You banned Flashy? Seriously?

[deleted15807]

Yeah actually, i've been talked to like that several times.

Well like I said I'd like to see it(thread, poster, etc). It may be out there. I just haven't seen it.

 

[luka82]

Mem, start a thread about MitchyMo, this thread is about Flashy and what happened to him.

Here we go again and again...
Back to the topic, I really think Flashy was baited by some members!:frown1:
Good thing he will be back in less than a week!:smile:
I had to read all the post I avoided reading before!:frown1:
As we say here-If you don`t pay at one bridge, you pay at the other!
(literally tramslated)
Ko ne plati na mostu, plati na ćupriji!

 

[Tattooed Goddess]

The politics forum is practically nothing but baiting going on from both sides.

 

[novice_btm]

The politics forum is practically nothing but baiting going on from both sides.

Believe me, you have NO idea. And when they're not baiting each other, they're reporting each other. If it went away, I'd be thrilled.

 

[petite]

Believe me, you have NO idea. And when they're not baiting each other, they're reporting each other. If it went away, I'd be thrilled.

Yikes! I'm glad I stay away! I hate conflict. It sounds like a nightmare.

 

[HazelGod]

Yikes! I'm glad I stay away! I hate conflict. It sounds like a nightmare.

It often is, which is very sad considering its potential.

Believe me, you have NO idea. And when they're not baiting each other, they're reporting each other. If it went away, I'd be thrilled.

Perhaps if you...oh, I dunno...actually moderated the activity there, things might not seem like such an unholy clusterfuck.

 

[D_Portelay Porquesword]

Yikes! I'm glad I stay away! I hate conflict. It sounds like a nightmare.

You are right, it is a nightmare. When the name calling starts, that's when the medication needs to flow. Sedatives, please!

Everyone makes mistakes. It was mentioned earlier that maybe Flashy's last good nerve was pushed to the limit with company being there.

It's a temp ban, he'll be back soon.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Are you high? Not speaking of Flashy at all? Do you think I can't read? Do you think the words exchanged aren't readily available for everyone to see?

Answers: No. No. I wonder. And yes.
Here's the relevant paragraph in Ex's post:

Focus on the issue, folks. Name calling is the function of those who perhaps hold a great deal of passion, but not much substance. We can do better in our discussions and debates.

Notice, dear, he does not mention Flashy. He is speaking in principle ... as he says explicitly in a later post.

I have no reason to focus specifically on Flashy...who by all counts is a well-celebrated guy. However, we would all do well to remove personal attacks from our arguments. Many of us have seen where that leads...which is not what this site is about.

Now, more of your honeyed wisdom:

After I pointed out that the post did in fact contain a good deal of substance along with the invective, XYZ changed his tune...to which I observed the significant disparity with his original statement. Because, yes, it is a far fucking cry from "lacking any substance and consisting entirely of name-calling" to "a great deal of unnecessary name calling that his post would have been much stronger and clearer without."

He is not contradicting himself, not changing his tune. This is actually very simple. In one case he's speaking of vitriol-filled posts in principle ... in the other, he acknowledges that Flashy's greater range of posts do have substance.
There is no contradiction.

And no, in that later post he was saying that unlike your cited post, a vast majority of Flashy's posts did not fit the "lacking substance/only name-calling" characterization.

Precisely ... as I've several times mentioned. So if you can just put two and two together ...

This has all been said before.
Do I think you can't read?
The jury's out.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

DP

 

[B_talltpaguy]

The politics forum is practically nothing but baiting going on from both sides.

There are ways to change that, and what has occurred is a step in the right direction, to be sure.

Here we go again and again...
Back to the topic, I really think Flashy was baited by some members

Read the thread again, and it's clear who initiated the trolling and tried to make it stick, and that is who got suspended.


I will be open... I was the OP of that thread, and I am the one who reported him (I have no idea if anyone else did or not). To me, the oil spill is a BIG DEAL, and my intention is to use that thread to report things that I hear (I have a number of connections both online and in real life which afford me access to things that not everyone hears with the same timing)...

Now that I have discovered this thread (I only came into this 'Etc' forum out of early morning boredom), I now see that yes, the moderation here actually does take action to ensure some degree of order and civility in the Politics forum... FWIW, I myself will be moderating my tone therein, now that I can see the mods will take action when necessary, meaning that I won't have to personally confront trolling on my own terms. (In fact, I consider this action to be a personal warning to myself, even though I have not been 'officially' warned for my obviously terse and sometimes downright nasty responses to some of the longtime regulars with an established pattern of unsavory behavior.

I did not know that Flashy had been warned before, and did not know that he would be suspended.

However, now that I do know this, I must add that this is the correct course of action for this forum's staff to take. They MUST maintain order, else the community's integration suffers, traffic dwindles, ad revs suffer and the site is inevitably usurped by another operator who establishes a more peaceable community of the same genre.

Just like I tell people on the sites I run, if you encounter an objectionable post, report it if you want the Admins/Mods to see it. There are surely hundreds, if not a couple thousand posts made here every day, and with such a small moderation staff here, it is simply impossible for this forum's staff to be aware of all goings on at all times, without active participation in the process by the membership itself.

 

[D_Portelay Porquesword]

:borladuck: :borladuck: :borladuck::borladuck::borladuck: :borladuck:

 

[DiscoBoy]

So fucking what? We're grown adults here, not finishing school students. It's the apparent nanny state mentality of those handing out the sanctions that I find so onerous.

Not very mature ones apparently:

Upchuck very cutely quoted the blue parts that were sprinkled liberally throughout, but that post was very pointed in its content as well.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

Flashy's mistake was taking the bait of insults and character assassination directed at him by two other posters.

Hmmm... As the OP of the thread, I've read every last word of it... Can you go ahead and quote the posts and names of these "two other posters" who baited him with "insults and character assassination" please?

Or perhaps you would like to re-read the thread and modify your statement?

 

[B_talltpaguy]

On the other end of the spectrum, one could create an invitation-only site that carefully controls who are members and limits or bans those its admins don't find worthy of the site. Maybe that's been tried elsewhere.

Actually, it's definitely being tried elsewhere, and very successfully I might add. I'm not certain of it, but I'm confident I run the most trafficked (free) forum of this type on the internet. (it takes at least an hour a day just to approve new registrants, which are all verified manually, by yours truly)

On that site, the politics forum is itself an invitation only forum within the forum, with its own set of rules (members must be active contributors elsewhere on the site, they must be members for 6 months, have at least 100 posts and be free of any disciplinary action for at least 6 months). Members who make objectionable posts are almost instantly dealt with. It is also locked behind a 2nd password, and kept away from search engines. Even links within that forum are dealt with in a special way which masks their true location to other site owners (namely corporate media) seeking information on who is linking to their site.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

We don't need a nanny squad policing our language like schoolchildren.

I would argue that due to irreconcilable cultural, moral and social differences among differing populations of people, that any integrated online community that hopes to have a reach beyond national borders needs much more policing than most people would ever realize, or possibly accept, were they to fully understand its extent... But that's the beauty of the internet... One man's rubbish is another man's cup of tea. For every 10 people who say "no thanks" to a certain way of doing things, there are 5-10-50 more who say, "thank you sir, may I have another!"

 

[HazelGod]

Notice, dear, he does not mention Flashy. He is speaking in principle ... as he says explicitly in a later post.

In one case he's speaking of vitriol-filled posts in principle ... in the other, he acknowledges that Flashy's greater range of posts do have substance.
There is no contradiction.

Notice, dear, this thread is about Flashy, and I specifically responded to his "general" remark as it pertained to Flashy, which he acknowledged by directly referencing your citation of one of Flashy's posts as conforming to the characterization made in his "general" statement. You have to be either pedantically obtuse or a really stupid cunt to actually insist that we weren't talking about Flashy. Whichever the case, I'm done with your disingenuous crap. You know where you can take your jury and stick it.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

^Oh pish posh... Direct your angst at me if it must be directed at anyone.

 

[HazelGod]

^Oh pish posh... Direct your angst at me if it must be directed at anyone.

That wouldn't be appropriate, as you had no part in this idiotic decision.

 

[vince]

Hmmm... As the OP of the thread, I've read every last word of it... Can you go ahead and quote the posts and names of these "two other posters" who baited him with "insults and character assassination" please?

Or perhaps you would like to re-read the thread and modify your statement?

I'll not modify anything. Perhaps you are the one that needs to read again.

Here is the post by Silvertrain-

"Wow, the Crusader for the defense of Halliburton's virtue!

What an amazing bit of toolery. I'm truly baffled as to from whence the massive measure of your hubris is derived.

Don't bother with one of those long-winded rants that you think are so wowzie. They bore the shit out of all us who aren't sycophantically beholden to your umpteen porn "compilations" (a.k.a. clips you gathered together in your room in between your mom bringing you snacks from downstairs).

Once again, I laugh in your faux "independent" face."

And by tallpaguy-

"For the love of God, go troll someone else's thread!"

Can you explain how those statements are not insults or character assassination?

He responded, in an argumentative way, to a suggestion by another poster, not you or Silvertrain, that "all the employees of Halliburton should be crucified." He pointed out that that would be 52,000 people. It was a nonsense post about a serious disaster. Did he come on too strong? Probably. Did he personally insult the person he was taking to task? No, he did not. The worst thing he wrote was "no hysterical over-reaction or anything".

Please explain how writing that justifies what Silvertrain wrote.
How does that make Flashy a troll?
What is your definition of an internet troll?

You claim be be the administrator of an internet site where "Members who make objectionable posts are almost instantly dealt with". What would you do if a poster wrote-

"Just like it's not my problem that you're so fucking stupid, you don't even know how to read the name of the forums you post in.

How do illiterate retards like you even get a job? Lucky for you, McDonald's uses pictures on their equipment now, not words."

http://www.lpsg.org/180275-first-auditions-michael.html#post2721185

Hmmm?

 

[B_talltpaguy]

???

What else can one call trolling, but trolling?


This is not my site, and I'm not obligated to behave here as if it is. As I have indicated elsewhere, that is much of the allure here for me.

What I said to another person on another thread under different circumstances is not relevant to this discussion, unless YOU are the one seeking a character assassination here.

Furthermore, you conveniently left out the part where the very next post in that thread after mine was your beloved Flashy himself agreeing with my remarks towards the noob troll.
http://www.lpsg.org/2721272-post12.html

So, thanks for your concern, but it is clear that neither objectivity nor fairness are on your agenda here.