Discussion Thread Re: 8/3 No Insults Rule Amendment

[CrackRabbit]

What do you mean hardly? Several posters have already said the number of his posts are a factor.

"Semantic games" is not ban-worthy. If he blatantly distorts what people say after he's been warned, then he should be sanctioned.

That's the thing; his semantic games will cause a thread derail a great number of times, and he isn't sanctioned because this forum isn't being actively moderated. Not anymore anyways.
Frankly if it was I probably would have received a couple of vacations myself, because I enjoy antagonizing trolls like Cybr, PJABBER and Incorruptible. Turn their own tactics against them and they don't like it one bit.

I'm not sure why you choose to play devil's advocate about this, if you haven't noticed since he is on vacation at the moment the forum has been much quieter and has returned to its normal (for election season anyways) level of signal to noise.

 

[Infohawk]

Frankly if it was I probably would have received a couple of vacations myself, because I enjoy antagonizing trolls like Cybr, PJABBER and Incorruptible. Turn their own tactics against them and they don't like it one bit.

Look, you're hear because you want to yell at people like Cybr, PJabber and incorruptible. You would end up disappointed if everyone like them went away.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Look, you're hear because you want to yell at people like Cybr, PJabber and incorruptible. You would end up disappointed if everyone like them went away.

You mistake me, it isn't that I don't enjoy discussing and debating political topics in a fairly rational manner. I would love to do just that without as much noise that happens in here.

I just happen to enjoy making "trolls" squirm as well.

 

[fskimospy]

The definition of a troll is someone who wants to get a rise out of other posters. When you start insulting them, they know they have you riled up.

If you want to be fair you need a specific rule. Otherwise it amounts to "I don't like that guy" (who I happen to disagree with.)

That's what moderators are for. All rules require some sort of interpretation no matter how specific you make them. There are lots of people on here that I disagree with on almost everything, yourself included, yet you don't see me saying that you should be banned.

Lots of message boards have rules against being disruptive that are incredibly general. There's no need to be specific because that 1.) gives the disruptive people a line to tiptoe around and 2.) because it's like the famous Supreme Court pornography ruling. People know it when they see it.

I simply cannot fathom how someone would be so interested in removing personal insults from this board and not want to see someone who engages in vastly more antisocial behavior still around.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's what moderators are for. All rules require some sort of interpretation no matter how specific you make them. There are lots of people on here that I disagree with on almost everything, yourself included, yet you don't see me saying that you should be banned.

Lots of message boards have rules against being disruptive that are incredibly general. There's no need to be specific because that 1.) gives the disruptive people a line to tiptoe around and 2.) because it's like the famous Supreme Court pornography ruling. People know it when they see it.

I simply cannot fathom how someone would be so interested in removing personal insults from this board and not want to see someone who engages in vastly more antisocial behavior still around.

Could he still do that if personal insults were not allowed and opinions without logical reasons to support them weren't either. Naturally, a person could make a bogus statement and claim it was logical but it can be challenged on the level of logic. If a disagreement occurs and no insults are allowed, at least the discussion will be civil. We can rely on the fact that most people without some bias on a topic, should be able to differentiate between logical and bogus thinking. I see no logic in banning disruptive behavior because a fool is bothered by truth. We are commanded not to judge so we won't be judged. To me that means that what we think of others is what we think of ourselves.

 

[dank69]

Almost 2 months after this thread was opened and over 500 replies later in a highly unusual and never seen before moment this poll gets placed in this thread and you need me to tell you how the poll may be biased?
Intellectual dishonest much?

What does this even mean? What do you mean "highly unusual"? What do you mean "never seen before moment"?

 

[monovillage]

They not only allow it, they support it and engage in it.

 

[jackstar7]

They not only allow it, they support it and engage in it.

They who?

 

[monovillage]

They who?

How did you vote on the "intellectual dishonesty" poll ?

 

[jackstar7]

How did you vote on the "intellectual dishonesty" poll ?

Vote in an internet poll? Why?

 

[monovillage]

Vote in an internet poll? Why?

You don't vote in any of the polls here?

 

[jackstar7]

You don't vote in any of the polls here?

I'm sure I have at some point, but it's not a thing I typically do. They're usually pointless.

Since you were asking about my answer to the question indirectly, I'll tell you I find intellectual dishonesty worse. I tend to ask a lot of questions when I see that sort of thing.

 

[jackstar7]

Sad to see that things remain needlessly personal and ad hominem from all sides (more than the obvious two).

Not sure why it is that people don't want to discuss issues more than they want to feel superior on the internet... where it really matters.

I thought the recent absences would prove of greater benefit to the discourse.

 

[monovillage]

Sad to see that things remain needlessly personal and ad hominem from all sides (more than the obvious two).

Not sure why it is that people don't want to discuss issues more than they want to feel superior on the internet... where it really matters.

I thought the recent absences would prove of greater benefit to the discourse.

Why would you think it when it's often proven that the lack of enforced rules is the real problem?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2275770

Thread crapping, thread derailing, personal insults all from the usual suspects. Hell you can even include me in the "usual suspects" list.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Why would you think it when it's often proven that the lack of enforced rules is the real problem?

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2275770

Thread crapping, thread derailing, personal insults all from the usual suspects. Hell you can even include me in the "usual suspects" list.

Alright, so how are we supposed to respond to incoherent rambling about two women that have been dead for the better part of 200 years?
The post is neither politics, even in a historic sense, nor news.

Deal with the fact that the moderators are simply watching from the towers of the asylum as the inmates roam free. Reaching out with the ban-rifles to deal only with extreme cases or escapees.

 

[dank69]

Lol did cybr get banned again already? He just came back today but now his avatar is gone like he got banned...

 

[jackstar7]

Lol did cybr get banned again already? He just came back today but now his avatar is gone like he got banned...

Nah, he removed it because it was part of his argument a while back. I think it was just cached during his recent vacation.

 

[dank69]

Nah, he removed it because it was part of his argument a while back. I think it was just cached during his recent vacation.

Still hasn't posted since.

 

[jackstar7]

Still hasn't posted since.

Why would you jinx it?

 

[dank69]

Why would you jinx it?

I like to push my luck.

 

[cybrsage]

Do you guys cry every day you fail to get cybrsage banned?

They do.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

They do.

Well, you certainly haven't given anyone any reason to cry of late, as you've been on one "vacation" after another over the last N weeks.

The only one who is in the process of getting you banned is you. It will happen eventually, for the simple reason that you can't stop your sociopathic behavior. That's on you, not anyone else.

Your "vacation" hasn't become permanent solely due to the commendable patience and fairness of the admins and mods here at AT -- not because you don't deserve to be gone.

 

[cybrsage]

You can't ban someone just because they keep posting. As I suspected, a lot of people have problems with him because he posts a lot.

Being high-volume is not wrong.

What a lot of people have read many times, but for some odd reason pretend to not know, is my explaination for the high volume of posting. I will post it again, so that it can be "forgotten" again, though:

Let us say you walk into a room where five people are discussing how that Hugo Chavez discovered the New World. Realizing they are wrong, you mention it was not Hugo Chavez, but rather Columbus or, if you like, some Vikings.

These five people each independantly cry foul and put forth their arguments as to why it was actually Chavez. Now, each one needs to be answered in turn, so the Columbus supporter has to post five times for each single post of the Chavez supporters.

The Chavez supporters, realizing they are outmatched, start crying that the Columbus supporter is posting too much and needs to be forced to leave due to it.


It is easy to understand, explained many times, but I suspect you will hear it regurgitated again in the near future anyway.

 

[cybrsage]

Well, you certainly haven't given anyone any reason to cry of late, as you've been on one "vacation" after another over the last N weeks.

The only one who is in the process if getting you banned is you. It will happen eventually, for the simple reason that you can't stop your sociopathic behavior. That's on you, not anyone else.

Your "vacation" hasn't become permanent solely due to the commendable patience and fairness of the admins and mods here at AT -- not because you don't deserve to be gone.

Not in the least. But I realize you will believe it anyway.

I like your idea about new subforums.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

The reason you post so much is that you have a boring job -- as you've already told us.

You also seem to have a very unhealthy need to piss people off to get attention.