[POLL] Abolish the "ignore" function.

[dada]

Etiquette is a lost art. We need authority, rules. General consensus and Jeff. Emily post is dead.

[Wombaticus Rex]

If Jeff were more active here, I highly doubt things would not have continued as they have.

I often wonder if AD has a keyboard shortcut for that, or if he still manually types it out every time.

[Blue]

If the board could/did come together around new agreements that applied equally to everyone- and not just the chosen target of a bullying campaign- I would certainly adhere to these new agreements.

If we want to create new guidelines for this board, I would greatly appreciate Jeff's input.

A.D.

That sounds reasonable to me. If there were to be posting limitations such as the number per day or number of pages in a thread it should apply to all members, not just one.

Sounds like a concession to me, Mac.

[DrEvil]

...snip...
So, I would bare that in mind. But as a courtesy, and experiment it might be worth starting a thread asking/informing posters that this thread is not for data dumps (which would have to be defined) but discussion only. Maybe even put that in the thread title? Ex: Extraterrestrial Encounters: Discuss Only

To enforce it we could have the option to disable the paste command when starting a new thread.

I can just picture a certain poster sitting in the shower singing 'Everybody Hurts' while hitting ctrl-v over and over on his soaking wet keyboard (sorry AD, but I had to!) .

[MacCruiskeen]

If the board could/did come together around new agreements that applied equally to everyone- and not just the chosen target of a bullying campaign- I would certainly adhere to these new agreements.

If we want to create new guidelines for this board, I would greatly appreciate Jeff's input.

A.D.

That sounds reasonable to me. If there were to be posting limitations such as the number per day or number of pages in a thread it should apply to all members, not just one.

Sounds like a concession to me, Mac.

It`s not a concession at all, Blue, and it`not reasonable. It´s yet another of his smokescreens. The accusation that I or anyone else here has bullied him is ludicrous, and really insulting to boot, especially from someone whose own style and ductus --on the rare occasions when he does condescend to speak in his own voice -- is so relentlessly authoritarian, domineering and disrespectful. (Willow has been angered by this more than once, as have many, many other people here.) And as for "agreements that [apply] equally to everyone", well, LOL. Because that is exactly what I want too and what I have always argued for. For instance: No one should be allowed to spam up the board with torrents of copy & paste, and no one should be allowed to turn General Discussion into their own collection of Private Data Dumps. Not fruhmenschen, not SLAD (when she was still doing it with the multiple Trump Dumps), not AD, not I, not you, not anyone. So there is absolutely no need for any kind of "new agreements" (sic).

That whole post of his, from which you quote, really is a piece of work, a masterpiece of disingenuousness and misrepresentation. Shakespeare has comic villains who talk like that, though of course they do it in much better English. I wasn`t going to comment on it at all, but since you did address me by name I didn`t want to leave your post unanswered.

ON EDIT: Blue, you might not be aware of quite how long this has been going on, or of how many people here have been affected by it. From an 8-page trainwreck of a thread started by American Dream in Jan 2015 and eventually locked by Project Willow , who was still a Moderator at the time. (Bold -type emphasis added, the italics are PW's own.)

Re: Why is Counterpunch vile?

Post by stillrobertpaulsen » Sat Jan 10, 2015 6:01 pm

American Dream » Sat Jan 10, 2015 5:26 pm wrote:

Mac, I don't like your attitude- or your manner of argumentation- so I'm putting you on "ignore" now. It's been a long time coming, and it's really for the best.

Mac, you're in good company. AD did the same thing to me and for the same reason. In fact, he has done this to so many posters here (yet somehow manages by his own admission to "peek" at your posts at random) it beggars the questions: is AD really interested in dialogue on this forum at all? Or is it really just a monologue with the occasional sycophantic amen? Why, after multiple entreaties by the mods to find a "different approach" do we see more of the same MO? Does he, despite his complaints to contrary, actually enjoy the conflict he engenders?

edited for grammatical error

Postby Project Willow » Sat Jan 10, 2015 8:09 pm

Re: Why is Counterpunch vile?

Take some time off solace.

Locking.

AD, this is indeed a discussion board. Endeavor to find a way to repair relationships and respectfully participate in this community or restrict your postings to the data dump or your own personal blog.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... &start=120

That was 27 months ago.

[DrEvil]

Mac wrote:
Right. It's also a way of burying other people's posts, their actual attempts to discuss a topic, in a torrent of second-hand text. It can make discussion literally impossible, or futile. It's sabotage. And when it's done by someone who pretends not to be able to even see what others are posting (because he has them all "on ignore") then it's particularly infuriating and demoralising.

Hang on. Isn't this a good argument for keeping the block function?

[MacCruiskeen]

^^No, it`s an argument for not allowing anyone to clog up the board with torrents of copy&paste. If no one`s allowed to get away with it, then no one else has to go to the trouble of blocking it. Simple.

[Sounder]

American Dream wrote:

If Jeff were more active here, I highly doubt things would not have continued as they have.

Take the 'not' out of the sentence, -AD has got knots on his mind.

Some choose to have ideologies drive their mind, It's a simple solution but after awhile the mind forgets how to work on its own.

Odd lifestyle, seems to me.

[NeonLX]

I've had all y'all on ignore for weeks. In the sense that I haven't logged in during that time.

Do whatever you gotta do. I'm just along for the ride.

[seemslikeadream]

How can I ignore you when you won't go away ...oh wait




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW9-FOLG-iA

[km artlu]

Some choose to have ideologies drive their mind, It's a simple solution but after awhile the mind forgets how to work on its own.

That's a good one Sounder. Very good.

It's easy, and it affords a measure of clarity, to apply that to others.
Not so easy to apply it to the trickery within myself.

[brekin]

If the board could/did come together around new agreements that applied equally to everyone- and not just the chosen target of a bullying campaign- I would certainly adhere to these new agreements.
If we want to create new guidelines for this board, I would greatly appreciate Jeff's input.
A.D.

That sounds reasonable to me. If there were to be posting limitations such as the number per day or number of pages in a thread it should apply to all members, not just one. Sounds like a concession to me, Mac.

It`s not a concession at all, Blue, and it`not reasonable. It´s yet another of his smokescreens. The accusation that I or anyone else here has bullied him is ludicrous, and really insulting to boot, especially from someone whose own style and ductus --on the rare occasions when he does condescend to speak in his own voice -- is so relentlessly authoritarian, domineering and disrespectful. (Willow has been angered by this more than once, as have many, many other people here.) And as for "agreements that [apply] equally to everyone", well, LOL. Because that is exactly what I want too and what I have always argued for. For instance: No one should be allowed to spam up the board with torrents of copy & paste, and no one should be allowed to turn General Discussion into their own collection of Private Data Dumps. Not fruhmenschen, not SLAD (when she was still doing it with the multiple Trump Dumps), not AD, not I, not you, not anyone. So there is absolutely no need for any kind of "new agreements" (sic).

That whole post of his, from which you quote, really is a piece of work, a masterpiece of disingenuousness and misrepresentation. Shakespeare has comic villains who talk like that, though of course they do it in much better English. I wasn`t going to comment on it at all, but since you did address me by name I didn`t want to leave your post unanswered.

Oh pleez. Yeah you only start a whole thread about him, engaging in character assassination with the purpose of limiting or curtailing his postings and the bizarre request for him not to have the ability to ignore your posts. It's like taking an ad out in the paper against someone petitioning the court and public for them not to have the right to continue to have a restraining order against you any longer. Because? You have some mandate to correct others peoples thinking, even those who won't listen to you? But sure, I also think no one should be allowed to turn General Discussion into their own collection of Private Data Dumps. But also, no one should be allowed to turn General Discussion into their own collection of Private Grudges Dumps. Nor should anyone be allowed to wear socks with sandals, but that isn't going to happen either. If only (lighting a candle solemnly) Jeff Wells were here though...he'd get people to stop wearing socks with sandals.

[Sounder]

I've had all y'all on ignore for weeks. In the sense that I haven't logged in during that time.

You are smarter than you look NeonLX.

Thanks km artlu, it is a version of one of a small set of quips that I am prone to using from time to time.

[MacCruiskeen]

brekin, on page 1 of this thread, I made the mistake of replying to your post as if you were honestly interested in a serious discussion. Mea culpa. Since then I have ignored every one of your obsessive attempts to provoke an angry response from me (or from anyone), every piece of your childish, timewasting flamebait. No one else has responded to your contributions either (you might ask yourself why, but you won`t) -- except for JackRiddler, whose contempt for your bullshit I share.

Have this for free and it`s my last word to you here: You`re trolling this thread and no one`s interested, because it`s not impressive behaviour and it adds precisely nothing to the discussion. So farewell, traveler, and may you flourish on life`s path.

[brekin]

brekin, on page 1 of this thread, I made the mistake of replying to your post as if you were honestly interested in a serious discussion. Mea culpa. Since then I have ignored every one of your obsessive attempts to provoke an angry response from me (or from anyone), every piece of your childish, timewasting flamebait. No one else has responded to your contributions either (you might ask yourself why, but you won`t) -- except for JackRiddler, whose contempt for your bullshit I share.
Have this for free and it`s my last word to you here: You`re trolling this thread and no one`s interested, because it`s not impressive behaviour and it adds precisely nothing to the discussion. So farewell, traveler, and may you flourish on life`s path.

Sounds like you are putting me on ignore.