Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > Feedback > The Hammer Returns: Na-nana-na, Can't Touch This

The Hammer Returns: Na-nana-na, Can't Touch This (Page 7)
Thread Tools
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Oct 17, 2017, 04:53 AM
 
No matter which of #1–4 you find objectionable, some members have a more robust constitution than others (e. g. when skimming a post rather than reading every syllable carefully). It is very easy to escalate from “your idea is idiotic” to “you are an idiot” by simply parsing one as the other. On the other hand, some ideas really are idiotic … There are also topics when people are more sensitive than others. For instance, talking about issues related to homosexuality, religion or race may hit close to home, and be much more important to one member than another.

At the end of the day these are all proxies for mutual respect, though. Writing that you are an idiot indicates a lack thereof, which is why even “acceptable” insults can negatively impact the atmosphere. But make it too polite, and the forums become anodyne and sterile. And it can stifle honest and intellectually stimulating discussions. However, right now I think it’d be better if we nudged the PL a little more towards mutual respect and away from drama. Especially the in these divisive times it is important that we build bridges rather than deepen the trenches.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Oct 17, 2017 at 05:04 AM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Oct 17, 2017, 07:14 AM
 
There is an interesting dynamic that is worth noting. It's already been brought up that CTP gets 'attacked' for his personal life because he continually makes it the centrepiece of his arguments. As has been said, these unverifiable claims, which often run counter to available evidence and logic, are often his only argument. To counter his 'evidence', one is left with no option other than to argue against him personally. I have made appeals to my own personal authority and I have been understandably attacked personally for it.

A similar situation exists with Chongo and the Catholic Church. Many (perhaps even the majority, I've not counted) of his arguments begin and end with 'Because the Church says so, and they are the ultimate authority.' The only possible counter to this is to argue against the authority of the Church.

I suppose the alternative is to ignore them both when they take these lines of argument, but then what is the point of being part of a forum dedicated to discussion and debate? I assume every argument I make and the evidence I present will be tested and either accepted or refuted. Should they not assume the same level of scrutiny?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 17, 2017, 01:40 PM
 
Is there no middle ground between silence and withering insults?
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Oct 17, 2017, 02:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is there no middle ground between silence and withering insults?
Maybe. I haven't seen it on this board. About the only people who don't seem to get into mud-slinging matches with the Captain are those who largely agree with him and those who seem to ignore his more 'colourful' claims.

I could be wrong, but I'd guess you fall somewhere between the two. I know you have a libertarian streak, but I also choose to believe that you must find at least some of his claims inflammatory and disingenuous. As I don't remember you calling him on any of them, I assume you selectively choose the 'silence' option- only engaging when there is little chance of conflict.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 02:39 AM
 
I don't have any reason to avoid conflict with CTP because I know if he punched me too hard, I could say "okay, that hurt for real", and he'd not only stop but be concerned.

I think CTP gets treated unfairly around here, and I avoid the healthy debate I'd like to have with him because an environment of unfair treatment isn't conducive to it.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 03:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I don't have any reason to avoid conflict with CTP because I know if he punched me too hard, I could say "okay, that hurt for real", and he'd not only stop but be concerned.

I think CTP gets treated unfairly around here, and I avoid the healthy debate I'd like to have with him because an environment of unfair treatment isn't conducive to it.
Well that is interesting and surprising. I've not seen the evidence he's capable of healthy debate, but maybe I've missed it. I think he may be treated unkindly, but completely fairly.

However, respect that you view it differently.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 03:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is there no middle ground between silence and withering insults?
Did you read my post? It's all about the difficulty of finding the (right) middle ground — as a member and as a mod. In CPT's case, though, the staff thinks that he has more than crossed middle ground, though. You write that if you told CPT that a comment of his hurt him, he'd not just stop, but be concerned for your well-being. Ask yourself: how many others feel the same? Do you expect that CPT will show the same level of concern as he (according to you) will afford you?

Quite a few relationships between members (I am thinking beyond CPT here) have soured and become acrimonious. Members have begun mocking others over the years, and they started needling each others by small things such as replacing posts with “funny” gifs. Or throwing around insults. I have read things like member ABC hopes that member XYZ never has any children so that XYZ's non-sensical ideas aren't perpetuated. In such an atmosphere XYZ admitting that (s)he is hurt by ABC's comments won't bear any fruits at all.

That's the whole difficulty here: you cannot legislate compassion and respect.
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
There is an interesting dynamic that is worth noting. It's already been brought up that CTP gets 'attacked' for his personal life because he continually makes it the centrepiece of his arguments.
I don't care much about using the personal lives of members in arguments — unless that is intimately related to the topic at hand. When you try to ignore those things, then what some members perceive as either bragging or “proof by intimidation” will become less of an issue.
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
A similar situation exists with Chongo and the Catholic Church. Many (perhaps even the majority, I've not counted) of his arguments begin and end with 'Because the Church says so, and they are the ultimate authority.' The only possible counter to this is to argue against the authority of the Church.
I think this is worth exploring: intellectually speaking, if I base my argument on the official catechesis of the Catholic Church, and I believe in that fully and absolutely, then indeed your argument ends if my counter is that “I believe in the authority of the Church and in the correctness of its catechesis.” Not because that implies I am correct, no, there merely isn't anything more to discuss, you will not convince him, because you won't change my fundamental assumption, and I won't convince you either. Conversely, if I demand scientific evidence, and you don't deliver anything but vague anecdotal evidence, then don't expect me to be convinced by your line of argumentation. That's a healthy point at which to stop the conversation.

You should not get frustrated when you are unable to convince others, even if from your vantage point their arguments lack logic or are not supported by scientifically valid evidence. The discussion gets even more difficult when you use vaguely defined notions such as “freedom”. Freedom for you may mean you have the right to bear arms and that nobody should force affordable health care onto you. To me health care gives me freedom and I consider it a basic human right. So when either one of us argues that “we are against/for freedom”, it is simply neither right nor wrong, it is not a well-defined statement.

As a scientist, I think it is important to push people on that, if you make an argument, be specific and be sure you have evidence to back it up. That only works on people, though, who are interested and open to new perspectives. Needless to say, not everyone is.
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
I suppose the alternative is to ignore them both when they take these lines of argument, but then what is the point of being part of a forum dedicated to discussion and debate? I assume every argument I make and the evidence I present will be tested and either accepted or refuted. Should they not assume the same level of scrutiny?
You should not expect others to stick to the same rules of evidence as you. But if you want to convince others, you need to at least be familiar with how they can most likely be convinced, and what line of argumentation works best. If someone believes in the infallibility of the Catholic Church, then the best strategy might be to use that even if it is not what you would choose. However, perhaps you don't want to appeal to the authority of the Catholic Church, as that is antithetical to your beliefs. Fair enough, but then you'll fight more of an uphill battle when it comes to convincing the other person.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 11:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Which of these is a personal attack or low blow? I'll use mild examples with no swearing to make it harder.

1. What you've just said makes no sense. It's a stupid argument.
2. You are stupid for saying such things.
3, You are presenting lies as truths just to mess with everyone. You have no credibility. You are a liar.
4. You are deranged and I feel sorry for your children that they have to be raised by you.
5. You are losing your mind. Seek help.
1. Attacking the argument. Fine.
2. Attacking the person, name calling. Not fine.
3. This one is borderline for me. It's something I'd say if I had reason to believe it was true. It's something I'd be incensed to see written about someone if I believed it wasn't true.
4. Bad form. Not fine.
5. Implying a mental condition necessitating professional help - attacking the person. Not fine.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 11:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I don't have any reason to avoid conflict with CTP because I know if he punched me too hard, I could say "okay, that hurt for real", and he'd not only stop but be concerned.
Do you believe he'd extend to same courtesy to anyone proudly wearing a name tag that says "Liberal"?

Shouldn't we expect people not to punch too hard in the first place?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 01:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Do you believe he'd extend to same courtesy to anyone proudly wearing a name tag that says "Liberal"?
If he didn't, I propose it has more to do with the overlap between "Liberals" and "people who give him shit" on the MacNN Venn diagram, as opposed to an unyielding political philosophy.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 01:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
If he didn't, I propose it has more to do with the overlap between "Liberals" and "people who give him shit" on the MacNN Venn diagram, as opposed to an unyielding political philosophy.
Totally. But if I'm only nice to people that are nice to me, what does that say about me?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 01:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Did you read my post?
I was replying to Paco.

As previously stated, I'm not arguing whether CTP has crossed the middle line. I'm saying his behavior should be assessed in the context of all the personal shit flung at him.

As a clarification, was "I don't care" about these personal attacks meant to be "I don't care for" them?
( Last edited by subego; Oct 18, 2017 at 02:17 PM. )
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 01:39 PM
 
Is "people who give him sh!t" vs "people who disagree with him" a different venn diagram?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 01:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Totally. But if I'm only nice to people that are nice to me, what does that say about me?
I give up. What does it say?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 01:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Is "people who give him sh!t" vs "people who disagree with him" a different venn diagram?
Do people generally give shit to people they agree with?
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 01:54 PM
 
To be clearer, you say it is ok for him to be a jerk because people give him shit. tit for tat.

venn diagram : liberals | people who give Capt shit | people Capt is a jerk to.

other venn diagram: people who disagree with Capt | people Capt is a jerk to.

Is it ok then for him to be a jerk to people simply disagreeing with him?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 02:00 PM
 
I do not say it is okay for him to be a jerk.

I am saying I do not ignore people being a jerk to him in my evaluation.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I do not say it is okay for him to be a jerk.

I am saying I do not ignore people being a jerk to him in my evaluation.
Take another step back and look at why people were being a jerk to him. He repeated unsubstantiated rumors, the only recorded source of which (to this day, still) were something Alex Jones read off of his phone for a YouTube video. In the face of a tragedy, he propagated misinformation fed to him that he ate right up because it allowed him to blame the groups he wants to find reasons to hate. Something he did when a white nationalist plowed his car into a crowd of people, killing someone. He repeated rumors of Antifa connections without any actual evidence.

For context, here's the "shit" he got for trying to tie the Vegas shooter to ISIS and/or Antifa:

Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
[quoted the white nationalist car driver incident claim] Same reliable source?
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Actually entirely the opposite. You have heard a rumour and you are completely NOT waiting for confirmation. You are posting on here. I can practically hear the frothing as you anticipate the ISIS connection.
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
He was still an American citizen with a shitload of guns that decided to indiscriminately murder people. What group he considered himself a part of is entirely inconsequential. If he had a MAGA hat does that mean Trump supporters are all murderers? If he had a Bernie pin does that mean Democratic Socialists are actually violent anarchists?

Everyone needs to take a big step back, and then two more f**king steps.
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Citation needed or put your Antifa-boner away until you find one.
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
and if the tooth fairy claimed she did it. Grow up. You have a history of jumping to conclusions that suit you with a speed and glee that is unseemly.

A tragedy has unfolded, committed by un unhinged madman from a gun obsessed culture, swimming in guns.

If it turns out that he had any connection to Islamic terror, that's the time to start discussing. Other than that it's just your obsession.
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
They ALWAYS claim responsibility, first thing.

Their objective is to get unreflected numbnuts riled up. That’s the whole reason they kill people. If they can seize a chance to do so without going through the bother of actually killing people, of course they will.

They claimed responsibility for the germanwings crash that turned out to be a suicidal co-pilot, as well.

Same as al Qaeda would claim every bad thing that happened. We’ve had this discussion before, a decade ago.
Given how blatantly stupid his claim was, the responses seem rather tame - no personal attacks at all. The worst is probably WAS's "Antifa-boner" comment.

But then he doubled down on the antifa claim and held simultaneous arguments with several people. This is probably the worst one, and it's what prompted his "frothing psychopath" comment.

Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
No, you're full of crap. You know exactly what you are doing when you post idiotic unsubstantiated rumours, then you run and hide behind feigned ignorance and (in this case) outrage, along with a self serving dose of emotional blackmail regarding your feelings for the victims of this horrific event.

You can only have mentioned ISIS because the unsubstantiated rumours suited your purpose, when even 15 seconds critical thinking would have led you to question thise rumours. Adding the Antifa element was the icing on your fake rage cake, even though it was scarcely less unbelievable, infact having both your pet hates in one crazy scenario surely should have triggered at least a tiny alarm bell of critical thought.

Unless you actually are stupid enough not to be able to think these things through in which case I apologise and hope you learn some thinking skills at some point.

ps. I make no case for your crazy ass gun laws, they are entirely up to you to either live with or change.
If CPT got an infraction for his comment, that comment at least deserves a warning.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 04:12 PM
 
This behavior is why I stopped responding to him last summer. It was glaringly obvious to me he was just try and rule the liberals on the forum.

Which is why subego hasn't gotten much shit from him. Not the target audience.
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 04:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Given how blatantly stupid his claim was, the responses seem rather tame - no personal attacks at all. The worst is probably WAS's "Antifa-boner" comment.
I was just thinking mine was the worst on that list too.

In my defence, its crude rather than being offensively personal and its not like it wasn't justifiable. He always tries to make out that Antifa are worse than everyone else without anything to back it up and he even went on to prove my point by doubling down as mentioned.
I genuinely feel his attitude towards them is a little bit obsessive which is what I was trying to convey. I acknowledge I could have been less crude and therefore less antagonistic. Just a touch.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 05:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I was just thinking mine was the worst on that list too.
I think mine was the most gentle. Pretty much neck-in-neck with analogika, but I never hit the caps lock, so I'm claiming victory.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 06:06 PM
 
My statement was actually before his "Antifa and ISIS" post, just after ISIS claimed responsibility is what I was referring to. My take a few steps back comment fell on deaf ears.

Classist bigot and incurable ideologue
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 06:13 PM
 
Oh and I've lurked a bit in the PWL since all this kerfuffle and may I make a suggestion?

The condescension and mockery towards Chongo for his beliefs is a bit strong from a few of you. I mean, I literally disagree with him on everything sans Larry Fitzgerald, but pump the brakes a little.

Classist bigot and incurable ideologue
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 06:43 PM
 
I'm trying to. I've already held my tongue on two hilarious but ultimately counterproductive comments.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 06:43 PM
 
You're not wrong but as always there's a history there.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 07:25 PM
 
A few years ago I quite justifiably declared CTP to be our "Resident Forum Internet Expert". Because it eventually became very apparent based upon the pattern of his many claims over time ... which he's never once backed up ... that no matter what the topic being discussed was he somehow managed to have either worked in field, had a relevant advanced degree in the subject, personally owned the vehicle mentioned either presently or in the past, had unnamed officials involved in the case on speed dial, possessed the secret microfiche in his personal library proving all other publicly available historical evidence to the contrary was wrong, etc. He rarely cites supporting evidence and when he does it typically turns out to say the complete opposite of the position he's advocating. A scenario that wouldn't arise so frequently if he bothered to actually read the entire article and not just the headline. So maybe we should just call a spade a spade and recognize that CTP has added "Resident Forum Troll" to his repertoire? It should be clear based upon his recent behavior that he has no interest in substantive debate. He relishes the fight and is more interested in kicking up dust. And then whining to mods like a little "snowflake" when someone responds to him in kind and he ends up getting dirty.

OAW
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 07:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Paco500 View Post
I think mine was the most gentle. Pretty much neck-in-neck with analogika, but I never hit the caps lock, so I'm claiming victory.
Oh, you got it. I stuck the "unreflected numbnuts" in there, which probably counts as a personal attack, but it generally appears to have slipped under the radar.
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 08:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Oh, you got it. I stuck the "unreflected numbnuts" in there, which probably counts as a personal attack, but it generally appears to have slipped under the radar.
Looks more like you're attacking a whole group. Which I guess is ok depending on the group.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Oct 18, 2017, 10:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The condescension and mockery towards Chongo for his beliefs is a bit strong from a few of you. I mean, I literally disagree with him on everything sans Larry Fitzgerald, but pump the brakes a little.
I've noticed the piling-on as well.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Oct 18, 2017, 10:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
The condescension and mockery towards Chongo for his beliefs is a bit strong from a few of you. I mean, I literally disagree with him on everything sans Larry Fitzgerald, but pump the brakes a little.
I agree, and I don't think it is constructive or useful to use Chongo to unload your frustration with what is wrong with the GOP now — especially when Chongo's position in some matters is more nuanced than that. Chongo has reacted already by replacing the replies of some members with gifs, which doesn't go over well with the others. And so the cycle continues.

It's important to keep in mind that to overcome division, we need to learn how to live with people who have fundamentally different frames of mind and who can “nevertheless” be respected. A lot of the discussions (be it here or in the PL) seem to start from a position that “the other” person acts in bad faith and has to prove that he or she acts in good faith. That is very grating and really poisons the atmosphere. The staff wants to promote mutual respect, but we can only act on egregious breaches of polity.

To anyone who bemoans other people's behavior I suggest that you try to behave the way you want others to behave. Resist the temptation to ridicule and patronize, and know when an argument has run its course. We can and should continue to point out factual errors and have lively debates, however it is important that we do not lose sight of the fact that the ultimate goal is not to win the argument but to understand. Over the long term, the best way to convince someone is when the other person is open to be convinced.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 12:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I agree, and I don't think it is constructive or useful to use Chongo to unload your frustration with what is wrong with the GOP now — especially when Chongo's position in some matters is more nuanced than that. Chongo has reacted already by replacing the replies of some members with gifs, which doesn't go over well with the others. And so the cycle continues.

It's important to keep in mind that to overcome division, we need to learn how to live with people who have fundamentally different frames of mind and who can “nevertheless” be respected. A lot of the discussions (be it here or in the PL) seem to start from a position that “the other” person acts in bad faith and has to prove that he or she acts in good faith. That is very grating and really poisons the atmosphere. The staff wants to promote mutual respect, but we can only act on egregious breaches of polity.

To anyone who bemoans other people's behavior I suggest that you try to behave the way you want others to behave. Resist the temptation to ridicule and patronize, and know when an argument has run its course. We can and should continue to point out factual errors and have lively debates, however it is important that we do not lose sight of the fact that the ultimate goal is not to win the argument but to understand. Over the long term, the best way to convince someone is when the other person is open to be convinced.

It's really hard for me to discern what sort of opportunity exists for debate using reason, what runs up against our limitations and emotional barriers (including my own), and what discussions are simply a waste of time. I'm not even sure that this is always a matter of voluntary stubbornness either.

It has taken me many years to learn that some conversations are just literally counter productive and filled with emotional traps. I think many of us have felt that we can find common ground by dissecting every little thing and analyzing the crap out of it, eventually agreeing upon some definition of reason, but it is depressing to see how little headway we make as humans. I mean, if you were to go back to discussions about global warming and guns 5 or 10 years ago, it would probably be pretty much the same thing.

People are what they are, and sometimes it is nearly impossible to change that. That's partly why I wonder if these discussions about rules and our conduct here is even worth it. When CTP returns he is going to continue being CTP, all of us are going to continue being ourselves, and probably very little will change.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Oct 19, 2017, 01:26 AM
 
Since there has been such a big interest and everyone has discussed Cap'n Tightpants's situation publicly, let me give everyone a quick update: CPT's temp ban has just expired, and given the circumstances the staff has decided that if Cap'n Tightpants is temp banned once more until the end of the year, we will permanently ban him from the PL. Just to be clear, he would still retain access to the other subforums, including the regular Lounge. I have just sent him a PM saying exactly that.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 03:57 AM
 
For OAW (racist), sek929, besson (and your Badkosh sockpuppet), paco, Laminar, Oreocookie (and his condescending quips included with each warning and infraction notice), and all the other twats in the general Lounge and PWL, who (for several years) worked to make my stay here as unbearable as possible, because you're classist bigots and incurable ideologues, incapable of even talking about the f*cking weather without dragging your shitty political ideals and biases along for the ride:



To the (very) few decent, non-venomous people left, I've enjoyed my time talking with you. If you guys need anything, Josh (subego) has the bat signal.

Adios Pendejos,
Mike
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 05:52 AM
 



…aaaand lock.
     
Paco500
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 08:12 AM
 
I do hope the mods don't take this down. It's a fitting memorial to who he was and what he contributed to the forum.
     
And.reg
The Mighty
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Well the sports issue was within arm's reach but they closed up shop and kicked me out. And I'm out of toilet paper.
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 10:19 AM
 
Screen-captured for awesomeness
This one time, at Boot Camp, I stuck a flute up my PC.
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Oct 19, 2017, 12:14 PM
 
Is it wrong that I'm disappointed not to be specifically named?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:06 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,