Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ShortcutToMoncton · Dec 31, 2012, 05:59 AM

This thread is an entirely interesting one that's basically all about Shaddim buying millions of dollars of crazy cars. I would imagine most of us have been following it since Inception and it's a great thread.

Well raleur comes in and basically questions whether Shaddim is 100% on the level with this thread based on inconsistencies in his statements and the histories of the cars he identified. It looks like Shaddim responds by claiming that he is lpmckenna and is attacking him. It looks like they have some history from other threads. After some back-and-forth, Shaddim declares that raleur has been "banned from this thread" and continues on.

I'm concerned and not at all comfortable with this outcome. A poster has apparently been "banned from a thread" (which I did not know was possible), and there was zero mod comment as to how or why.

First of all, raleur made some very, very interesting points based on his online research which, if they did not catch Shaddim in a complete lie as to the cars he bought, certainly indicated that something odd was going on. Secondly, in a recent thread about house prices for example, Shaddim was shown to be "making up facts" about a particular house to support his viewpoint, which turned out to not be nearly as well supported by the actual facts of the house. So, sure, it's the internet and we can't verify everything, but this is a thread about Shaddim's lavish lifestyle - it's great to read about, but I don't want to be wasting my time if it's not true. If it is true, then Shaddim should find it very easy to refute raleur's points. To my knowledge in reading the thread, he did not: he provided examples of how raleur could be wrong, but he did not directly address the inconsistencies raleur spotted, which I find to be concerning. It may be that raleur's comments made entirely no sense, but from the links he provided I thought his internet research was surprisingly backed up.

Secondly, there are a number of accusations made against raleur, by Shaddim and other posters in that thread (basically, that he is lpmckenna I believe). I have no idea whether they are true or have been proven true elsewhere, but a number of posters (including myself on occassion) have used other handles over the years, whether publically acknowledged or no. I'm concerned about public accusations which may or may not be true (I have not seen mod confirmation); if they are not true, then it is entirely unfair.

Thirdly, other posters basically accused raleur of thread crapping. It's true. On the other hand, I refuse to accept the "if he is true, I don't want to hear it" statement given by sek929 et al (sorry buddy, no offence, I just don't agree with you there). If Shaddim is just pretending to buy these cars (for example), then most of the thread beccomes irrelevant and not worth my time in reading. As stated above, my view is that if raleur has found a number of inconsistencies created because Shaddim was giving only a brief overview of a more-complicated process, then it should be very easy for Shaddim to further explain the process and explain the inconsistencies.

Finally, Shaddim is not a mod, to my knowledge. If raleur has been banned from a thread, then a moderator should be making a comment to that effect, and perhaps a reason as to why.

Sorry for the length of this thread. As I stated, it may be that raleur has been discredited elsewhere, but I haven't seen that thread and would appreciate it being pointed out to me.

Thanks.

reader50 · Dec 31, 2012, 08:09 AM

Shaddim's thread is a focused one, and raleur appeared to be hounding another member with OT posts. I can't speak to raleur's statements, except that I've personally seen no anomalies when speaking with Shaddim.

We seldom reveal alternate handles - let people have their fun, so long as they don't sock-puppet. I will say we don't have any evidence to relate raleur to another member, and I'm not familiar with lpkmckenna's style.

Huddler allows blocking a member from posting in a thread - this has been used once before with Rob and a (different) car thread. I used it here to separate the two. No infractions or warnings were issued. It looks like the minimum intervention to maintain peace.

Shaddim · Dec 31, 2012, 11:29 AM

I did refute the claims, but as usual there's a good bit of selective (and biased) reading going on by someone I've had tiffs with in the past (you). While I didn't spend nearly the time, such as he did, trying to exploit everything I've ever said, I just don't have that time. Nor do I care enough to do it. "Oh noes, someone is wrong on the internets!" I don't get ruffled over stone-throwers in regular life anymore, why would a forum be different? Is that arrogant? Insensitive? I couldn't tell you, only you have control over what you feel, and it isn't my job (or hobby) to waste hours doing so. There's a rule about making threads about other members too, if I remember correctly.

TL;DR version: Whatever, IDC. Many thanks to Mrs. Costello, that's one of my favorite versions of that song. I'm spinning that LP over here and thought you might enjoy it too, isn't that nice of me?

Also I have a cold, so that magnifies my "go find a fence post and spin, if you don't like it" attitude.

turtle777 · Dec 31, 2012, 01:36 PM

Raleur is definitely a sock-puppet.

I thought (for a while) it's one of Besson's, but lpmckenna makes almost more sense, because of the specific political bias/twist.

Whoever he is, he can't possibly have a life, because he feels like having to prove that his internet dick isn't quite as small as Shaddim makes him feel.

-t

lpkmckenna · Dec 31, 2012, 02:44 PM

Um, I'm not raleur. I really only skim raleur's posts because I'm really only here to engage with people I don't agree with. You know, that post that Shaddim has been complaining about since I posted it.

And since all the people I used to love to engage with have vanished (ebuddy, Big Mac), I'm not around much. Frankly, since the election, MacNN isn't all that interesting to me anymore. I may restrict myself to the Mac and gaming threads.

I don't participate in Shaddiim's car thread because I'm not into cars. I don't even own a car.

Shaddim has hated me over since I told him polygamy is an antisocial con-game that favours rich men. I'm not surprised he is dragging me into a thread I don't even read.

Shaddim · Dec 31, 2012, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Shaddim has hated me over since I told him polygamy is an antisocial con-game that favours rich men. I'm not surprised he is dragging me into a thread I don't even read.

Since I'm not a polygamist, in the limited way it's understood around here, why would I even care? I don't even remember you making that comment.

Furthermore, I don't "hate" anyone on this forum. That would require more energy than I devote here. I dislike you because you can't debate without turning to insults and starting a fight, and I see that as a waste of time, closely related to schoolyard bullying. What a person says doesn't bother me, how they say it does. Sockpuppet "Raleur" isn't into cars either, "he" was trying to deal out some type of revenge, due to feeling butt-hurt. Speaking of which, if I bother some of you, there's a forum ignore function. Barring that, the only other recommendation I can make is to go get bent.

lpkmckenna · Dec 31, 2012, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Since I'm not a polygamist, in the limited way it's understood around here, why would I even care? I don't even remember you making that comment.

Fair enough. (Perhaps I should have chosen the fashionable "polyamorous" term then?)

I dislike you because you can't debate without turning to insults and starting a fight, and I see that as a waste of time, closely related to schoolyard bullying.

Being compared to the school yard bully is, um, an unusual experience for me.

Sockpuppet "Raleur" isn't into cars either, "he" was trying to deal out some type of revenge, due to feeling butt-hurt.

I'm still not raleur.

Speaking of which, if I bother some of you, there's a forum ignore function.

Now you're just stealing from me. Someone's gonna call you an lpkmckenna sock-puppet soon.

lpkmckenna · Dec 31, 2012, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by reader50

and I'm not familiar with lpkmckenna's style.

Oh, I am wounded!!

Athens · Dec 31, 2012, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna

Oh, I am wounded!!

Once you hit puberty I'm sure you will develop a special unique identifiable style

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 1, 2013, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

I did refute the claims, but as usual there's a good bit of selective (and biased) reading going on by someone I've had tiffs with in the past (you).

You did not. You immediately attacked raleur and made suggestions for how they may have been wrong, but you didn't come straight out and say what could have been an easy rebuttal based on his points - "that's not the car I bought, it was just a stock photo"; "it changed hands a couple times the weekend I bought it". In other words, you immediately began acting butthurt, which - as demonstrated by your post here - has been your typical MO on this forum since you arrived. You engage with other posters only when it's comfortable and/or convenient for you to do so; when it's not, you take a couple shots at the other guy, then take your toys out of the sandbox and leave in a huff.

I've "had tiffs" with you because I call you - or anyone - out when they say stupid shit that I know to be wrong and/or ignorant. You've said such stupid shit before - regarding climate change/global warming in particular; the threads aren't hard to find of course - but you also did a very, very dumb thing when you blatantly lied about the history of that house in the real estate thread. And in that thread, your immediate reaction was also to attack the poster; hence, why my alarm bells went off when you took the exact same response in this situation.

I don't know raleur from a hill of beans, but from the limited amount of his posts I've read his posting style and knowledge base seem obviously different from both lpmckenna and besson. (More similar to OldManMac IMO, but there's always the possibility it's someone new, or a very old poster returning.) I will say that I'm quite surprised that you bitch and moan out of one side of your mouth about people leaving this forum because of ignorant posters, and when someone new arrives who seems moderately intelligent but doesn't agree with you, you immediately and repeatedly accuse and attack them for having a secret agenda against you. Your repeated claims for good manners are hypocritical and, once again, based solely on your own convenience.

Other than that, I enjoyed the thread and most of your posts and have no problem with you or anyone else. But I felt that in cases where a poster has been banned for some reason, in particular where they have not obviously disobeyed the rules of the forum, a simple explanation from the relevant authorities would be appreciated. I appreciate the clarification reader50.

Shaddim · Jan 1, 2013, 01:40 PM

Given your attitudes and history, I can't say that I care.

besson3c · Jan 1, 2013, 02:45 PM

If you guys don't start to get along I'm going to take all of my sock-puppets away so you have nothing left to play with.

Waragainstsleep · Jan 1, 2013, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

You engage with other posters only when it's comfortable and/or convenient for you to do so; when it's not, you take a couple shots at the other guy, then take your toys out of the sandbox and leave in a huff.

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Given your attitudes and history, I can't say that I care.

subego · Jan 1, 2013, 05:24 PM

Was raleur told by a mod to back-off before the hammer was dropped?

reader50 · Jan 1, 2013, 05:44 PM

There has been no mod contact with raleur to my knowledge, so the answer is likely 'no'.

Note that there is no ban involved, he only lost write permission in the one thread. And he's free to continue his topic in another thread - here for example. This way Shaddim can continue in his car thread and may or may not visit raleur's discussion.

Another choice would have been to move the relevant posts to a 2nd thread.

Shaddim · Jan 1, 2013, 05:55 PM

Okay, let's look at this for a second:

You engage with other posters only when it's comfortable and/or convenient for you to do so; when it's not, you take a couple shots at the other guy, then take your toys out of the sandbox and leave in a huff.

This is true of everyone around here, including the person making the statement. If you throw insults and behave like an asshole, then I'm not going to waste any more of my time discussing a matter with you, in depth. Your behavior has determined my reactions, and you have no one to blame but yourself. If you want to be taken seriously, don't barge into it with both barrels loaded and spoiling for a fight. What's the point of talking about anything if you're always intractable? It's just boring.

There was one person from this forum whom I got to know in RL, they even visited us while on vacation. He doesn't post here anymore, though, partly because of the things I've already mentioned. He has more important things to do than engage in the same predictable old debates over and over again.

Shaddim · Jan 1, 2013, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by reader50

There has been no mod contact with raleur to my knowledge, so the answer is likely 'no'.
Note that there is no ban involved, he only lost write permission in the one thread. And he's free to continue his topic in another thread - here for example. This way Shaddim can continue in his car thread and may or may not visit raleur's discussion.
Another choice would have been to move the relevant posts to a 2nd thread.

They can do what they want, of course, but I'm not posting any more personal details on this matter, or any other, on this forum. I've already pulled all "non-stock" photos from MacNN, since I don't feel comfortable sharing that info here anymore.

subego · Jan 1, 2013, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by reader50

There has been no mod contact with raleur to my knowledge, so the answer is likely 'no'.
Note that there is no ban involved, he only lost write permission in the one thread. And he's free to continue his topic in another thread - here for example. This way Shaddim can continue in his car thread and may or may not visit raleur's discussion.
Another choice would have been to move the relevant posts to a 2nd thread.

I don't have an objection to the tool, what seems off is he wasn't asked to back-off before he was hit with it.

ebuddy · Jan 2, 2013, 03:58 AM

First to mckenna, I'm flattered that you miss our disagreements. While I found your political views generally objectionable, our disagreements were often, at least stimulating.

For what it's worth, I've debated mckenna for years and there is little I find in common between his stylings and raleur's though admittedly I've not debated as much if at all with raleur and I had always been among the last to know/recognize a "sock-puppet". I also have no gay-dar so maybe they're just both homosexuals and that's throwing everything out of whack. Or maybe I'm naive to how/why someone would feel the need to change internet handles on a forum they've frequented. If you've had some profound life-changing experience that has changed your perspective entirely or you felt you've burnt bridges down in your past here, just own up to it and be the new -- you.

To Shaddim, while I entirely believe your persona, you do have a most unique lifestyle ala the most fascinating man in the world, but that is no reason to hate on you or challenge your integrity and honesty, again for what it's worth. It's a bit of a catch-22 here because my life experiences have absolutely dictated the evolution in my world views. It's near impossible to offer that perspective without divulging some personal information, but I'd recommend against offering much of any personal information to anyone here. Particularly when you have "followers" as has been my case, though I always took that as a compliment.

To the mods and/or raleur and others concerned about heavy-handed moderation; The mods may know something we don't and wanted to keep that in check. It seemed at one point raleur had solicited other members in his quest and perhaps that had begun to rub several members the wrong way. The only one who hasn't popped up in here to defend himself/herself is raleur.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 2, 2013, 04:00 AM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Okay, let's look at this for a second:

You engage with other posters only when it's comfortable and/or convenient for you to do so; when it's not, you take a couple shots at the other guy, then take your toys out of the sandbox and leave in a huff.

This is true of everyone around here, including the person making the statement. If you throw insults and behave like an asshole, then I'm not going to waste any more of my time discussing a matter with you, in depth. Your behavior has determined my reactions, and you have no one to blame but yourself. If you want to be taken seriously, don't barge into it with both barrels loaded and spoiling for a fight.

If you're referring to me, at no place in this thread did I barge in spoiling for a fight or behaving like an asshole. I wanted a clarification on what I initially thought - and has confirmed - to be an modded matter that was left unresolved and/or unexplained. While I'm somewhat surprised that a poster was apparently banned from a thread without receiving any explanation as to why - in particular when he didn't break any forum rules, as far as I can tell - but I agree that his conversation was likely going nowhere in the first place and wasn't helping that thread.

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Given your attitudes and history, I can't say that I care.

Oh? And what attitudes and history are that, may I ask? I doubt I have much of a reputation for giving the mods trouble.

There was one person from this forum whom I got to know in RL, they even visited us while on vacation. He doesn't post here anymore, though, partly because of the things I've already mentioned. He has more important things to do than engage in the same predictable old debates over and over again.

Who was that, by the way?

I've met a couple of old-time posters back in the early 2000s in the Toronto area but they had all but stopped posting by that time and I don't think they've been around for a decade or more. We had a couple beers but didn't share many other interests beyound MacNN and did not keep in touch. I understand other MacNNers get together now and then, though.

abbaZaba · Jan 2, 2013, 05:09 AM

Shaddim: why not just answer the question and not dance around with words? you make these long winded posts talking about everything BUT the questionable points raleur brings up.

you seem to understand how to use the quote feature to reply to sections of a long post. everything is laid out here. what's stopping you?

edit: clarified who this was directed to and toned down the dangs

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 2, 2013, 05:15 AM

Originally Posted by abbaZaba

why not just answer the dang question and not dance around with words? you make these long winded posts talking about everything BUT the questionable points raleur brings up.

you seem to understand how to use the quote feature to reply to sections of a long post. everything is laid out here. what's stopping you?

Errrr....are you talking to me? I was not involved in the raleur/Shaddim discussion.

Edit: I guess that was directed at Shaddim? Sorry, it wasn't clear from your post.

MacinTommy · Jan 2, 2013, 06:36 AM

Finally some drama on MacNN! BTW, I have been requesting pictures of all the cars- mainly because I'm a car nut- from Shaddim but (and I do believe him) no dice because of security reasons. I mean, why would someone come onto a Mac/Apple forum just to lie about their lifestyle? Seems pointless and a waste of time to me. I've also had some PMs back and forth with him and asked "why not post/join an exotic car forum?" and his reply was that something like they are too ridiculous/immature... which is true. I'm part of a lamborghini forum and they are RUTHLESS when it comes to posing and general douche-baggery will get you banned in a heart-beat. Coming here to post there seems to be a bit of a higher intelligence factor and better and more civil debates/discussions can be had.

After re-reading my own post I'm not sure it it makes sense to anyone but it's just my 2 cents.

andi*pandi · Jan 2, 2013, 07:01 AM

Aside from the hassle, I don't see why Shaddim couldn't post pix of the fleet. Photoshop out the license numbers and bob's your uncle. For this to be a security risk, someone would have to know the address.

The hassle might not be worth it say, for pix of that DVD you got for christmas, but for something so unique (baby pix, construction projects, cooking masterpieces, photoshop funniez) it's worth it. Content!

I hate to see anyone pull all their pix and retreat to their shell. Showing our individuality is what helps make us a community.

subego · Jan 2, 2013, 07:15 AM

When I'm accused of lying in an online forum, and happen to be telling the absolute truth, I have little interest in giving proof, and much interest in telling the accuser to **** off. This is especially true if the accuser has already pulled out the knives.

andi*pandi · Jan 2, 2013, 07:26 AM

I am thinking more of MacInTommy's friendly request, before Raleur's cross-examination.

subego · Jan 2, 2013, 07:41 AM

Well, on the other hand, after my fifth or sixth supercar, I guess there might be some expectation of a fleet photo.

subego · Jan 2, 2013, 07:49 AM

DAE think it's funny this argument is between two people accusing each other of long-form, super intricate lying about themselves on the Internet?

This is usually a one way thing in my experience.

andi*pandi · Jan 2, 2013, 08:22 AM

OMG. Raleur is Shaddim!

lpkmckenna · Jan 2, 2013, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by ebuddy

I also have no gay-dar so maybe they're just both homosexuals and that's throwing everything out of whack.

There's going out on a limb, but this is standing on the end of a pine needle.

abbaZaba · Jan 2, 2013, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by andi*pandi

OMG. Raleur is Shaddim!

Einhorn is Finkle! Finkle is Einhorn!

subego · Jan 2, 2013, 10:13 PM

Was peeb also Atomic Rooster?

The Final Dakar · Jan 3, 2013, 06:41 AM

subego · Jan 3, 2013, 07:24 AM

That's a no?

The Final Dakar · Jan 3, 2013, 07:37 AM

That's a reaction to this entire thread.

subego · Jan 3, 2013, 07:40 AM

Hmm...

More of a Jackie Chan my brain is full of **** for me.

besson3c · Jan 3, 2013, 09:53 AM

Subego: hi!

subego · Jan 3, 2013, 10:06 AM

Why, hello...

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 4, 2013, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Originally Posted by Shaddim

There was one person from this forum whom I got to know in RL, they even visited us while on vacation. He doesn't post here anymore, though, partly because of the things I've already mentioned. He has more important things to do than engage in the same predictable old debates over and over again.

Who was that, by the way?

Any comment?

The Final Dakar · Jan 4, 2013, 09:09 AM

My shot in the dark would be Doofy and his then fiancé. Railroader seems out of the question because I doubt he can get away from what he does.

Either way, I don't think your inquiry will bear fruit.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 4, 2013, 09:29 AM

What does Railroader do?

The Final Dakar · Jan 4, 2013, 09:31 AM

Volunteered at a home taking care of children, I believe.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 4, 2013, 10:34 AM

Oh, he's retired?

The Final Dakar · Jan 4, 2013, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Oh, he's retired?

Careful, you're reaching BIg Mac levels of "Where the **** have you been?" here. He would bring that up with some frequency.

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 4, 2013, 11:23 AM

Had no idea. I don't really care and probably would not remember if I read it. Wasn't that Kilby, though? The same guy who worked for GM or some such? I didn't think he was an old dude but am surprised one could retire early on a tradesman salary.

Anyways,

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

Either way, I don't think your inquiry will bear fruit.

Huh? For the life of me I can't figure out why this would be secret information.

The Final Dakar · Jan 4, 2013, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Had no idea. I don't really care and probably would not remember if I read it. Wasn't that Kilby, though? The same guy who worked for GM or some such? I didn't think he was an old dude but am surprised one could retire early on a tradesman salary.

Same person. He isn't old, which is why he frequently boasted about his accomplishment(s).

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Huh? For the life of me I can't figure out why this would be secret information.

I don't get how you can describe such a unique lifestyle as MacNstein and then get mysterious on the small details, as if that's what's going to give you away. Perhaps it's the same mindset that thinks civilization will be ending soon.

(Also, I take it you didn't catch the reference in the previous post)

ShortcutToMoncton · Jan 4, 2013, 11:49 AM

Interesting. Good investments, I assume? Good for him.

I didn't catch any reference, no. I'm possibly thick-headed, you might not have noticed

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

I don't get how you can describe such a unique lifestyle as MacNstein and then get mysterious on the small details, as if that's what's going to give you away.

Yeah I'm not sure I understand it either. "I've got 8 supercars, live in Nashville, have two wives and a kid, live in a large compound with security.....but damn it all if you'll ever find out which MacNN member slept over a few years back"

The Final Dakar · Jan 4, 2013, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

Interesting. Good investments, I assume? Good for him.

I don't recall clearly, but I think it was savings.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

I didn't catch any reference, no. I'm possibly thick-headed, you might not have noticed

http://forums.macnn.com/0/forum/4388...t#post_4075247

Phileas · Jan 4, 2013, 12:47 PM

He got a golden handshake from GM when they needed to shrink. I think he wanted to go into woodworking for a while, but not sure how that worked out.

Face Ache · Jan 4, 2013, 02:51 PM

"Roll up, roll up! See the fantastical Internet Sideshow! SEE the amazing Internet Vigilante! BE AMAZED by the feats of the Internet Hero! LAUGH at the Internet Clowns! THRILL to the internet Daredevil. Sorry son, no looking behind the curtain. Staff only, I'm afraid."

As the punters queue out front, in the caravans behind the tent performers are putting on their costumes and makeup. In a van with sides marked "Internet Hero" Bradley Townsend dons a threadbare padded suit that was handed down from his father, while the clowns outside pass a whiskey bottle around.

【 camera pans past your caravan, but we can't quite see the writing on the side 】

"Enjoy the show folks!"