Like you have the ability to not need the last word, or to defend your pal without using Suzzer’s name.
Amazing.
I WAS TRYING TO WALK AWAY AND NOW YOU DRAGGED ME BACK IN AGAIN
1 Like
You are pretty good at telling other people to do things you seem incapable of doing yourself.
Please stop. Both of you.
6 Likes
hm
quite the pyrrhic victory huh
You made the 16th post in this thread, right after it was opened, and posted about an unrelated matter without addressing the two questions. Then you made this, the 229th post, after a full day of Off Topic Bickering™, and only answered half of one of the two questions. So… come on man. Don’t personally attack our intelligence. Regardless,
a few questions:
-
What is this line and how did that go over it?
-
Assuming there actually is a line and that went over it, why was the ban excessively long?
-
And this is the most interesting, why did you feel the need to delete the entire long ass post and not just the offending word? Especially because the poster in question quoted the word themselves in a reply:
Clearly there was no problem with anybody gazing upon the actual word, a somewhat common surname, so it raises the question of why you felt it appropriate to delete a long and relevant post unrelated to the offensive word. None of the potential answers are particularly charitable but I like to be the change I want to see, so I’m asking rather than making declarations. For a refresher, here’s the post in question with the offensive word changed:
On one hand, thanks for sharing.
On the other hand, what you typed is so thoroughly false, and can quite easily be empirically proven to be false, that if I didn’t know any better I’d say you were doing a thought experiment. Like, a honeypot to see who’d have the absurd gall to cosign such a statement. And yeah, empirically proven, because that’s the brilliance of written communication: It’s all documented, and, like, written down, man. It’s literally impossible to say ‘omg crazy 6ix shouted some crazy stuff and ran away and who can really remember but it was definitely super crazy’ and that’s the entire point .
Would you like an example? In this very thread, in the actual throughline conversation you’re participating in, I made a “new point”. The guy who directly replied to me and started the derail with a questionable post, Goebs80, then went on to post in another thread that I in fact did make a new and good point and he agreed with me in a manner of speaking .
Please let that sink in for a second. Do you get now why nobody actually answered this when I asked them, why a highly intelligent programmer and software designer pretended to not know the difference between what and why, among other people, and let you, a person who I know does actually care about the forum, just walk up in here and step in it? Do you think they were just trying to be nice and spare my feelings, as if saying “you’re a worthless pos but I won’t tell you why” is somehow the nice and feelings-sparing version? Sweetsummerchild just had an aneurysm. Now that Sabo’s gone I’m the most casually insulted and disrespected poster here and it’s not particularly close. I just give people the benefit of the doubt that they know I don’t care and that’s why they run so wild.
I should specify that I don’t care in the feelings-hurt sense. I care very much about the interesting meta-conversations that pop out of it. And the more ridiculous projections, the more interested I become. It’s like, if projection had mass and density, the amount of projection in this forum would collapse into a black hole. It would suck all of the oxygen and other elements out of the forum and past its event horizon. And other totally good analogies.
So uh, as to “how’s that for why?” I’d say 1 to 1, tie ballgame?
2 Likes
Separate post for
- If I reply to people in the thread, will the thread be throttled or locked and will I be banned again? If so, why, and how does that relate to the larger issues?
4 Likes
You know, or at least should know, that I think precisely delineating such a line is at best a fool’s errand but is more likely a counterproductive blueprint for those who wish to abuse to color just inside such a line so as to claim that their abuse isn’t.
Seems like it was mercifully short compared to your previous ban.
It’s, not interesting? It’s a combination of laziness and humility. It’s not my business to edit bad posts into something acceptable, and I don’t think anyone could reasonably be expected to do so without being more infuriating than just deleting an offending post. It’s innately prone to accusations of bias and the original posters saying that the mods made them say something they did not intend to say. It’s not my job to fix your posts, and I don’t think anyone could do so in a manner you would accept consistently.
Sure, probably. Anyone who thinks of themselves so highly that they deserve to take over a whole thread to respond to everyone in their own way is likely to be a nuisance or a spammer. But, as usual, it’s a judgment call.
If he posts a lot in a thread about him it isn’t spam or a nuisance.
10 Likes
Yes, he should start an AMA thread and go nuts. I support this.
1 Like
That’s fine. I mean, it’s obviously ridiculous for a number of reasons and we both know it, but it’s also fine, because that wasn’t really the spirit of the question.
I asked you how it was over the line. I can tell you that elephants are “big” because they’re the largest land-dwelling mammal, and can tell you their average weight and dimensions, without divulging where my cutoff line for “big” precisely is.
None of these were complicated or trick questions. I changed Goebs80’s name to “Goebbels80”. The question was simply, why did this receive a week-long (edit: six days) ban?
I didn’t ask if you found it interesting, I asked something else. It wasn’t a bad post, and I wasn’t talking about some nebulous and abstract platonic ideal of a post-that-needs-editing. I asked you specifically about that specific post.
There was one word in the post, and it’s been demonstrated that it did not even need to be censored. Again, “Goebbels80”, one word among hundreds not pertaining to that word. So, why not change that one word, or, better yet, leave the post up and have it follow the established flagged post protocol? The latter would obviously be the easiest from a work perspective, right?
This thread was made to ask two straightforward questions. When you neglected to answer them, what transpired was exactly what you’re describing here, a Hostile Thread Takeover by questionable actors. Which, fine, it’s welcomed and I think people should have a right to share their thoughts.
So, gibberish aside, we’re actually getting somewhere. For example, during the hostile takeover, Clovis lied about a PM exchange with me, which a number of people repeated as truth. AOFrantic also displayed his complicated relationship with objective reality. And that’s just two things in the cornucopia.
It seems like you’re actually saying that I don’t have a right to also type words into the rectangle and share my thoughts, as replies to all this. Which, also fine, tell me there’s a clear double standard based on your arbitary whims and let me make my choice. That’s the easiest and most respectful way to proceed, right?
2 Likes
To make sure this isn’t overlooked, because it’s by far the weirdest thing in this whole entire affair:
This ban was six days and the one before was one day. There were no bans before that. It seems like you’re confused about the basic plot points. Do you actually have me confused with a different poster?
That actually would explain a whole lot.
8 Likes
Without reading the posts you can’t be certain of this. On 22 Wil used to ruin threads by obsessively responding to every post that mentioned him regardless of what the mention was.
In wookie’s defense I have a hard time keeping all the recent bannings straight too.
4 Likes
Because it was an obvious personal attack.
Looks like this was my mistake. My recollection at the time was that you’d eaten a ban for about as much or more recently. That doesn’t line up with the log, so it should have been shorter.
1 Like
But it’s been well worth it because of all the happy posters now.
6 Likes
That excess time should be applied to 6ix’s next ban.
I would like to hear more about this. @clovis8 told the forum that you “literally” said something in PM which you’ve told me that you not only didn’t literally say, but that you also did not imply in any way in the PM. Seems pretty bad if true, especially since it was subsequently repeated as truth by other users.
2 Likes
2 Likes
Please don’t @ me in this bullshit anymore. I am no longer engaging in this pointless, endless, and self-destructive nonsense.
Leave me out of it. The entire ATF forum should be closed for good.
For the record, I have no idea what this is about, nor do I frankly care at all.