Rationalskepticism,lol part III.

[pErvinalia]

I hate to drag us back to the topic, but has anyone discovered why I was banned yet? I'd be surprised if it had passed without comment over there, but the email I sent 17 days ago remains unanswered. I presume there must be a reason, so one wonders what obstacle prevents me from knowing it.

They never answer those emails unless someone over there (or here) raises a stink about it. They really are a system of authoritarianism over there. All the bullshit in the FUA etc about appealing decisions is just that, bullshit.

[pErvinalia]

I hate to drag us back to the topic, but has anyone discovered why I was banned yet? I'd be surprised if it had passed without comment over there, but the email I sent 17 days ago remains unanswered. I presume there must be a reason, so one wonders what obstacle prevents me from knowing it.

According to the Mod Note that announced your banning:

GENERAL MODNOTE
As some of you make have noted Strontium Dog has been banned.
This member enjoyed more opportunities to redress issues with his posting behaviour than many may think is reasonable. Like some before him he may not be most accurately labelled as a classic troll, but his continued and frequent disruptive influence on discussions has led us to end his membership.

As this situation highlights, disruptive members are difficult to nail down, and therefore often have considerable longevity. And to those who feel this is too harsh an action, this thread will remain open for comment. But let us make this quite clear - while banning this member may prove unpopular, the staff has not taken this step lightly. This action has been the result of discussions over an extraordinary length of time and has been taken for the good of the forum as a whole. I would also like to note that this was the unanimous decision of all staff.

Continued and frequent disruptive influence!

One would have thought someone who was continually disruptive would have accrued more than two warnings in two years, but I can see evidence clearly played little part in their decision.

I have never had any interest in "disrupting" anything in my life. Life is too short for that. How can such apparently intelligent people misjudge a situation so tragically? Have any recent examples of so-called "disruption" been given?

I would agree that I have, in the past, reacted too robustly to provocation, and this is something I addressed a long time ago. Hence why I have had just two warnings in the past 27 months. If this isn't "redressing issues with posting behaviour", then I don't know what is.

No, I'm afraid I don't believe this modnote has any credibility at all. I would have far more respect for them if they'd come out and admitted the truth, that it's easier to ban an individual who holds opinions that are sometimes in the minority than it is to address issues with the wider membership reacting like out of control lunatics whenever they see something they disagree with.

Thank you for posting it Scott, since they didn't even have the courtesy to inform me. I know we haven't always seen eye to eye in the past - you seem to dislike me, for reasons I've never quite been able to pin down - but I do appreciate you posting that for me to see.

They fucking banned you because you are a troll. Grow up. You've been an identified troll for a fucking decade. Samsa probably saved you for a lot of those years as, for some reason, he's too nice to believe that you could be so willfully idiotic.

[Strontium Dog]

I hate to drag us back to the topic, but has anyone discovered why I was banned yet? I'd be surprised if it had passed without comment over there, but the email I sent 17 days ago remains unanswered. I presume there must be a reason, so one wonders what obstacle prevents me from knowing it.

They never answer those emails unless someone over there (or here) raises a stink about it. They really are a system of authoritarianism over there. All the bullshit in the FUA etc about appealing decisions is just that, bullshit.

FWIW rEv, even though we disagreed a lot - sometimes horribly - I do think your banning was unwarranted too.

It's funny, because I'm the same person on this forum as on RatSkep. Have I been "disrupting" this forum too without anyone noticing or passing comment on it? I'd like to think not, but if anyone disagrees...

[pErvinalia]

Well you'll love my next comment after that one... :p

[Strontium Dog]

They fucking banned you because you are a troll. Grow up. You've been an identified troll for a fucking decade. Samsa probably saved you for a lot of those years as, for some reason, he's too nice to believe that you could be so willfully idiotic.

This is patently ridiculous. You sure know how to butter people up, don't you

Like I say, my main problem has been reacting to provocation. I received three warnings for complaining that one member wanted to see me incincerated. If you want to see reaction to such outright twattery as "trolling", then you're on the same bizarro planet as the rest of them.

[pErvinalia]

But in general I disagree with bans. Mine was fine, because I was sock puppetting the cunts. But yours, Seth's, rainbows etc are not a good process. As you say, they should be able to do it via suspensions via the usual warning process. Many of us argued that you, rainbow, Seth etc could have got usual warnings. Not sure why they didn't apply them.

[Strontium Dog]

Well you'll love my next comment after that one... :p

I'm over any disagreements we've had in the past. I'd like to think you could move past them too. Like I said, life is too short for such nonsense. I just want to get along with people, and have made enormous efforts to do so on that forum, even if the moderators refuse to acknowledge that, and even if half a dozen hardcore provocateurs aren't prepared to stop dragging up ancient history in their endless quest to strike low blows.

I can deal with being excluded from a community I've been a part of for eight years. It's the mischaracterisation of my motives and purpose that I find incredibly upsetting. I am not that guy, and never have been.

[Hermit]

I'm the same person on this forum as on RatSkep. Have I been "disrupting" this forum too...?

Yes! You are doing it right now, troll. Here we are busily discussing weighty issues about life and death, as propounded by a prominent aspirant to knighthood no less, and you keep interjecting with bringing up your hurt feefees that you so richly earnt by your disruptive behaviour in some obscure hole somewhere on the innerwebz.

I fear that I cannot keep a straight face much longer, so I better stop now.






Eta: BUT LET THIS BE A LESSON TO YOU !!11!1!!!

[Hermit]

I think you might be losing sight of what Dawkins means and/or is trying to put into words.

I think you have lost sight of what Dawkins means. He has actually put exactly what he means into words. It's in the conclusion of the paragraph, and that rhetorical question makes it crystal clear that he does not merely mean to tell us how unlikely it was that any one of us has been born. The mention of that unlikelihood does not stand on its own; it serves him to set up a sermon with bonus petulance the likes of which would be the envy of any sternly moralising priest, parson or vicar who is given to sternly wag his finger at his congregation.

how dare we whine at our inevitable return to that prior state from which the vast majority have never stirred?

Why not? Is the assurance of dying one day and the distinct possibility of spending our final years with increasing physical decreptitude and/or mental decay not something to dread because of the unlikelihood of having been born in the first place? This is Dawkins at his most emotional. The paragraph on the whole contains zero percent logic.

[pErvinalia]

Well you'll love my next comment after that one... :p

I'm over any disagreements we've had in the past. I'd like to think you could move past them too. Like I said, life is too short for such nonsense. I just want to get along with people, and have made enormous efforts to do so on that forum, even if the moderators refuse to acknowledge that, and even if half a dozen hardcore provocateurs aren't prepared to stop dragging up ancient history in their endless quest to strike low blows.

I can deal with being excluded from a community I've been a part of for eight years. It's the mischaracterisation of my motives and purpose that I find incredibly upsetting. I am not that guy, and never have been.

Most of the people you (and I) have arguments with are people with a different view of politics and economics. I don't think that will ever stop while ever we are such strong advocates of our own points of view. We also believe fervently in the inherent wrongness of other's political views/ideologies. And let's be honest, I'm a gruff cunt who doesn't suffer (IMO) foolish arguments. I'm always going to be at the throats of my political/economic opponents. I don't really back away from that. I could do with less negativity in my life at the moment, hence why I'm pretty much ignoring anything from Seth about MARXISTS!!1!, conservatism, and atheism as a religion. But I can see it ramping up again eventually with coito/42, so i'll end up having to put him on ignore again eventually to preserve my sanity. Basically, me and politics/economics is always going to lead to ranting and rabid defence of a certain point of view. It's as certain as the heat death of the universe.

[pErvinalia]

Samsa, learning question posted here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=50439

[Seth]

Exactly. What's ironic is that Dave doesn't realise that conservatism is the home of authoritarianism, as conservative psychology fears the free individual and cherishes top down control of individuals lest they let their inherent evil natures bring down society.

Well that's just a complete load of horseshit if ever I've heard one. Conservatism is the last bastion of individual liberty and the freedom of the individual to pursue, excel and succeed...or fail, on one's own merits and efforts. Socialism is the essence of top-down control of individuals, who must be hammered down into proletarian equality lest the rest of the proles see them excel and become unmanagable because they realize just how suppressed and oppressed they actually are and how much happier and more free they would be if out from under the yoke of socialist majoritarian tyranny.

That's why conservative, capitalist states like the United States have to build walls and fences to keep people OUT, whereas socialist states have to build walls and fences to keep people IN, lest the labor force flee the oppression of either State Socialism or democratic majoritarian tyranny, leaving nobody behind to dig the potatoes.

[Seth]

I hate to drag us back to the topic, but has anyone discovered why I was banned yet? I'd be surprised if it had passed without comment over there, but the email I sent 17 days ago remains unanswered. I presume there must be a reason, so one wonders what obstacle prevents me from knowing it.

According to the Mod Note that announced your banning:

GENERAL MODNOTE
As some of you make have noted Strontium Dog has been banned.
This member enjoyed more opportunities to redress issues with his posting behaviour than many may think is reasonable. Like some before him he may not be most accurately labelled as a classic troll, but his continued and frequent disruptive influence on discussions has led us to end his membership.

As this situation highlights, disruptive members are difficult to nail down, and therefore often have considerable longevity. And to those who feel this is too harsh an action, this thread will remain open for comment. But let us make this quite clear - while banning this member may prove unpopular, the staff has not taken this step lightly. This action has been the result of discussions over an extraordinary length of time and has been taken for the good of the forum as a whole. I would also like to note that this was the unanimous decision of all staff.

What a bunch of top-down intolerant, bigoted, Marxist authoritarian asswipe fuckwits, each and every one of them. I'm actually glad to be banned as I'd otherwise have had to resign because it makes me want to vomit that I ever bothered to correspond with a single one of those despicable motherfuckers. I wish them and the entire forum a long, agonizing and instructive death.

[Seth]

They fucking banned you because you are a troll. Grow up. You've been an identified troll for a fucking decade. Samsa probably saved you for a lot of those years as, for some reason, he's too nice to believe that you could be so willfully idiotic.

Just because someone has been allegedly "identified as a troll" doesn't mean it's true. Almost always it means that those who make such identifications are microcephalic bigoted fuckwits who couldn't pour their own shit out of a boot if the instructions were printed on the sole.

[Seth]

But in general I disagree with bans. Mine was fine, because I was sock puppetting the cunts. But yours, Seth's, rainbows etc are not a good process. As you say, they should be able to do it via suspensions via the usual warning process. Many of us argued that you, rainbow, Seth etc could have got usual warnings. Not sure why they didn't apply them.

Because they are motherfucking, cocksucking, child raping shithead cowards with intellectual quotients in the deeply negative range who are too stupid to be allowed to post on the internet, much less operate a forum, even one filled with other fuckwitted shitheaded Marxist cowards.

God how I love it when you guys bring up that cesspool of Marxist flatulence because I get to say all the things they don't want anyone to say about them and do so with impunity.