This is topic Hatrack broke my thinking cap (or How I learned to stop worrying and love the Chad) in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=028166

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
for some reason, reading hatrack threads today has made my brain try exploding a few times today...

why?

[ October 13, 2004, 07:16 AM: Message edited by: Ben ]
 

---

Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
 
That's because you're not in platinium mode.
/sims 2 allusion
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
You need the new Pentium V chip. It runs faster than the 4.

More RAM never hurt either.

[ October 12, 2004, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: CStroman ]
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Perhaps you should try taking a walk (((Ben))).
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
There is a hatrack braindrain going on. Up to 50% of our energy is being used to disprove lies and half truths being posted on this forum.
 

---

Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
 
If... Only... I... Had... The force... To go to bed...
Argh !
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

There is a hatrack braindrain going on. Up to 50% of our energy is being used to disprove lies and half truths being posted on this forum.

---

I am kind of curious as to why I'm the only one who seems to attempt to do this with at least one other poster who posts lies and half-truths fairly often. Is it because of the target de jure's far more prolific posting?

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 
Yep. That’s a big part of it, anyway. Plus some other social dynamics.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Dagonee, it may also have to do with the fact that the way the target-du-jour posts tends to be highly sarcastic, smug, offensive, and grating. People tend to respond very strongly to that.

To me, it has less to do with the content of the posts that with the style of the particular poster. I love to read thoughtfully considered opinions that are different than mine. You and mr_porteiro_head are both great for that, and I've actually been meaning to thank both of you for it for quite some time.

 

---

Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
 
Why don't we get as many complaints when Hatrack's liberals post lies?
 

---

Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
 
Dagonee, it may be me, but I find it unfair that you imply something like that about another poster without naming him/her
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Also, Thor is not just a partisan, he's an eccentric partisan. He's someone we can smile and nod at, then go about our daily lives. Chad isn't.
 

---

Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
 
That was Thor. Right. Sorry. I didn't figure that. I mean, you can hardly evitate Chad since he is in almost all threads, but I haven't read something from Thor since a moment, I think.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Well, Thor does receive a lot more leeway than other people. If he renamed himself without telling us and started posting the same stuff, wouldn't we crucify him?

Bob did lay the smack on him on one of his recent threads though.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 

quote:

---

There is a hatrack braindrain going on. Up to 50% of our energy is being used to disprove lies and half truths being posted on this forum.

---

quote:

---

Dagonee, it may be me, but I find it unfair that you imply something like that about another poster without naming him/her

---

I thought it would be unfair to name him/her out of context. But s/he is not Thor, and is often as highly sarcastic, smug, offensive, and grating as anything Chad puts out. The fact that s/he is more articulate may help in escaping detection, I guess.

And thanks, Megan.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
I like reading political threads, but when it's just so much ranting and finger-pointing and calling people the "l-word," yeah, no thanks.

Hmmm.... "liberal" is a dirty word?
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
I thought it would be unfair to name him/her out of context. But s/he is not Thor, and is often as highly sarcastic, smug, offensive, and grating as anything Chad puts out.

Hey, don't talk about me as if I'm not even here.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
To some people, it seems to be. I've seen people use it as a derogatory label plenty of times. Not here until VERY recently, though.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Adam has an "n" word fixation. Why do you keep talking about the "n" word when no one else does. That's like the 3rd time I've seen you post it...

Or are you meaning like "neo"
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Oops, sorry Dags, I'd just noted you refuting Thor/SBS repeatedly recently.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
So, my posts using the "L" word are bad, but someone like Senor "Tom" calling people "hard-core bigots"..is acceptable...because why again?

The intollerance of the majority of "lefties" on this board is absolutely astounding!

Grow up people.

[ October 12, 2004, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: CStroman ]
 

---

Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
 
No, the bad l-word is "liar," a word that seems out of place here on the Internet, the realm of lies and misinformation.
 

---

Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
 

quote:

---

I'm still a liberal, it's *those* people who aren't liberals...

-GKC, emphasis, his

---

quote:

---

So, my posts using the "L" word are bad, but someone like Senor "Tom" calling people "hard-core bigots"..is acceptable...because why again?

The intollerance of the majority of "lefties" on this board is absolutely astounding!

Grow up people.

---

What about the intolerance of us conservatives for many posts of yours and some posts of Tom's?

Of course, Tom has a very high ratio of rational, thought-provoking posts to over-the-top posts, and is very comfortably into the "productive poster" realm.

You haven't made the needle on my Productive Poster Detector (patent pending) quiver even once.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
I like "lefties" better than "liberal." With a nick like "lefty" I can pretend I'm a pirate.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Arrrrr!
 

---

Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
 
Dag, part of it is also the lack of defensiveness/follow-up attacks by the liberal poster you’re referring to. S/he lets his/her posts speak for themselves, in the main, rather than getting into long back-and-forth arguments, and thus doesn’t derail entire threads, or spill into other threads.
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
actually, i edited the other night to be nice.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Chad, it has nothing to do with your viewpoints. It has to do with a certain approach in which you imply (and in some cases, outright state) that YOUR viewpoints are 100% correct, and anyone who thinks differently is an utter moron.

It also has to do with your apparent view that anyone who is, to use your word, a "leftie" has clearly not considered their viewpoint at all. You condescend to anyone who shows even the slightest deparature from your view, and talk to them as if they were a) complete boneheads or b) immature children.

This, to me, is a highly offensive, rude way to go about discussion, especially given the fact that most discussion that goes on at hatrack is civil and thoughtful.

I admit to being more than a little frustrated with you because your discourse is neither civil nor thoughtful.

No one has called you a "righty" or a conservative nut-job, have they? No. Most people here have responded to you with FAR more thoughtfulness and courtesy than you have shown them. The only "intolerance" you've been subjected to has been an intolerance for jingoism and spouting the party line without considering carefully what you're saying AND what others are saying.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Man, I can't believe I've never given CStroman my "take your partisan chunk-blowing to Ornery" spiel. It's been a while since I even tried that. Oh well.

P.S. I'm afraid I might have called CStroman a nutjob or something similar.

[ October 12, 2004, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Dag, part of it is also the lack of defensiveness/follow-up attacks by the liberal poster you’re referring to. S/he lets his/her posts speak for themselves, in the main, rather than getting into long back-and-forth arguments, and thus doesn’t derail entire threads, or spill into other threads.

---

quote:

---

Yeah well, on a strictly monitored scale of justice, I don’t agree with it either. On a purely utilitarian, “how much is this person’s eccentricity going to interfere with my enjoyment of an otherwise good conversation” scale, I think it’s a reasonable dynamic.

---

quote:

---

But if I make a certain viewpoint look stupid. It's not my fault that it's one you hold. It's yours.

---

If you would actually "make a certain viewpoint look stupid" you'd probably get cheers from both sides.

Instead, you call a viewpoint stupid (or socialist), provide lackluster proof and questionable support, and then refuse to fully meet posts that call your reasoning into question.

The fact that you often utterly mischaracterize others' beliefs and posts doesn't help either.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
the problem i've found with "discussions" with you chad is that you do not answer questions asked of you. you manipulate questions asked to you to state a completley different point. you remind me an awful lot of the debating styles of the current POTUS. you keep reiterating earlier statements without bringing anything new to the conversation even if the conversation has evolved. i can count a few times where questions about the decisions made by the current POTUS have been responded to by you simply accusing Kerry of being incapable of leading the nation or making decisions, whether its related to the point or not. or you just don't answer or follow up at all.

[ October 12, 2004, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: Ben ]
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
*feels sad he didn't make the name-calling list*

I must admit I was letting my extreme disdain for your intellectual understanding of factuality and politics drip through in some recent posts, and I'm somewhat disappointed, though hardly surprised, that you didn't notice.

However, I rather suspect its because most the time I find your statements say exactly what I would want to say about them all by themselves. Your masterful economy at including the best arguments against yourself in your own posts makes my role easier .
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
That's just it - if you actually made people look stupid, people would notice. Do you understand that when you attack without respect or discipline, it is NOT the person you are attacking that is diminished?

This isn't a playground where the rudest person wins.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Chad, it is most certainly NOT that you make a certain viewpoint look stupid (unless, perhaps, it's the unsupported viewpoints you yourself are espousing). It is that you are rude and uncivil in your responses. You assume, and post as if, anyone responding to you is an idiot. This is rude. Again...read the post carefully...it has NOTHING to do with your particular views. It has EVERYTHING to do with how you treat Hatrackers.

I've seen people who basically agree with your conservative stance call you rude, and you never respond. Address the rudeness. Not the views.

That, my friend, is why people call you a troll. Because you are unendingly uncivil to everyone who posts here.

[edited to add, I'm gonna find it REALLY ironic if my frustration with Chad actually makes me finally hit 500 posts]

[ October 12, 2004, 06:01 PM: Message edited by: Megan ]
 

---

Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
 
It doesn't have to be that way - trust the people here. Intelligence and articulation is recognized, no matter what the views they defend.

You don't have to try so hard to get noticed.
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
oh, and is it too late to substitute the words "nut-job" with "twit"?
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
I thought it was "right wing nut job" and "liberal weiner."
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
i was thinking "twit" so it should be fine.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
I must not be reading the same posts as everyone else.

Why in the world is everyone so "anti-chad"?
 

---

Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
 
Mostly because Chad is so anti-everyone.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Tammy, take a stroll through some of the political threads.

I have to say, actually, (now that I've had two ranting posts born out of frustration), that Chad has been an ok hatracker (for the most part) in non-political threads. When they stay non-political, that is.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
<---clueless!

I really must pay attention to the more serious threads.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 

quote:

---

I've seen people who basically agree with your conservative stance call you rude, and you never respond. Address the rudeness. Not the views.

---

quote:

---

Ok, I've made a decision. Before I was for giving Homosexuals equal rights along with Heterosexual couples in the form of a Union.

The comments on this thread have changed my mind.

I am now for the state and constitutional ammendments banning Gay marriage.

It has become clear that there are the minority of people in this country who don't give a rat's ____ what the majority of the people in this country want and are willing to abuse the judicial system in order to force their beliefs on the majority. If you are willing to compromise, but the other side is too pig headed to do so, then you go out and being the majority, you get what you want.

Just want to say thanks to all those who pushed me towards the banning of Gay Marriage from my previous view of equal rights for both.

But it has become evident that one side is really too stupid to realize that what they want is not what the majority of the people in this country want, but feel they have the right to force those views upon us.

So, ban gay marriage in all forms and the problem is solved. The rules will be clear, and the law will be one that the majority in the country will believe in and support, which is critical.

Thanks again.

---

 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
i'm not anti-chad. as illustrated by the quote above, he's excellent comic relief.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
So Dagonee, what is the problem with that post?

Please elaborate how I should change my views to make you happy.
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
hey chad how about addressing ANY of the other issues or concerns brought up in this thread or others...if it's not too much trouble.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
I hope this is helping your headache Ben.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
For the last time, it ISN'T your views. It's HOW you post them.

Try to rein in the sarcasm. Try to behave as if the other people posting know what they're talking about. Most people here DO know what they're talking about, and phrase it cogently and politely and respond to others' posts with respect.

Eliminate comments such as this...

quote:

---

that one side is really too stupid to realize that what they want is not what the majority of the people in this country want

---

quote:

---

I don't call anyone moron or nut job or any such names, although many do fit the bill to a "T".

---

quote:

---

But it has become evident that one side is really too stupid to realize that what they want is not what the majority of the people in this country want, but feel they have the right to force those views upon us.

---

 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I think the German Pansy dialogue was much more illustrative.

Wow, in checking the Debate #1 thread I noticed that Irami and I agreed on something- the debate was a tie.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Well should I name call like you Ben? I really don't want to stoop to that level, so I'll just say, that if you wish to continue attacking me directly, go right ahead.

If it makes you feel better about yourself Ben to call people names directly, I'm glad I could help you out.

I'm just here for the enjoyment of the topics.

Oh and here's a hint or two that it's obvious some have a tough time dealing with. It's simple, but so hard for some to grasp.

You don't have to read something. There is no "force" here to make anyone read anything, or even respond for that matter other than one's own lack of self control.

Likewise, you don't have to respond. If you choose to, then be prepared to respond back as well.

Don't post something like "Two republican senators annouce Gay affair" and then be suprised if someone responds with Anti-Democrat or "liberal" quips as well.

When I think someone crosses the line is when you call someone directly "ignorant" or "pick your favorite name here". See there's thinking an idea is stupid, then there's actually calling another poster stupid directly.

So again, Ben, if you wish to continue posting "names" I hope your ego gets that little boost from it.

But alas, I won't bite your bait and do the same back.

I hope that answered your question.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

So Dagonee, what is the problem with that post?

---

For one, no one in that thread stated that they wanted to enforce gay marriage rights through the courts. So when you say "The comments on this thread have changed my mind" and "It has become clear that there are the minority of people ... willing to abuse the judicial system in order to force their beliefs on the majority," you mischaracterize the opinions of those opposing you.

If this happened once in a while, or if you apologized when it happened, this might be tolerable. But you do this very frequently, basically conflating the ideas of other people you've encountered or read about elsewhere with the ideas of the people you're engaged in discussion with.

Further, when you say, "But it has become evident that one side is really too stupid to realize that what they want is not what the majority of the people in this country want..." you are both name calling and ignoring the plain basic fact that this is a discussion board in which participants are trying to convince others what they think.

I disagree with pretty much EVERYONE on this board on some substantive matter or another. I know I've sometimes pissed people off and not always acted perfectly. I've generally apologized, and I've always been forgiven when I have. Why? Partly because Hatrack is generally very forgiving, and partly because I generally treat other posters' ideas with respect, even while vociferously disagreeing with many of them.

Finally, deciding to publicly announce your change of heart because people on this board disagree with you and have the nerve to give reasons why is about the most childish thing I've witnessed on this board.

quote:

---

Please elaborate how I should change my views to make you happy.

---

quote:

---

The illicit gay affair thread was Idemonsthenes. I don't think that is the same person as Ben, though I have been known to be wrong.

---

quote:

---

<h|tler> HOW THE **** CAN YOU TELL THAT I'M 13 BY LOOKING AT WHAT I'M WRITEING?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

---

quote:

---

and in many threads people have made valid arguments for not supporting the war or president's decison in going to war and asked you why their ideas were so off base and you didn't even give them the time of day. you DID however find time to post in those same threads about the ridiculous nature of kerry and any of his supporters.

---

I've posted valid responses to the way I see it and fact sources that back it up, and they have been attacked in response.

Are you saying that something I believe in as false I should just let hang out there?

Ditto right back at you and MANY MANY others.

I have valid reasons for my views on John Kerry and I post them. I don't get all tissy when someone responds that they don't like them. Good for them.

So if you want me to raise the "level of civility" of political threads, you can start with yourself as well, because I can't do it alone and you and others have made no effort to do the same.

When you call President Bush a liar, I question those reasons and have done so. There's nothing wrong with that.

If you base your claim on a German book written by a German who has no inside intelligence on the Bush Administration, then why should that not be called into question.

From what I can gather Ben, it appears that people want to be able to say "Bush lied" to their hearts content, but don't want to be disproved or challenged on that.

My advice, don't post "Bush Lied" unless you want it to be responded to.

And I have responded and said what I think of those conspiracy theories and my reasons.

If you are talking about "indirect" references, then others are far more guilty than I am.

Because Calling bush a Liar automatically blankets those who support him as well.

I don't see why one should be allowed and then have people get tissy when Kerry is called the same.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
My "articulateness" sucks, so I probably shouldn't even post. However, I do.

As crazy as Chad may make people, I don't think we can compare him to that guy.

Yes, he's a man of certain opinions. There are quite a few of those around here...are there not?

He's obviously very unpopular, so he's not "allowed" to get away with speaking his mind.

I don't like personal insults of any kind. I've always loved that bumper sticker "mean people suck".

I just don't see how some of his posts are that different from other very opinionated posters..
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Chad, do you plan to respond at all to any of the posts that address your lack of civility?

Tammy, I think it's mainly because a lot of us see Chad's responses as not just opinionated, but downright rude and insulting. Just being opinionated is one thing; but to me, it seems like Chad falls into that "mean person" category. All I'd like to see from him is a little bit of respect for everyone else on the board.

And, now, "Respect" will be in my head for the rest of the night.

R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Find out what it means to me!

[ October 12, 2004, 06:57 PM: Message edited by: Megan ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Chad, I posted a response to your explicit request. You've responded to three posts posted after my response. Are you going to have the courtesy to respond?

Dagonee

[ October 12, 2004, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: Dagonee ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Tammy, I posted a sample in response to your request. I can recall very few posts that match up to the level of contempt in that post. The ones I can recall I have responded to.

Do you think that kind of thing is very common around here?

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 

quote:

---

See there's thinking an idea is stupid, then there's actually calling another poster stupid directly.

---

quote:

---

You can do as I and not call ANYONE names, and still be unacceptable

---

quote:

---

Yup, that must have been someone else who called a bunch of posters stupid in that post Dag quoted. Certainly wasn't you. Poor, innocent little Chad. Nobody understands him.

---

Celia, tell me who I directly called stupid.

I'll give you a hint. No one. I don't do that.

Name one person on this thread that I have said directly "You're stupid".

And if you try to say, "well I am opposed to you so that means I must be stupid". That is YOUR assumption of your own choice by association. I don't tell anyone to believe anything. If you choose to believe something, then you are responsible for your choices.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
and your belief happens to be stupid, well you're SOL.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
People can't always tell when I'm being serious or not, so I'll say that I'm being 100% serious, CStroman. I realize we keep asking you to stop being uncivil, and you apparently don't know what we mean.

Lumping all the liberals together is uncivil. Refusing to apologize when you have been shown wrong is uncivil (referencing the German contributions). Calling your opponent "stupid" is uncivil.

Are
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Then don't read my posts and ignore them.

Have some self control.

Jedi Mind-Trick:

"I am the all powerful Chad. I can force you to READ my posts and respond. You can try to hold back, but My mind control is greater! I will force you to read my posts...yes...I have power over the weak minded to make them read...yes...you must now post...yes....You will post.....The all powerful Chad has spoken!"
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
I'm not really trying to defend you Chad, you're more than capable of fighting your own battles, and I’m just trying to understand why they allow you to personally get under their skin?

They're asking questions. Maybe you should individually address them to clarify some issues.

To my knowledge, Ben doesn’t usually go for the juggler. Obviously some lines have been crossed. You’ve got Dag and Megan AND Celia calling you out….answer their questions. *shrugs*

I'm not sure why I'm even in this debate. I suppose it's because I've felt that Chad got picked on from post one, and it's confused me.

You all have your reasons…I hope.

I’m outta this thread. Not my style.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
So you're claiming that 3 pages of people disagreeing with you, none of whom wanted to use the judicial system, somehow made you aware of all those other people out there who do want to use the judicial system to accomplish their goals?

If that's the case, what did you mean by "Just want to say thanks to all those who pushed me towards the banning of Gay Marriage from my previous view of equal rights for both"? Were you referring to the participants in that discussion that disagreed with you? Or do you often talk to people who aren't participating in the discussion?

The plain meaning of your post is that 1) people in the thread were advocating using the judicial system to enact gay marriage rights; 2) these people are stupid; and 3) it's the comments in the thread that made you come to the realization that "compromising" is fruitless.

I note that you, of course, ignored the discussion of you calling people stupid, and of your mischaracterization of my post in this thread.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Apparently if he doesn't say a name he hasn't called someone a name.

Just saying that lots of people posting in the thread are stupid isn't calling anyone stupid.

I guess if I said that anyone spending most of this thread arguing Chad wasn't being insulting was a homophobic nazi necrophiliac bigot I wouldn't be calling Chad such a thing, because I never named him, merely alluded to him in a way which could not be misconstrued.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 

quote:

---

and your belief happens to be stupid, well you're SOL.

---

quote:

---

"I am the all powerful Chad. I can force you to READ my posts and respond. You can try to hold back, but My mind control is greater! I will force you to read my posts...yes...I have power over the weak minded to make them read...yes...you must now post...yes....You will post.....The all powerful Chad has spoken!"

---

Okay...now I'm really outta here.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
"To my knowledge, Ben doesn’t usually go for the juggler."

I hear he mostly goes for contortionists.
 

---

Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
 
A person who believes that others who are offended when their viewpoints are called "stupid" are at fault for their own offense is stupid.

[edited for grammar, and to apologize for the convoluted sentence.]

[ October 12, 2004, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: Ophelia ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Celia, tell me who I directly called stupid.

I'll give you a hint. No one. I don't do that.

Name one person on this thread that I have said directly "You're stupid".

And if you try to say, "well I am opposed to you so that means I must be stupid". That is YOUR assumption of your own choice by association. I don't tell anyone to believe anything. If you choose to believe something, then you are responsible for your choices.

---

quote:

---

I'm not really trying to defend you Chad, you're more than capable of fighting your own battles, and I’m just trying to understand why they allow you to personally get under their skin?

---

quote:

---

Oh and here's a hint or two that it's obvious some have a tough time dealing with. It's simple, but so hard for some to grasp.

You don't have to read something. There is no "force" here to make anyone read anything, or even respond for that matter other than one's own lack of self control.

---

Chad, the last time this came up, I pointed out that the defense "I'm just speaking my mind; you don't have to read it" has never worked for anyone on Hatrack who's ever tried it. In fact, universally, everyone who's ever resorted to that lack bit of desperate justification has been banned within weeks.

You seem to draw a distinction between calling me a jerk, saying that anyone who believes something I believe is a jerk, and saying that I am -- for the following three reasons -- a jerk, in a manner you are not. I say this because you seem to think that only the first is out of line, and that only the first is technically a personal insult; you certainly engage in the other two forms of insult fairly regularly, and I'd like to think that you are not unconscious of your behavior. The thing is, all three of those behaviors are equally insulting; all three of them, in essence, call me a jerk. Dagonee's been upset in the past -- to the point that I've wondered, idly, whether he meant me when he mentioned his struggle against the Secret Lying Poster, but for the fact that I'm not exactly known for my dishonesty -- when I've made the argument that an entire belief system is dangerous or stupid, precisely because he rightly understands that the implication is that I am insulting the people who adhere to that belif system.

You ARE insulting, Chad. Every time that you call someone who supports Kerry "uninformed," you are calling half this board uninformed. Every time you say that people who disagree with you are nattering, negative nabobs who want to be ruled by the French and are secretly friends with Saddam Hussein, you are accusing people of being traitors and betrayers. And you are doing it deliberately.

I think, quite frankly, you do not know any other way to argue. I fear you were raised in another part of the Internet, where this kind of thing is what passes for argument. But rest assured that you will not ever be embraced by this community unless that deliberately confrontational and offensive behavior stops.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
Alright...nuke him!

(this was suppose to land directly below Chad's last post)

Fire away!

[ October 12, 2004, 07:22 PM: Message edited by: Tammy ]
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Does that mean you've had a "change of heart" Tammy?

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Chad, your "change the channel if you don't like the tune" analogy doesn't work. I can avoid Howard Stern quite easily by changing the station. But given your prolific participation in all political threads, I would have to do a lot of scrolling to avoid your posts.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 

quote:

---

It's because I am all powerful! I can make them read! I can make them post! They can't help themselves. I really shouldn't flex my all powerful self at them as much as I do, but if you read my threads, you know who my victims are!

They truly, and honestly can't NOT post. They have to. Don't blame them. I force them with my powers!

See I made the people in this thread call me names!

Behold the Power of Chad!

MWWwwwhaahahahahaha

---

Yes...Banna I do believe I get it now!

Chad

You need to at least seriously reply. It would be the respectful thing to do.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
((Tammy))
((Anna))
((Tom))
((Kat))
((Celia))
((Opehlia))
((Ben))
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Aw, man. I feel all left out now.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
How about a firm handshake Dag?
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Dagonee, sorry I didn't spell it out for you because I didn't think anyone would start "jumping to assumptions".

Do you want me to make that directed at you? It seems like you do. Your follow up post to that as well seems to indicate you wanted some "direct" response.

Well, suprise, suprise, the thread was only one thing that helped me change my mind. The stupid people were everyone in general who would abuse the legal system to force their beliefs on the Majority?

Are you one of those?

Maybe you are, but I didn't get the feeling in the thread that people in the thread were going to abuse the legal system to push their agendas.

And dagonee, there are about a thousand unanswered questions out there I have asked, but I don't press them.

If this is so important to you, please let me know how I can help you.

You are obviously very distraught because you think I was perhaps targetting you directly or indirectly.

Be at ease, for that is not the case. As stated above, it was directed at those who abuse the legal system, and which person in the thread fit that description?

Please don't be distraught and put your heart at ease. Let not your feelings be hurt for it was not to you that the post was intended.

Your replies in that thread only showed that the reason for "compromise" wouldn't be valid.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
((Dagonee))
((vwiggin))
((pooka))
((dkw))
((Megan))
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Um I did reply to Ben, who asked the same questions as the others.

I think they are fishing for something because they don't like the replies I'm giving.

Again, If you could just tell me the reply your fishing for, maybe I could help out or explain a bit.

As far as I'm concerned, I answered those with unique questions.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Pft. I don't need your pity hugs.

OK I do. ((Banna))
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
Hey...I'll take all the hugs and kisses and whatevers I can get!


 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Well, I'd like to stay and continue forcing people to post and reply, but I must go home to my family.

G'night all!
 

---

Posted by Space Opera (Member # 6504) on :
 
You know, the topic/person of discussion in this thread is why I haven't been willing to spend much of my time on Hatrack lately. The posts can't be ignored because they're everywhere, so that makes me want to go somewhere else.

space opera
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
*sigh* you've issued apologies before Chad. But even the apology is arrogant,

For example:

quote:

---

Please don't be distraught and put your heart at ease. Let not your feelings be hurt for it was not to you that the post was intended.

---

quote:

---

As stated above, it was directed at those who abuse the legal system, and which person in the thread fit that description?

---

quote:

---

Now what we have here is a failure to communicate.

---

Dagabbit, what did that come from? A Mel Brooks film? I'm hearing it in a western drawl.

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Good night Chad. Have a safe drive home.

Now that he's gone, I guess we have to pick on someone else.

You know Dag, you've been really annoying lately...

edited to add: Only the greatest movie of all time -- Cool Hand Luke!

[ October 12, 2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: vwiggin ]
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
cool hand luke.

and vwiggin's feet stink. VW how come whenever i bring up your stinky feet you just keep repeating that the feet-aware are a bunch of losers?
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
"What we have here is a failure to communicate" is from Cool Hand Luke, starring Paul Newman.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061512/
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
My feet stinks because I'm a flip flopper.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

You know Dag, you've been really annoying lately...

---

quote:

---

home to my family

---

I've had to come to grips lately with the mistaken idea that having a home and family seemed to validate some of the jerky stuff I did and said around others, when in reality I was just ticking people off. I'd say something in a conversation as a gambit into iffy territory and then look to my wife to see if I had crossed the line, and when she didn't react I'd keep going.

I go through phases like that, in which I think that having accomplished certain milestones affords me the liberty of getting loose with my tongue.

Yeah, the spouse and kids may want to cuddle and play when we get home. Does that mean we weren't jerks today?
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Dag, I totally expect that kind of irrational response from a girl.

[ October 12, 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: vwiggin ]
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
skillery, that was profound.

AJ
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Huh. If you hadn't been dumb enough to stick a glowing jewel in the face of a raving werewolf you'd have both your hands.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
it was a Werewolf?

(dag you know you'd better back up your facts and reference your Tolkien chapter and page on this forum )

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 


You're just bigoted against man-elf relationships. Especially when that man is a hot chunk of manly love.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Yes. Yes it was a werewolf.

[ October 12, 2004, 07:55 PM: Message edited by: Dagonee ]
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Everyone knows God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Legolas.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
wow, didn't know that. you learn something new every day!

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
I win!
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Yup and you even slayed two foes at once... or were we having a threesome?

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Is anyone else mesmerized by that dancing wolf? It's so peaceful.

skillery, I always have a soft spot for people with spouse and children to go home to. Part of it is because I'm single, and I'm jealous!

Another part is because when a man says he is going home to his family, I'm reminded that no matter what I think of the guy, someone, somewhere loved him enough to marry him. So they can't be all bad.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Ya big softy!
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
wow. NOW the thread is relieving my broken and painful brain VW.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
"or were we having a threesome?"

Again, I only offer my firm handshake.

Don't worry Dag. That rule doesn't apply to you. I know you're an evil law student.
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
You know, I have a relatively simple question (really, set of questions) for Chad.

How many forums have you found that don't consider your argumentative style abusive and insulting? How many have you tried? Do you think this suggests anything? If so, what?
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Sorry for derailing your thread in the first place Ben.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Are you sure we shouldn't read some subconsious anti-liberal bias into your "firm" handshake?


AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
No. But feel free to read a healthy dose of homophobic "stop touching me unless you mean it" bias into it.


 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
One day I'll have minions.

Then you'll all pay.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
but... but... I'm really a girl!!!

AJ
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Then I take everything back, you fruity goodness.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
You mean fruity goddess!

AJ

(hey I didn't say I was a Nice goddess. Maybe I'm related to Kali)

[ October 12, 2004, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 

quote:

---

But if I make a certain viewpoint look stupid. It's not my fault that it's one you hold. It's yours.

I would encourage anyone to look up my threads to see if I attacked anyone personally.

You will find that it is others like Tom or Ben or Kwea who have nothing other than "name calling" to depend on.

They can do it all they want. It reflects on THEM, not me.

But if you are looking for someone who will abandon their viewpoints because it gets attacked, you're barking up the wrong tree.

---

Chad...that does it.....you are a complete waste of skin.

You have never successfully refuted a single point on this board, and I could post more than a dozen examples of you calling someone names without provocation.

The only time you have ever made me feel stupid is right now....because I can't figure out why I have bothered replying to your posts at all.

I have argued with 4 year olds who use better rhetoric, and 10 year olds with a better grasp of international politics. Your "facts" are, at best, overly simplistic, and at worse complete fabrications.

You are rude, ignorant, and arrogant...and I can't for see why you have such a high opinion of yourself...

Because no one else here shares it with you.

Feel free to continue as you have, as you make a better argument against yourself with every post than I ever could alone.

One question....

If you don't care so much, why bother coming here and posting?

Once again...if you are going to lie, please put some effort into it, and be a little less transparent.

Kwea

[ October 12, 2004, 08:39 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 


You're an goddess and Dag has minions. I feel so inadequate.

P.S. Possible caption: "In place of a dark lord
you would have a queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the dawn!"

You looked like a hotter, younger version of Cate Blanchett.
 

---

Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
 
Hatrack is where we "speak with passion and listen with respect." It's in the terms of service.

Chad, if you don't adapt to the respect part, then you will likely be asked to leave. Please don't let that happen. Things were getting better, but they've slid back down into name-calling and shouting matches. You can do that elsewhere on the web with impunity, but not at this private site.

As Tom said, the excuse that "you don't have to read it" doesn't fly. The hosts don't have to fund inappropriate behavior, either, and they won't.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

You're an goddess and Dag has minions.

---

You're half right. I have no minions yet.

I ordered some from minions-R-us, but they haven't arrived.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Oooh if Dag says I'm a goddess does that make it legal??

AJ
 

---

Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
 
I'm a drill sargent in Pookaville and a supplicant in the Order of Noemonites.
 

---

Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
 
Only if you're a tort, AJ. Saucy wench.


 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
tortes...eaten...

<yeah if your mind is dirty enough you'll go there, if not you remain unstained>

AJ
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Oooh if Dag says I'm a goddess does that make it legal??

---

No, it just makes it true.

Once I have minions to enforce my will, then it will be legal.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
oooh, you know Celia should have you do the writing on her soul contracts. (Though she normally acquires them through illicit deals.)

AJ
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I believe Sara coined the term "Daghead". And it's Pooktopia. Though "ville" reminds me of the train set in "A Mighty Wind".
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
I need to decide on a Hatrack career move. Should I volunteer to be a minion, or hold out for goddess status?

*ponders*

[ October 12, 2004, 08:54 PM: Message edited by: Megan ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
"Though she normally acquires them through illicit deals."

What do you think lawyers are for?
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Almost...but those same laws that make you a legal goddess prevent you from ever using your powers for anything....

The funny thing about this whole conversation is that I had just been defending this troll in another thread two days ago, talking about how far he had come in a short time....

I had not even posted in this thread, or any other political threads, for a few days because the level of animosity in them had ratcheted up to a point where I was uncomfortable.

Then out of nowhere, Chad opened his mouth and something stupid popped out, with my name in it.....

Edited because I can't type
Kwea

[ October 12, 2004, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
I would volunteer to be Sara's minion, but I'm already Shan's house peon.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Though "ville" reminds me of the train set in "A Mighty Wind".

---

quote:

---

Then out of nowhere, Chad opened his mouth and somethind stupid poped out, with my name in it.....

---

You're missing either an "o" or a "p" in "poped."

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
Well, the civility I've shown in this thread certainly hasn't been reciprocated.

But I doubt anyone will call into question anyone elses rudeness or uncivility.

If you can't see it and need me to point it out to you, look harder at the labels placed on me in this thread, then with a straight face demand "civility" from me.

I have responded to this thread and it's hatred in a civilized way (heck I even tried to be comical to change the mood). If all you can do to respond is call names and attach labels then I have nothing to say to you.

I leave you to your Chad bashing.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Uh, if you were comical, none of us got it.

AJ
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Chad, please, if I have been uncivil to you in any way, please point it out.
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
See, Kwea makes the list but I was the first person to come out and call Chad a dickhead. I think he must have some short term memory problems. Certainly his posting style seems to suggest that this might be the case.

At the same time, it's interesting to watch him work and wonder what points I consider so intrinsically true that I react in a Chad-like fashion to defend them. I suppose, it being the nature of the beast, I'll never know.

And yet, despite the fact that I'm sure I have the same failings as he in that regard, there are no 4 page posts about what a prick I am. Or anyone else for that matter.

Ah well.

Would it be tacky of me to start an office pool on the date he finally gets himself banned?
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
Megan -- "Goddess of Civility"

[ October 12, 2004, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: BannaOj ]
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Banna, you may have just caused me to eee twice in one thread!

Yay!

I may just keep that post and frame it!
 

---

Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
 
Oh, for the love of Pete, won't someone please post a good "Hanging Chad" joke already?!?
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
I would like to point out that I have been rude and uncivil to Chad on every occasion possible. I have been rude in this thread, the first thread where his behavior was brought up, and the 2nd Presidential Debate thread.

I freely admit that I take the same perverse pleasure in mocking Chad that I did back in elementary school when I teased the local bully. I also admit that this may make me a bad person and encourage all other Hatrackers to judge me as they see fit.

I also have no willpower and enjoy few things more than descending into depravity and guilty pleasures.

In closing, Chad, you're still a wanker.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
It's true. He's incapable of being honest.
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Too bad he isn't willing to answer the how many forums questions.

Perhaps they make him uncomfortable.
 

---

Posted by CStroman (Member # 6872) on :
 
I never claimed you were Megan. Sorry if you thought I included you.

Anyone who browses the 4 pages can see what "labels" have been attached to me by Dagonee, Kwea, Ben, and the like.

All claiming the need for "respect" while blatantly disrespecting.

Again, I'll leave the thread for your continued Chad bashing.

Enjoy!
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Ooh, BtL, you got lumped in with "the like" even after that post.

Wait, so did I. *scowl*

What's one got to do to be considered insulting around here!
 

---

Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
 
Bob the Lawyer is my hero.

--ApostleRadio
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
Chad, you're about as good at leaving threads for us to bash you as we are at ignoring your useless drivel. Perhaps we deserve each other, eh?
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
By your definitions I haven't attached any label to you.

I admit I have labeled you. But your dishonesty is evident on even casual inspections of your own posts, so I feel confident in my labelling.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
nobody commented on my clever thread title change. come on. if you guys aren't going to appreciate my efforts i'm just going to quit trying. sheesh.
 

---

Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
 
Ben, I love it! Good on ya for the Kubrick reference! You go!
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
There's no fighting in the Ben room!
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Vlasic really does make a nice pickle. Say, That reminds me... P.S. Ben, I did note the reference, though I would have said "...stop worrying and love the Chad".

[ October 12, 2004, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: pooka ]
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
*trying hard not to make a phallic pickle joke*
 

---

Posted by Jutsa Notha Name (Member # 4485) on :
 
Why don't you guys actually use the report button when he does perform his disrespectful and poor behavior? I have, numerous times. Maybe when the moderator warns him a few times he'll give it a rest.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I guess I should have mentioned that these are the mini dills.

It seems like the last time I was reporting someone (OSC-fan, in case anyone was wondering) the mod mentioned that unless you include your email address in the message it isn't actionable. FYI. There is some point of ettiquette that unless you first ask the person to desist, it isn't "nice" to report them. The only thing I would consider reporting is that there are apparently members of the community who don't like it here anymore due to someone's presence.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Hey Chad/Troll, where did I even post on this thread, before you mentioned me?

Can you read?

Or do you just not bother, because all of the damn facts might get in the way of you "expressing" your opinion....

Even though you say you don't care about what we have to say.

Yeah...I ALWAY go piss over everyone, at their own place , when I don't care bout their opinions....

All I ever did, until now, was use your own posts against you in debates you freely entered.

Hell, you didn't even make it that hard to do..

My personal favorite was when I quoted an article you had used and posted, and then you tried to nail me for not posting a link to it.....

Even though I was merely posting what you had linked to!

If you don't read your own source material, why should ANYONE here even bother caring about you at all?

[ October 12, 2004, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
OK Kwea, we feel your frustration. But we don't need to accuse people of punishing their family with their presence. That cannot be said of anyone, except my mom, and that's only on certain days of the month.

edited to add:

[ October 12, 2004, 09:44 PM: Message edited by: vwiggin ]
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
i punish ophelia with my presence every time i come home.
 

---

Posted by kerinin (Member # 4860) on :
 
isn't there somewhere we can go and vote the little prick off? like hatrack survivor or something?

how 'bout a show of hands: who wishes chad would go the hell away?



[ October 12, 2004, 09:45 PM: Message edited by: kerinin ]
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
BtL, Kwea....Cool it. Cut it out. Please.

Chad is who Chad is. We don't need you to define him for us; I'm reasonably sure that he isn't going to take your criticism to heart; and it seems rather arrogant to presume that your own insults are less actionable or worthy of criticism than his just because he did it "first," or "deserved" it.

If the mods decide he needs a warning or ban, they'll do it. Until then, we can only provide constructive -- if stern -- examples, unless we're comfortable with fighting fire with fire. But here's the thing: we do NOT fight fire with fire, because we recognize that this is not a valid excuse for fire. If we accepted this approach, we would drown the whole forum in flames.

I find your own posts to Chad as unacceptable as his posts to everyone else. I'm not as angry at you as I am at him, since I know both of you better and understand your motivations -- but, for exactly the same reason, I'm more disappointed in the two of you.

We have a perfectly good sheriff; we don't need to lynch anybody.
 

---

Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
 

quote:

---

i punish ophelia with my presence every time i come home.

---

And how.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Then why do you reward him with your wonton pantlessness? Hmmmm?
 

---

Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
 
Best. Page-starter. Ever.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Done...and from here on out, consider this a warning, Chad...

I have a pretty good record with reporting people here, Chad...I havn't done a lot of it, but most of the people I have are no longer inflicting themselves on us here.

I can't kick anyone off, but I can...and will...report you the next time you call anyone a name, or go too far.

I don't expect you to change...change requires an admission of fault and a desire to avoid the same fault in the future....

But now you can't say no one has warned you.

Just in case you forgot that the mods weighed in on that on your first week....which, BTW, was a record, I think.

Oh yeah....it was all them, not you...

Nevermind....

[ October 12, 2004, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
 
Who's the other person? Come on! Some of us can't figure it out from the references.

-Katarain

Edit: wow, 5 page thread. I'll read it later and find out.. maybe.

[ October 12, 2004, 10:04 PM: Message edited by: Katarain ]
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
I took the really bad stuff out...not because it wasn't true, but because this isn't the first ambush he has done on people here, and it is time he got called on it.

But I don't react to things that way usually, so I remocved it.

It did no good, and possibly some harm...not to Chad...

I don't care about him at all, from this point on..

But to Hatrack.

So, it's done.

Good enough?

[ October 12, 2004, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
:gives Kwea a strictly therapeutic backrub:

Got stabbed last time I tried that, so I hope you appreciate the risk I'm taking.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Great Kwea! Now we can all get back to hating the same person. That's right. Ralph Nader.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Go Nader go!
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
i'm wondering if the mods will end up deleting this thread, since it has been kind of brutal. not that im concerned about any "damage" done, but i am just curious what will become of this.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Thanks pooka...

I won't stab you these days...

I'm married.

 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 

quote:

---

Dagonee
Member
Member # 5818

posted October 12, 2004 10:06 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go Nader go!

---

LOL
 

---

Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
 
I VOTED FOR NADER! I HATE EVERYONE!

--ApostleRadio
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Yeah, we'll know who to blame when Bush wins again.

*sharpens pitchfork*
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I voted for Nader too. That last minute revelation about the drunk driving arrest got me.
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
You know, of course, that it's completely hypocritical of me to flame Chad. Especially considering the number of times I've yelled at other people for similar actions. Heck, even I think Kwea went too far in this thread (as an example of my hypocrisy more than a judgement of Kwea). I've no excuse, justification or, for that matter, remorse in this case. Generally I try to walk a fine line between heartfelt flaming and a more joking variety, but you're right. Both in that I was too personal here and (more importantly) that a flame is still a flame.

Not that I can promise I won't do it again because it does amuse me and I do find it satisfying. And a habit (however bad) that is both gratifying and amusing is a tough one to kick (especially when cheered on by the lynch mob).

But hey, continue irritating me by pointing out the blatant hypocrisy and it'll start moving more and more to the forefront of my mind I'll probably change my ways because, like I said, I know I'm wrong, even if I don't care enough to change right now.

That's the only concession I can offer you, buddy, hope it's something.
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Can you say "buddy" in a really snooty French accent? Man, I need to get my Gilmore Girl fix tonight.
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
Bob, I must admit that the "if I freely admit that what I'm doing is bad, I don't need to change" approach is a novel and disarming one. But it also has the potential of being far, far less amusing than it sounds over the long haul. So please play nice.
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
Sadly, I am completely incapable of reproducing any accent. Snooty or otherwise. My brother, however, is quite good at a number of accents and used to get us howling by speaking fluent French in a thick Glasgowegian accent. My father would be so proud.

And for the record, Tom, I'm now completely irritated with myself for my posts in this thread. I hope you're happy.

(Posted in the hopes that my apparent dissatisfaction of losing my fun will stimulate your "must not derive pleasure from someone's pain" response and thereby ruin any satisfaction you might have for a job well done. Yes, it's a complex and meandering world inside my mind. I frequently get lost on one of the many garden paths).
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 

quote:

---

I frequently get lost on one of the many garden paths

---

Oh, is that YOU I keep seeing there?

Nice to "meet" you..

Got a light?
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Apart from beating me fair and square in debates from time to time, the only time I recall BtL annoying me was some random linkage of church and porn in the middle of an unrelated discussion. For some reason it caused me to visualize a specific haunt from my college days called "Big Ed's".
 

---

Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
 
The whole problem with the internet is male conflict resolution. We can't solve things through physical contact, so we have to walk around and prove who wears the biggest pants all. the. time.

It's so much easier in person. If Chad spoke, in person, the way he does on the internet I'd probably long since have knocked his ass out. As it is, I can still ignore him or read his posts and laugh out loud at his extreme stupidity.
 

---

Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
 
I swear I was typing that last one as you were typing yours and didn't see it before I posted.

It was novel and disarming, wasn't it? That's so what I was going for.

The thing is, Tom, that I know you're right. I agree with you and I should be the bigger person here. I would love to be the bigger person here... but maybe I'd love to be snarky even more? I'm not going to lie to you and say "I've changed! I will never flame someone that I feel has it coming again!" because I'd be lying. I have a poor track record at overnight changes. But calling me on it has certainly stopped it for this thread, and probably more several threads to come (sadly, that probably depends more on Chad than it does me. Which, agian, is unfair of me).

So my question is, if I see and understand that a behavior is wrong, but clearly don't care enough to change it (else I would have by now) how do I suddenly care? It's actually a common theme in my life where I understand on an academic level that what I'm doing is wrong, but can't find the will to change it. Pathetic excuse? Yes. Perhaps I'm lying to myself that I understand that it's a problem? Am I lost on another garden path?
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 

quote:

---

I'm a drill sargent in Pookaville and a supplicant in the Order of Noemonites.

---

Pssst--it's the Order of the Noemonic Knights, and you're a full fledged Knight. Got a saddle broken Roc to fly around on and everything. Order of the Noemonites sounds good too though. I'll have to incorporate that into it.
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 
It's because you are a weak, degenerate, immoral, liberal, girlie-man. OOPS. I mean, people like you are.
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 
And people who post between my post and the post I am replying to are stupid, too.
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
Oh, and whoever it was that asked for a show of hands of people who would like Chad to go away--I would like Chad to stay, actually. I would like him to develop a posting style that is consistent with the ideals laid out in the agreement he accepted when creating his login here, but I would very much like him to stick around. I'd have liked Baldar to stay around, frankly. When that guy wasn't being deliberately offensive, he had some pretty interesting things to contribute to the discussion. I like to have articulate, intelligent, kind people with whom I disagree on just about everything on the board; it helps me to understand the mindset of those who think differently than I do. I would love for Chad to mellow into such a member.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
oddly enough that is what I had been saying about Chad in another thread 2 nights ago...hell, I had even said he had really shown a lot of improvment, and would end up being a good addition to Hatrack..

Then he went and proved me wrong.

Oh well, if he doesn't are, why should I...I won't bother to give him the satisfaction of riling me up again, that's for sure....

He simply isn't worth the trouble.

Kwea
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Just in case anyone (but Chad) thought I was kidding...

NOW is it clear why I had had enough?

lol
 

---

Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
 

quote:

---

wonton pantlessness

---

quote:

---

gyoza pantlessness

---

I don't know, my wife's gyoza always leaves me panting.

[ October 12, 2004, 11:54 PM: Message edited by: skillery ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Great. Now I'm hungry and honry.
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 
You keep doing that, you'll go blind.


 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
you know this thread has inspired some of my highest quality fluff ever.

*moment of silence*

AJ
 

---

Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
 
I'm going to make a suggestion that I think might help here. Everyone back off of Chad for now.

Yes, you think he's been rude and childish and disrespectful and all these things. I'd agree with you on that. But that's not what our main focus should be on.

Now's the time when we need to figure out what our goals are here and to focus on those goals. With respect to the forum, I'd very much like it if our more serious threads could be both mostly respectful and productive. Apropo of nothing, there was a thread a few days ago about how this could be achieved in the face of people acting rude, childish, and disrespectful.

With respect to Chad, well, that's where we've got some options. The way I see it, the big problem we have with Chad is that his behavior is both unacceptable and somewhat poisonous in regards to this forum. So, our goals are pretty much set out for us. I think they are either we try to convince Chad to change his ways or we try to get rid of him.

One of the things that is simultaneously admirable and somewhat maddening about this forum is how remarkably forgiving people can be towards bad behavior. I tell you, when I finally come up for parole, I hope that there are a bunch of Hatrackers sitting on the board. I doubt that there are very many people who really want this to be the type of place that would be dedicated to trying to get rid of someone like Chad.

I certainly don't want that, nor do I want Chad specifically gone. When he first started, before people (in many cases justifiably) began jumping all over him, he gave hints of some perspectives that held potential to be interesting and informative.

When you focus on the wrongs that you perceive Chad as having done in general or to you specifically, I think you risk losing sight of either of these goals. Reacting with anger isn't going to get you want you want.

If you'd like Chad to change, well injudicious attacks are not the way to go about it. Think of it from your own perspective. When you're getting attacked, don't you generally become defensive? That's not the place where a lot of self-reflection or change happens. You tend instead to focus on the people attacking you and you try to lash out at them. People may not have noticed, but the general level of Chad's posts have deteriorated as he has come under attack. I think we're seeing the understandable defensiveness coming out. If we remove at least some of this pressure, I think he might be better able to consider his role in all this mess.

If, on the other had, you opt for the more uncharitable option, think of how this situation would look to a moderator. Chad has been taking a lot of attacks, some of which are more or less equally unacceptable as the behavior he is being attacked for. In an environment like that, you're not only making the mods job much more difficult, you're also making Chad's trespasses much less significant, in the same way that the height of a 5 foot person is less significant in a crowd of people averaging around 5'2" than if they were all around 6 foot. If you really want to get him banned, you should be responding with kindness or at least politely worded criticisms.

In either case, I think we'd all be better off if people focus on their goal instead of trying to strike back and hurt Chad. It's neither good for you as a person nor particularly effective. I'm personally recommending that we give Chad a little respite, because I think that this would be the best step we could take towards either of these two goals right now.

---

Chad,
Regardless of what the actual facts and justice of the situation might be (and I'm willing to bet even you know that you've been out of line at least a few times), you've got a problem in that you are out of step with a large section of this community. Many of us, pretty much across boundaries of age, sex, religion, and political affiliation and ideologies (Dagonee, for example, is arguably the most respected conservative poster on this board), have viewed some of your behavior as unacceptable and occasionaly downright hillarious.

You've got a choice here. It's natural to assume that it our problem and that you are blameless. I'm sure all of us here have had times when we've felt these urges. The thing is, it's really not your ideology that we're really having a problem with. It's your behavior, the way you go about expressing your views, that we have problems with, not your views themselves (well, a bunch of people probably have problems with them too).

Again, maybe this is all our fault (I'll freely admit that you've been sinned against as well as sinning), but the thing is, it's very unlikely that we're going to change. You're not exactly something all that special or unprecedented here. We've had plenty of posters come in acting like you have been. Some have reformed and become valued members of the community, to everyone's (especially their) benefit. Others haven't changed and have been rejected by the community until they were either banned or took on a very sporadic presence. Overall, for us, it's really not all that big a deal (the evidence of the past couple of days notwithstanding). Right now you're an annoyance, but we're pretty confident that, one way or another, this annoyance will eventually go away.

So, if you want to become part of the community here (and I, at least, think it's a pretty good places, as places go), you're going to have to figure out what it is about what you're doing that we're objecting to and what you could do about it. There's really not even all that much you'd have to do. You don't even have to appologize or admit you were wrong. As I said, the people here are remarkably forgiving. If you stopped the offensive posting tommorow, in a week or two it would be as if none of this even happened.

I personally hope that you decide to at least give this a shot. You've demonstrated some glimpses of potential, and, as most people here can tell you, I enjoy arguing with people of integrity that disagree with me.

However, right now, I don't really care what you think. For one thing, I don't find your arguing style either pleasant or particularly effective. The best use I could put you to would be (as I suspect some people here have already done) to use you as an object lesson against whatever position you were taking by coupling your bad behavior with the stands you take. For another, you're simply not in my class, and you're not going to get any better going the way you've been going.

I would like to see you become a member of the community here and an opponent that I look forward to debating, but, besides giving you this advice, there really isn't all that much I can do to make that happen. That's pretty much up to you. I certainly don't expect you to have a Saul on the road to Damascus moment upon reading this. I figure you'll probably get pissed at me. I guess I'd be happy if you at least keep some of this in mind and match it up, from time to time, with your future experiences here.
 

---

Posted by Mr.Funny (Member # 4467) on :
 
Woah. My (already high) respect for MrSquicky just went up several notches.

MrSquicky
 

---

Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
 
Dag, while I do not have time at this instant to read all of what's been posted since I left the office yesterday, I wanted to thank you for responding to the question Chad asked. You have both accuratly represented my thoughts and articulated them more clearly than I generally manage to. Thanks
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 

quote:

---

Go Nader go!

---

Me to Dag!
 

---

Posted by Anna (Member # 2582) on :
 
I've been hugged by a Goddess ! I've been hugged by a Goddess !
*runs to tell everyone*
*then, thinks it may not be a good idea*
(((Banna)))
*whispers* I've hugged a Goddess !
 

---

Posted by Brinestone (Member # 5755) on :
 
Is it okay if I hear the voice of Michel from Gilmore Girls when reading BtL's posts now? Oh, and Tom, you're Lorelei.
 

---

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
 
well I don't make any claims on being a capital "G" goddess. I'm pretty sure I'm only a lower case "g"

AJ
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Dag, while I do not have time at this instant to read all of what's been posted since I left the office yesterday, I wanted to thank you for responding to the question Chad asked. You have both accuratly represented my thoughts and articulated them more clearly than I generally manage to.

---

Thanks. I regret a little of my tone in this, and agree to a large extent with MrSquicky about the usefullness of some of the responses to CStroman (including my own), but the only post of mine whose content I actually regret was deleted (Edit: by me) within a couple of minutes. I'm coming from a unique mix of alignment with and opposition to different aspects of CStroman's views, so the provocation comes from both sides.

However, I'm now going to take Dana's advice from another thread and MrSquick's advice from this thread and try to leave this alone for a while.

No promises, though.

Dagonee
P.S., I have a suspicion we're rooting for Nader for very different reasons, Tammy.

[ October 13, 2004, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Dagonee ]
 

---

Posted by vwiggin (Member # 926) on :
 
Tom has that get-off-my-lawn quality to him. That's totally Luke, not Lorelai.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
I'm not rooting for Nader.

I was just teasing Celia. *pouts* That obviously didn't work.


 

---

Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
 
I came on strong with Chad in his first thread, which seemed very trollish to. We subsequently apologized, and I'm willing to let him settle into the Hatrack ecology.

I don't believe I've "blown the whistle" on him ever.

I have to Thor. I almost have with some of Kwea's fiery rhetoric.

I think some people should lay off Chad, people are going a little neo-Conservative on him (ha!), and need to let him work himself in.

That said, I volunteer for Dagonee-minionship. I submit and look forward to my new Arch-Conservative overlord!

-Bok
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Ben, I like the "worrying" :thumbs up:

One thing this thread has accomplished is that I really go to know Ben. I was always pretty harsh with him before.
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
i never noticed.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I think I was the one of the only ones who didn't try to persuade you otherwise in the I'm-a-jerk thread When I don't like people, I try to avoid them. That's probably why you didn't notice. But it probably started with "I like to touch Ben's butt".
 

---

Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
 
oh come on, i was in top form in that thread.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
Feel free, Bok....

I have only done it a few (like maybe 3 times) ever, and all of them were not the first offence...the people had all been warned, many times, and not just by me.

I have never been deleted/baleeted, or been censord, nor have the Mods ever had to post about me in all the time I have been here.

I went too far here, and I am sorry I did...and I took steps to remedy it within 4 minutes.

I also admitted I was off base with at least one of those coments, which is the first step to making amends...to the board in general, not to the subject.

I had, up to then, done nothing wrong, and was tired of being bashed simply because I didn't kow-tow to a troll....or to someone who's actions up to this point are as close to the line of trolling as I have seen in the past 4 years.

I went too far by making my comments personal (even though he didn't have any problem doing so), and for that I am sorry....but I stand by my position on this, if not the words I used to express that position.

If that is a problem, feel free to whistle me, and I will explain all of this to them.

Kwea
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
I've never reported anyone. Can you believe that?



*goes to look for some annoying posters to immediately report to the moderators*
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 

quote:

---

Is it because of the target de jure's far more prolific posting?

---

Du jour.

Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
That's it. I found someone to report! *glares upward*
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
LOL
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 


Report me all you want, Kwea, Tammy: I'm in-vin-ci-cable. Really.

The Mods will never get rid of me! Mwa-haaa!
 

---

Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
 
I did read all 6 pages in one looong sitting. NOW my thinking cap is broken.
 

---

Posted by Tammy (Member # 4119) on :
 
Hey...just how do you report someone? This watchdog stuff is hard work.

I'll tell ya, it was the combination of coffee-nosed and maloderous in one sentence that set me off.
 

---

Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
 
Scooter, you only used to be invincible. You blew off OSC for your family -- you think the Cards are gonna forget that?
 

---

Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
 
I can't believe I read the whole thing...

Mr. Squicky, good post on page 5.

Your remarks are right on target.

[ October 14, 2004, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: Ela ]
 

---

Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
 
I don't know where else to put this... It's not about Chad. He's been pretty nice that I've seen lately. But it IS about trolls in general and I didn't want to start a new thread.

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20000820&mode=classic

-Katarain
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 
Listen, Moose-- I've got it on good authority that the Cards spitefully and willfully did not got to Carl's Frozen Custard while they were here in the 'Burg.

Do you haven any idea how OFFENDED I am about that?

I mean. . . I know I said I woudln't tell anyone when I leave Hatrack for good. . . so I guess I'm not leaving. . . but I'm sorely tempted.

It's worse than knowing that OSC reads Maxxim for the articles. I mean. . . it's frozen custard. You don't just pass that up, like it was some dirty old penny on the side of the road, laying tails up.

You just don't.

Not without consequences.

I'm the consequence, Moose. That's right. Mr. Consequence, that's me.

Learn it, live it, love it.

Uh-huh.
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
Trying to think too hard about frozen custard caused me to rear end a Pontiac once.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
There is a little whistle on everyones posts....if you clickon it you report that post.

Make sure you fill out all the fields, including the e-mail one....without that they can't take acton on anything.

I hope you never have to do it, but everyone should know how just in case there is something really wrong, and it can't be addressed any other way.

I have only done it 3 times, I think...in over 3 years.

Kwea

[ October 14, 2004, 11:17 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 
You know, the whistle hasn't been there for three years.
 

---

Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
I know...but it is now, old-timer...

Before you had to actually e-mail the mods...

How barbaric...
 

---