BigSug's exile on main street [Archive]

DudeMan

14 Feb 2008, 10:11 PM

i thought i'd make a separate thread on this one...

i have to call bullshit on this one.

there are a number of points here...

1) first and foremost, woxy has the right to ban anyone for any reason. it's not censorship and it's their prerogative.

having stipulated that....

2) i think we can all agree that ianalex is the poster child for someone who deserves to be banned. what sug said wasn't NEARLY as inflammatory as the shit that ianalex would regularly do. especially when you put it in the context of the fact that it was an exchange that took place in the CE/P forum, and the fact it took place between two people who have known each other long and traded posts forever. i'd be curious if THP was actually offended by sug's post any more than any other heated exchange he regularly gets into. i doubt it, but he's free to add his thoughts here.

3) i have to call it like i see it... there is political bias on mike's part in banning sugar and not making similar calls on people with whom mike shares political philosophy. some of the most vile things imaginable were said on these same forums on the day bush was re-elected, and none of the mods seemed to mind it.

4) for chrissake, we have a member here who stole someone else's identity and posted here for months, and yet this same person is allowed to continue to post here under 'his' real identity now. how can that be okay and this somehow isn't?

5) if what sug said was so horrible as to deserve being banned, then why did mike use the same exact language in his post in which he banned sug? if it's bad of sug to say he's going to shoot someone, it's just as bad for mike to say he hopes sug gets shot.

6) sug is a long-time member here who has made a lot of friends here, regardless of whether they happen to agree with his crazy-ass ideas, and despite the fact that sug sometimes goes farther than he should.

again, this isn't my call to make. but, i have an opinion on it, and this one seems to be against the spirit of the free exchange we all value here. i for one would like to request that mike reconsider this ban.

purple_octopus

14 Feb 2008, 10:13 PM

DudeMan, I couldn't fucking agree with you more.

And I also wouldn't be surprised if we were both banned by morning.

Breeze

14 Feb 2008, 10:15 PM

We have conspiracy theory, and now persecution complex. Can't wait to see where this goes next.

markalot

14 Feb 2008, 10:17 PM

bigsug has been around a while and people, including mods, have bad days. I say wait a few days and see what happens.

Oh, and he's a lawyer. I don't know what that means. :D

Personally I think sug has had to help to many illegal immigrants and has started hitting the sauce.

markalot

14 Feb 2008, 10:18 PM

We have conspiracy theory, and now persecution complex. Can't wait to see where this goes next.

Happy valentines day Breeze. Have I insulted you today ... goes to check ....

Breeze

14 Feb 2008, 10:18 PM

Happy valentines day Breeze. Have I insulted you today ... goes to check ....

Don't think so. Slacker.

ETA:

Just, you know... watch what you say. ;)

george

14 Feb 2008, 11:22 PM

Att-i-ca!!

Att-i-ca!!

Att-i-ca!!

monkey neck

14 Feb 2008, 11:37 PM

What the heck happened?

seafoamgreen

14 Feb 2008, 11:42 PM

hey P_O. Didn't you once threaten to shoot yosh? or was it levbronstein?

Not that i blame you or anything.

jps

14 Feb 2008, 11:44 PM

Obviously too late to start my own thread on this... or should I... maybe we should flood the damn ce/p with mirror threads to this one.

This is stupid.
This is lame.

I could rant a thousand ways around how I've had issues with a horrendous percentage of what BigSug has ranted a thousand ways about but this is.........BS..........

Homsar

14 Feb 2008, 11:44 PM

There was a thread that was deleted, wasn't there? I remember some of the stuff said, but not the title of the thread. BigSug don't take no shit!

The_Deacon

15 Feb 2008, 12:03 AM

Wha happen.....................:p

Angel30

15 Feb 2008, 12:06 AM

4) for chrissake, we have a member here who stole someone else's identity and posted here for months, and yet this same person is allowed to continue to post here under 'his' real identity now. how can that be okay and this somehow isn't?

I agree w/ everything you said but this stands out most of all. How can we allow someone who stole someone's real identity, not just a board name, but their identity and their artwork; their persona. This person is allowed to just "be" on our boards. Granted, I ignore that SOB cause he is lame like I ignore other trolls on the board.

WTF happened to freedom of speech? I didn't realize Bush took that right away too? :eek: :confused:

Whatever. I think BigSug is f*n hilarious and too many took him waaaaay too seriously. His whole post was dripping with sarcasm. That is all.

Angel30

15 Feb 2008, 12:06 AM

There was a thread that was deleted, wasn't there? I remember some of the stuff said, but not the title of the thread. BigSug don't take no shit!

Nope. It's still there. In all it's glory.

Homsar

15 Feb 2008, 12:17 AM

Whoa whoa whoa. I just read through that thread up to the point where BigSug was banned, and I have this to say:

What the fuck?
There's no way he should have been banned for that. No way. That thread was TAME TAME TAME compared to most others. In fact I recall a recent thread where he and Due were going at it, but that might have been part of the reasoning here.
Annoying? Maybe. Outspoken? Yes. Facetious? Absolutely. Banable? No.

Homsar

15 Feb 2008, 12:31 AM

I agree w/ everything you said but this stands out most of all. How can we allow someone who stole someone's real identity, not just a board name, but their identity and their artwork; their persona. This person is allowed to just "be" on our boards. Granted, I ignore that SOB cause he is lame like I ignore other trolls on the board.

Don't get me started.

jps

15 Feb 2008, 12:35 AM

To borrow a phrase...

Good night and good luck.

(yeah this is still stupid!) Big Sug is BS but it is BS to ban Big Sug

crank-e

15 Feb 2008, 12:53 AM

I liked his posts and respected his views, even when they opposed my own. Which is more than I can say about most the regular boarders on CE/P. And by regular, I mean cocksuckers who can't stand the thought of another's opinion/beliefs.

To BS-If the ban is lifted, don't come back. Fuck 'em.

Smoker29

15 Feb 2008, 01:31 AM

I enjoyed watching BigSug spar with everybody. Better him than me...

WOXY board members for the most part lean to the left, and BS helped to balance it out a little.

Mike, I don't agree with your political views, but I think you're a pretty good dude with a great ear for music. I enjoy listening to you. There are many on the boards whose views I don't agree with, but if I put those folks on ignore, (or had them banned) it would be a pretty bland community.

I've been on these boards for 9 years now and I've seen far more revolting posts than this one. I've seen far more deserving posters not get banned. I can't help but view this as a decision based on political differences. That bothers me.

DaHood

15 Feb 2008, 03:14 AM

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 05:39 AM

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 05:46 AM

Respectfully, I think it's bullshit. I realize that BigSug's comments were over the top but you do have to consider the source. I also believe that when you get into political discussions you have to accept the fact that it's going to be heated and people are going to say things that you don't like... things that you REALLY don't like... and if you can't take the heat then you should stay out of the blast furnace.

Respectfully, I'll strongly disagree. People who can't behave in an discussion -- any discussion -- are the ones that should stay out, not the nice people. By not banning the bad apples, we're actually "banning" the people that want to discuss things in an orderly manner.

How many times have I read about people that do not get into CE/P because it's too heated? I'm one of them -- I don't have the time to fume about what some person said about me that doesn't have anything to do with what we were discussing. I'll go out on a limb and say BigSug was a huge part of that.

Now, MaL and Due, for example, have some strong opinions that are frequently different than what other people think, but I don't recall them resorting to personal attacks. They may antagonize people now and then merely because of difference of opinion, but they don't "misbehave", so to speak. That's the way to go. BTW, I really enjoy their posts.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 06:14 AM

Unrequited

15 Feb 2008, 06:50 AM

WOXY board members for the most part lean to the left, and BS helped to balance it out a little.

I don't think he was banned because of how he thinks, I think he was banned because, most of the time, he just resorts to name calling and insults in his posts. Everyone's brave on the Internet, but I doubt he would say most of these things to people's faces because he'd get his ass kicked.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 07:00 AM

1) first and foremost, woxy has the right to ban anyone for any reason.

nuff said.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 07:12 AM

Everyone's brave on the Internet, but I doubt most anyone here would say some of the things they do to people's faces because they'd get their asses kicked.

Fixed that for the rest of CE/P.

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 07:43 AM

Fixed that for the rest of CE/P.

I do not agree with that, friz. There are quite a few people here that express their opinions in a nice way. I'd say most of them.

dragonflier

15 Feb 2008, 07:48 AM

I'm surprised and disappointed that he got banned. I almost never agree with him and I often think he's a jackass, but I think he's still a pretty funny jackass. Many of his statements are over the top, and I'd bet he means them to be exactly that. However, sarcasm doesn't always translate well to a message board.

I hope that Mike or Shiv consider lifting the ban.

jneale

15 Feb 2008, 07:53 AM

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51TMMRMW11L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg

silentpaul

15 Feb 2008, 08:17 AM

nuff said.

No kiddin'...

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 08:22 AM

I do not agree with that, friz. There are quite a few people here that express their opinions in a nice way. I'd say most of them.

Yeah, you're right. It is one of the tamest political discussion boards I've seen.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 08:29 AM

Yeah, you're right. It is one of the tamest political discussion boards I've seen.

i don't share the peculiarly 2000s value system that measures the seriousness of a message board forum by how assaultive it is.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 08:34 AM

i don't share the peculiarly 2000s value system that measures the seriousness of a message board forum by how assaultive it is.

That would imply that a previous value system existed, say before 2000. This is the only one I'm familiar with, since I've only been MB posting since '04.
By that short time period's standard, this board is tame.

doves

15 Feb 2008, 08:52 AM

Respectfully, I think it's bullshit.

Thank you for not saying, "I call bullshit." Just 'bullshit' stands alone nicely.
That is all. :cool:

akip

15 Feb 2008, 08:55 AM

By that short time period's standard, this board is tame.

you keep repeating this. what does woxy.com's low, but apparently higher-than-some, level of civility signify to you? too boring? you think woxy needs to encourage more, rather than less, gut-punching?

i've also heard of boards where the moderators will kick you out for being any kind of a troll, or for not observing all sorts of criteria. does that mean woxy should do the same thing? not necessarily.

since i've been here, the mods have kicked off less than one person a year, hardly excessive.

btw, i've never complained to the mods, never will, but i think any boarder is well within their rights to do so.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 09:01 AM

you keep repeating this. what does woxy.com's low, but apparently higher-than-some, level of civility signify to you? too boring? you think woxy needs to encourage more, rather than less, gut-punching?

Nope. Trying to show a little perspective to the folks who think this is some World War III.

Sushi

15 Feb 2008, 09:03 AM

Respectfully, I'll strongly disagree. People who can't behave in an discussion -- any discussion -- are the ones that should stay out, not the nice people. By not banning the bad apples, we're actually "banning" the people that want to discuss things in an orderly manner.

Quoted for emphasis.

Sometimes Big Sug was funny, but mostly not. I wouldn't say these boards might have some of the more "tame" political discussions on the 'Net--they're just more intelligent discussions. I always tell people we have a surprisingingly literate, intelligent message board community. That's what keeps us coming back, isn't it? You don't have to post in order to listen to woxy. We come and we talk to each other because we enjoy the discussion. I'm personally not a fan of arguments. I like intelligent, reasoned conversation--and you can actually find that here. When it turns to an argument, I generally split. Even so, the arguments here are generally intelligent and don't involve a whole lot of name calling. When it does, when a person consistently name calls, is continually beligerent and looking for a fight rather than discussion, then yeah, maybe he/she should be banned.

How can we allow someone who stole someone's real identity, not just a board name, but their identity and their artwork; their persona. This person is allowed to just "be" on our boards. Granted, I ignore that SOB cause he is lame like I ignore other trolls on the board.
I think enough people have that boarder on "ignore" that it's almost a moot point. Part of me feels he should be banned, and part of me just feels sorry for him (not sorry enough to reply to take him off of "ignore," but sorry nonetheless).

akip

15 Feb 2008, 09:10 AM

Nope. Trying to show a little perspective to the folks who think this is some World War III.

i agree that a mushroom cloud isn't exploding in cincinnati, but IF we are a community in something other than name only, we should sometimes attempt to iron out these differences.

The Big Crunch

15 Feb 2008, 09:11 AM

I'll disagree with everyone here. I'm quite happy to see him banned. He's the one and only reason I don't post more on CE/P, as I don't like being personnally attacked for merely expressing my point of view.

Maybe the post that got him banned was tame compared to others, but that only means his "body of work" is atrocious. He is fun, but maybe he also makes the mods work more because he is always stirring some shit.

It's not a matter of different political views, is a matter of him -- despite being a lawyer -- not being able to carry a discussion withour resorting to personal attacks. Godspeed.
I agree with you. Screw this viva la diference nonsense - the guy was a jerk who cared far less about any substantive discussion and far more about getting his rocks off being insulting. He was a troll. Politics was just a way for him to get a rise out of people. I don't think his political leanings were the issue - I think the problem was that he just wanted to start fights and get attention.

There are folks around here who have conservative political opinions who are far more interested in substantive (sometimes heated) debate than they are in picking fights where politics is just the means to getting one into those fights.

And as far as the tone of CE/P being overly tame or drained of any sort of dynamic arguments, I really could care less. As far as I'm concerned, the general purpose of these boards is music-related. If there is not enough scintillating political debate here, then go to a forum devoted to talking politics. I still don't understand why some folks who never really post about music hang out here to talk politics, and then sometimes complain about the lack of quality political debate.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 09:12 AM

i agree that a mushroom cloud isn't exploding in cincinnati, but IF we are a community in something other than name only, we should sometimes attempt to iron out these differences.

And do so internally--not by comparing ourselves to some other community

DudeMan

15 Feb 2008, 09:13 AM

And do so internally--not by comparing ourselves to some other community
and do so internally, not by banning people whose views we don't agree wtih.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 09:23 AM

and do so internally, not by banning people whose views we don't agree wtih.

Political persecution! Someone call Tom Morello! :rolleyes:

He's not Solzhenitsyn. He wasn't spirited off to the Gulag for his beliefs. Let's try to keep this within the realm of the credible.

Unrequited

15 Feb 2008, 09:25 AM

and do so internally, not by banning people whose views we don't agree wtih.

Nonsense. Say a person makes point X. Someone disagrees and says "You're wrong about point X, and here's why...". There are plenty of civil disagreements on the CE/P boards.

BS would reply "Oooooh, point X, my balls are on Hillary's face and I've knocked up your mother. If you weren't so stupid, I wouldn't have to waste my time posting here". You get the picture. His act was so old.

Frankly, I don't care either way whether the guy is banned or not. He's probably loving every minute of it. We're all here for a little attention but some folks need psychiatric help as well.

DudeMan

15 Feb 2008, 09:26 AM

Political persecution! Someone call Tom Morello! :rolleyes:

He's not Solzhenitsyn. He wasn't spirited off to the Gulag for his beliefs. Let's try to keep this within the realm of the credible.
and let's try to stop inflating what my point is. i didn't say anyone was carried to the gulag, and i said that woxy has the right to ban anyone they want. but, i think it's bullshit for the reasons i've already mentioned.

care to make any response that doesn't completely mischaracterize what i said?

miami2112

15 Feb 2008, 09:27 AM

i just checked his "find latest posts by", and it took me 5 pages back to find anything in the music section. since this is woxy, an internet music station, and bigsug was only stirring up trouble in the ce/p forum, perhaps the mods felt he should be on a different board and didnt want to deal with him?

he pissed me off and, i agree with motti, was a reason i stayed out of ce/p for a very long time.

fwiw, it took me two pages to find my most recent music forum post.

Chomp Samba

15 Feb 2008, 09:29 AM

Big Sug is good people.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 09:30 AM

care to make any response that doesn't completely mischaracterize what i said?

Yes.

BigSugar was not banned for his political beliefs.

Got it?

DudeMan

15 Feb 2008, 09:32 AM

i just checked his "find latest posts by", and it took me 5 pages back to find anything in the music section. since this is woxy, an internet music station, and bigsug was only stirring up trouble in the ce/p forum, perhaps the mods felt he should be on a different board and didnt want to deal with him?

good point. if the mods think people should be posting about music only, then they should get rid of all of the other fora, which is well within their power. as it happens, they created the CE/P forum as a place for people to take their comments, discussions and rants about politics and current events. hate the game, not the playa.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 09:33 AM

look, my spouse had to fire this older guy once 'cause when he didn't like what was going on he'd start talking about his 45, how if he brought in his 45 that could settle things. was that a threat? maybe, maybe not. and even if it was, what were the chances he would go postal one day in the office? probably one in a few thousand. but he still creeped people out and turned the atmosphere really weird.

this being a message board, you can't take in all the cues the way you can IRL. but it's just taboo to threaten to shoot people, even jokingly. it's not funny.

jcarwash31

15 Feb 2008, 09:34 AM

I'm going to stand up for Mike here. The only thing we know about BigSug's political views is that he hates liberals and hippies. We would possibly know more if he actually discussed politics. Unrequited pointed it out perfectly.

Nonsense. Say a person makes point X. Someone disagrees and says "You're wrong about point X, and here's why...". There are plenty of civil disagreements on the CE/P boards.

BS would reply "Oooooh, point X, my balls are on Hillary's face and I've knocked up your mother. If you weren't so stupid, I wouldn't have to waste my time posting here". You get the picture. His act was so old.

All he ever did in any CE/P thread was to berate and insult the people who opposed his view. He was constantly trolling. We don't need that and I think Mike finally had enough. I don't believe this has anything to do with Mike's personal political views.

jcarwash31

15 Feb 2008, 09:40 AM

good point. if the mods think people should be posting about music only, then they should get rid of all of the other fora, which is well within their power. as it happens, they created the CE/P forum as a place for people to take their comments, discussions and rants about politics and current events. hate the game, not the playa.
I don't think that was the point Miami was making. If you are going to be a complete asshat in one forum, don't expect to be able to keep posting here in any forum.

miami2112

15 Feb 2008, 09:45 AM

I don't think that was the point Miami was making. If you are going to be a complete asshat in one forum, don't expect to be able to keep posting here in any forum.

indeed it was. if all bigsug wanted to do was politics, perhaps there are more appropriate boards for his political "discussion".

and his bit was old, agreeing with unrequited.

its a music station. contribute to the mission of the station, contribute to the discussion of music once in a while.

fwiw, i may a completely stupid insulting post during a drunken rant one night. i was called out by the board and was mortified. i apologized to the potentially insulted in the thread, and sent out a pm. it was the right thing to do. i dont know that bigsug has ever felt the need to apologize for his posts.

Sofa King

15 Feb 2008, 09:46 AM

Political persecution! Someone call Tom Morello! :rolleyes:

You know, you abuse the :rolleyes: thing. It's freakin' annoying as shit. It makes you sounds like a smartass little teenager.

Here, let me try:

Whatever :rolleyes:

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 09:47 AM

You know, you abuse the :rolleyes: thing. It's freakin' annoying as shit. It makes you sounds like a smartass little teenager.

Here, let me try:

Whatever :rolleyes:

When you have nothing else, attack the person.

:rolleyes:

drougan

15 Feb 2008, 09:50 AM

All he ever did in any CE/P thread was to berate and insult the people who opposed his view. He was constantly trolling. We don't need that and I think Mike finally had enough. I don't believe this has anything to do with Mike's personal political views.

Pretty much an accurate summary of my opinions as well.

At any rate, this was a disciplinary action, not an execution for capital crime. BS can come back under a new name and post whatever he wants, in the end. His straw broke the camel's back this time and he got sent to time out. Not a big deal.

drougan

15 Feb 2008, 09:57 AM

its a music station. contribute to the mission of the station, contribute to the discussion of music once in a while.

I disagree. This forum is only an internet based social vehicle attatched to a radio station. Posting only in CE/P makes you no less a member than someone who only posts in Main Music. If a person who never listened to the station and came here for the sole purpose of political conversation then so be it. Behave yourself within the social norms of the forum and we won't have a problem.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 10:00 AM

I disagree. This forum is only an internet based social vehicle attatched to a radio station. Posting only in CE/P makes you no less a member than someone who only posts in Main Music. If a person who never listened to the station and came here for the sole purpose of political conversation then so be it. Behave yourself within the social norms of the forum and we won't have a problem.

I concur with this. There are other boarders who seem to confine themselves almost completely to CE/P--and without incident (that I've seen, anyway). I don't look askance at them, anymore than I do someone who only posts in Main Music.

It's all about that behaving thing.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 10:05 AM

Behave yourself within the social norms of the forum and we won't have a problem.

buy this man a drink.:D

slopechz

15 Feb 2008, 10:22 AM

Wow, I miss all the fun. :eek:

Woxy can ban anyone they want. This has nothing to do with political views but rather message board decorum and civility. I'm not sure why that is so hard for some members to understand.

classicgrrl

15 Feb 2008, 10:23 AM

damned I missed it.

again.

miami2112

15 Feb 2008, 10:25 AM

I disagree. This forum is only an internet based social vehicle attatched to a radio station. Posting only in CE/P makes you no less a member than someone who only posts in Main Music. If a person who never listened to the station and came here for the sole purpose of political conversation then so be it. Behave yourself within the social norms of the forum and we won't have a problem.

let me try to clarify.

i'm sure the folks that subsidize the station, and the message boards attached to the station would prefer the music forum to be the most active. if this was my station, i certainly would.

however, there should be no problem with posters who do as drougan says, provided they behave themselves.

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 10:27 AM

Blank Frank

15 Feb 2008, 10:29 AM

All he ever did in any CE/P thread was to berate and insult the people who opposed his view. He was constantly trolling. We don't need that and I think Mike finally had enough. I don't believe this has anything to do with Mike's personal political views.
Absolutely agreed. BigSug just added poison and vitriol to these boards, and frankly I'm glad to see that Mike decided to enforce some level of board decorum. I stayed out of CE/P for a long time because the very first time I posted in here I was bitterly and personally insulted for expressing an opinion. My argument wasn't attacked, just my person. I didn't want anything to do with that level of discussion.

Sofa King

15 Feb 2008, 10:33 AM

Fragile egos are put on the line every day.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 10:35 AM

You know, you abuse the :rolleyes: thing. It's freakin' annoying as shit. It makes you sounds like a smartass little teenager.

Here, let me try:

Whatever :rolleyes:

Fragile egos are put on the line every day.

Delicate sensibilities are as well.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 10:37 AM

ah, life back to normal. the sun is out and the shit is slinging. :)

Arkansas

15 Feb 2008, 10:39 AM

It's all about that behaving thing.

Yep.

I've had way more acidic conversation with people in real life than on this board. When people resort to name calling I tell them that I can't debate with their unreasonable attitude and end it (kind of like what mike did). I don't see where any conversation can go if people resort to attacks. People get lured into responding to posts that they know will start a fight. That's why BS keeps on doing what he does, he knows he can get a rise out of somebody. I think this time he was on a roll and didn't even think about what he was typing. Personally I get a laugh out of him and the folks that fall for his tactics. I say bring him back for the laughs. It was always entertainment for me to read what he says, kinda like listening to Rush Limbaugh.

epeolatry

15 Feb 2008, 10:44 AM

bs has pissed me off and made me laugh countless times over the years, but c'mon... even kidding about shooting someone over an opinion is uncivilized.

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 10:47 AM

I've had way more acidic conversation with people in real life than on this board. When people resort to name calling I tell them that I can't debate with their unreasonable attitude and end it (kind of like what mike did). I don't see where any conversation can go if people resort to attacks. People get lured into responding to posts that they know will start a fight. That's why BS keeps on doing what he does, he knows he can get a rise out of somebody. I think this time he was on a roll and didn't even think about what he was typing. Personally I get a laugh out of him and the folks that fall for his tactics. I say bring him back for the laughs. It was always entertainment for me to read what he says, kinda like listening to Rush Limbaugh.

Here's the thing, though.

When people have 1,000 posts and/or some thick skin, some brush-up with a troll is usually not enough to make them go away from the boards and/or WOXY. However, when you're new to the boards/station and you're volleyed back from something you said in your rookie innocence, you do NOT come back.

One of my first posts on these boards (something about Katrina Hurricane) was rebutted in a kinda strong manner and I didn't post again for about 6 months. Then I came back very slowly and was hooked. And even I -- seasoned boarder -- thought about quitting after some very nasty words from The Banned One.

Since WOXY is a commercial enterprise and they're interested in attracting/keeping customers, it's not logical to allow someone (anyone) to brush off people, no matter how entertaining it might be.

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 10:53 AM

Banning people for blowing their top is dumb. Giving them extended timeouts is not dumb. I don't think we know if this is a perma ban or just a timeout.

You could read the manual here:

http://www.vbulletin.com/docs/html/main/users_ban

:)

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 10:57 AM

Banning people for blowing their top is dumb. Giving them extended timeouts is not dumb. I don't think we know if this is a perma ban or just a timeout.

It was something of big deal at the time, and it was handled as such--at the time. Obviously, when you look at the possibility of actual intent to harm, it's not likely to hold up. As, I suspect, the banishment won't hold up.

Don't tell me we agree on something...

Buzzstein

15 Feb 2008, 10:58 AM

BigSug consistently acted like an asshole. I'm glad he got banned. They should ban a few others while their at it...getting rid of bestlaidplans and Jasmine would be nice. Fakers suck. I think anybody who stirs up shit just to stir up shit should go.

Emperor Wog

15 Feb 2008, 11:00 AM

Ahh... I'm gonna miss the Sug.

He's the same guy that shows up at the Board bashes and buys beers and hugs on the very people he rags on.

He isn't as understood by some of the people that's only been around here for three or four years and haven't had a chance to figure him out, or the pleasure to talk with him in person.

Most of his best friends are far-lefties. I guess his rants just don't translate on the boards very well. He is hardly the embodiment of "hate", "vitriol", and "poison".

But, I understand I guess, people do get offended and threatened easily, especially if you don't know someone. As stated before, those with "delicate sensibilities" need to be protected, and it looks like a banning and censorship is the method we'll have to use.

After about 9 years of him on this board, and being a friend of him as well in person, I'm going to miss him on here... it's really the only time I get to "see" him anymore.

Arkansas

15 Feb 2008, 11:01 AM

Since WOXY is a commercial enterprise and they're interested in attracting/keeping customers, it's not logical to allow someone (anyone) to brush off people, no matter how entertaining it might be.

I agree with you there. Sensitivity doesn't come naturally to me. I don't get offended easily. When people attack me personally I just look at things objectively and say, well, guess this conversation is over. I think that we could broaden our horizons if we just ignored silly, dramatic and inflamatory comments. Let's look at things with a sterile eye. I have discussions on other boards that debate all of the CE/P that is discussed here but I really have never seen personal attacks like threats of violence. All I can think is, man, I bet this guy is entertaining to hang out with on a Friday night.

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 11:05 AM

Speaking of Fakers I see a lot of fakery in this thread ... with the noted exception of Motti. It's always fun to pile on someone who's political viewpoints you don't agree with.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 11:21 AM

It's always fun to pile on someone who's political viewpoints you don't agree with.

the flip side to that comment is, when you play outside the boundaries, you risk getting thrown out of the game. whose fault is that? your own.

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 11:29 AM

Yea,

no liberal poster has ever stepped over those boundaries, have they.

suntzu

15 Feb 2008, 11:31 AM

I think anybody who stirs up shit just to stir up shit should go.

Wait a minute...did you just quote John Mellencamp?? I may just have to bitch slap you sir.

Stirring shit up just to stir shit up by:

Calling out a true lefty American hero like Mellencamp?

might get you banned.

Threatening misogynistic domestic physical violence?

might get you banned.

Tread carefully.....

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 11:32 AM

Yea,

no liberal poster has ever stepped over those boundaries, have they.

Are you asking or stating? Got an example, perhaps?

dannyboy

15 Feb 2008, 11:36 AM

Got an example, perhaps?

just about any thread about the Bush Administration

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 11:37 AM

just about any thread about the Bush Administration
So then you should have no trouble finding one. Go.

dannyboy

15 Feb 2008, 11:51 AM

So then you should have no trouble finding one. Go.
http://woxy.com/boards/showthread.php?t=47724&highlight=bush

Personally, I'd like to see a CIA sniper go a little "rogue agent" on some "high value" targets...

Impeach or assassinate all you want - the damage is already done with his supreme count appointments.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 11:58 AM

http://woxy.com/boards/showthread.php?t=47724&highlight=bush

Not seeing the part where a boarder threatened to harm another.

Sofa King

15 Feb 2008, 11:59 AM

.... clonE, who doesn't get to come around much anymore because his employer thinks he should be working when he's being paid to do so...

... maybe the axe can be put to other use... if you catch my drift.

As a manager, I find this very threatening. Are you suggesting that he puts an axe to use on an employer for making his employees work?

I'm extremely threatened by this. I'm not sure if this is a hypothetical situation you're referring, a joke, or a suggestion to murder someone's employer with an axe.

I need my delicate sensibilities to be stroked immediately. The only way I can feel safe as an employer, is to have you removed or banned.

I don't need to be reading posts by boarders suggesting others to murder employers with axes.

Oh, what can I do?

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 12:01 PM

As a manager, I find this very threatening. Are you suggesting that he puts an axe to use on an employer for making his employees work?

I'm extremely threatened by this. I'm not sure if this is a hypothetical situation you're referring, a joke, or a suggestion to murder someone's employer with an axe.

I need my delicate sensibilities to be stroked immediately. The only way I can feel safe as an employer, is to have you removed or banned.

I don't need to be reading posts by boarders suggesting others to murder employers with axes.

Oh, what can I do?

I imagine you can report it.

ETA:

Or you can just go on reaching. Up to you.

berserkr1979

15 Feb 2008, 12:08 PM

Wow...it all goes down and where am I?

Being a veteran of various boards I can tell you that there's a lot less crap on this board than any other board I've been on. But it's the nature of the beast that goes by the name of the internet.

People use the anonymity of the net to do things they wouldn't dream of doing in real life because more then likely they'd get beat down. So verbally assaulting someone on the internet is appealing to most people because they have a nickname to hide behind and no one knows their true identity.

There was one board I posted on (it doesn't exist anymore) that it was a day in, day out thing for some shit to go down and at least one person getting banned. And I'd say this board had less then 75 people on it at it's peak.

I have noticed around here that dissenting opinions are usually met with a mix of sarcasm and hostility, and usually descends into the bowls of hell and turns into a flame war that appears to be the end of civilized society. But as Banky Edwards put it in some Kevin Smith movie: "That's what the internet is for! Slandering others anonymously!"

Was he out of line? Definitely. Did he deserve to be banned? Probably. Will it happen again? It's the internet...definitely.

...Or I could be full of crap. Your choice.
If anybody needs me, I'll be lurking in the Technology forum.

Buzzstein

15 Feb 2008, 12:09 PM

OK so he probably should have received a warning before just being banned. I know in the past the moderators have been way more lenient towards others when they shouldn't have been *cough*harnk*cough* But I'm still glad he got banned even if it's not entirely fair. And yes that's my completely biased feeling about it.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 12:11 PM

I have noticed around here that dissenting opinions are usually met with a mix of sarcasm and hostility, and usually descends into the bowls of hell and turns into a flame war that appears to be the end of civilized society.
This is one such bowl:
http://www.campist.com/archives/john-t-unger-great-bowl-o-fire-portable-fire-pit.jpg

the_birds

15 Feb 2008, 12:11 PM

I've been sick so I've only been popping in here periodically to read, but someone did wisely warn Sug, that he was perhaps getting too personal.

Even in the land of free speech...Freedom of Speech only exists in contexts.

the_birds

15 Feb 2008, 12:12 PM

This is one such bowl:
http://www.campist.com/archives/john-t-unger-great-bowl-o-fire-portable-fire-pit.jpg

Dude, what about a Chipotle Burrito Bowl, with extra jalapenos?

berserkr1979

15 Feb 2008, 12:17 PM

I never said spelling was one of my strong suits.

But after talking about my father's bowels for most of the month of January (he had a partial obstruction and was in the hospital for a week) you'd think I'd know how to spell it, right?

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 12:26 PM

Dude, what about a Chipotle Burrito Bowl, with extra jalapenos?
That would be another such bowl. There are many.
I never said spelling was one of my strong suits.

But after talking about my father's bowels for most of the month of January (he had a partial obstruction and was in the hospital for a week) you'd think I'd know how to spell it, right?
I just found it funny, that's all. Inadvertent humor. :)

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 12:27 PM

This has been fun but I really have to work. I'll try to make this my last post on the subject.

Maybe I made it look like BigSug is the ONLY ONE misbehaving in CE/P and that's not fair. I don't know if everybody does it, if it's generally widespread etc., but personal attacks do happen and arguments do get too heated from time to time. I think I'm responsible for the shitstorm on the taser thing and all.

This is to say that, yes, liberals commit sins too. I'll agree with MaL on that. I don't remember when/how but I do remember seeing MaL attacked a few times and I was quite surprised by how he kept his poise (I wouldn't). So we all need to tone down sometimes. The difference is that The Banned One (I love typing this) did it consistently. That sucks.

And MaL, I know you probably did it knowing I'm a thin-skinned ninny (:)), but I'm quite uncomfortable with being singled out on that post. Again: people slip sometimes but I'd say 95% of the boarders are nice 95% of the time. Either everybody who deserves to be "excepted" is listed or none at all...

Sushi

15 Feb 2008, 12:27 PM

OK so he probably should have received a warning before just being banned.
He could have been warned privately by the mods any number of times.

Buzzstein

15 Feb 2008, 12:30 PM

He could have been warned privately by the mods any number of times.

True. If he was indeed warned first then the banning makes more sense.

Sushi

15 Feb 2008, 12:33 PM

True. If he was warned first then the banning was definitely called for.
I don't know whether he was or not, but I think we forget sometimes that no one has time to read every thread and every post on the boards and no one but the mods may get the full picture of an individual boarder's actions here.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 12:36 PM

He could have been warned privately by the mods any number of times.

There may be an entire e-mail correspondence we may not be aware of.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 12:37 PM

There may be an entire e-mail correspondence we may not be aware of.

Or there may be a threshold of complaints that was reached. There's a lot we don't know.

silentpaul

15 Feb 2008, 12:45 PM

There's a lot we don't know.

Such as the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow.

drougan

15 Feb 2008, 12:47 PM

He could have been warned privately by the mods any number of times.

True. If he was indeed warned first then the banning makes more sense.

As I recall he's even been publicly warned by a mod or two over his history here.

joebob

15 Feb 2008, 01:31 PM

1. This is the internet.

2. Solipsism: the view confining reality to oneself and one's experiences.

Just thought I'd throw those out there.

akip

15 Feb 2008, 01:34 PM

Yea,

no liberal poster has ever stepped over those boundaries, have they.

now that i'm back for a minute, i just had to pop back in and respond to this.

i came up with one! duemellon called me a "clueless fuck" a long time ago.:D:D :D i suppose that's up against the bounds of decency, though it's still a ways from threatening to shoot both me and joe at mcdonald's down the street.

i think he's a happier person now, though it's none of my biz.;)

:D

Homsar

15 Feb 2008, 01:46 PM

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 01:53 PM

Such as the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow.

African or European?

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 02:00 PM

You people still think he was serious? If everyone read that thread, you would see that BigSug was actually discussing things, in his way. So what if he said he'd shoot someone. He said he'd shoot someone if they stole all his money. Facetiously!

Waa waa, BigSug hurt my feelings. Come on people.

How do you know? If he was not serious about just that one aspect, does that mean he wasn't serious about any of it? How do you (or anyone) determine which parts to take with the proverbial grain of salt?

I did read the thread. There are any number of ways he could have made that point as vehemently, colorfully, and antagonistically as he clearly meant to--without saying he'd shoot two people. Unfortunately, he didn't do that.

epeolatry

15 Feb 2008, 02:03 PM

Yea,

no liberal poster has ever stepped over those boundaries, have they.

Which boundaries are you referencing? Creepily-worded threats or general assholism? I've been an asshole, but I'd be surprised if you could find a post where I threaten someone w/ shooting.

DaHood

15 Feb 2008, 02:05 PM

I've been an assholeNo, my dear. Never, as far as I have seen.

Sushi

15 Feb 2008, 02:10 PM

No, my dear. Never, as far as I have seen.
THen how the hell does she poop?

slopechz

15 Feb 2008, 02:12 PM

Woxy can ban anyone they want. This has nothing to do with political views but rather message board decorum and civility. I'm not sure why that is so hard for some members to understand.

Which boundaries are you referencing? Creepily-worded threats or general assholism? I've been an asshole, but I'd be surprised if you could find a post where I threaten someone w/ shooting.

Exactly, we all have been an asshole on here at one time or another. It comes with the territory. See my comment above. This is not about politics and it really is absurd to make it a liberal/conservative issue. Rather, it is about a member who went too far with his comments.

slopechz

15 Feb 2008, 02:14 PM

THen how the hell does she poop?

Good question. :D

silentpaul

15 Feb 2008, 02:14 PM

Speaking to assholes, my gf forwarded me a joke today:

A nurse walks into a bank, totally exhausted after a 20-hour shift. Preparing to write a check, she pulls a rectal thermometer out of her purse and tries to write with it. She looks at the flabbergasted teller and without missing a beat says, "Well, that's great..........that's really great..........some asshole's got my pen."

;)

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 02:17 PM

Exactly, we all have been an asshole on here at one time or another. It comes with the territory. See my comment above. This is not about politics and it really is absurd to make it a liberal/conservative issue. Rather, it is about a member who went too far with his comments.

Quoted for emphasis.

REMgirl

15 Feb 2008, 02:22 PM

"Speaking of assholes, my gf forwarded me a joke today:"

Please tell me you didn't mean to write this. Your girlfriend certainly wouldn't appreciate being referred to in such a way.;)

drougan

15 Feb 2008, 02:24 PM

gwar469

15 Feb 2008, 02:30 PM

Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!

silentpaul

15 Feb 2008, 02:32 PM

"Speaking of assholes, my gf forwarded me a joke today:"

Please tell me you didn't mean to write this. Your girlfriend certainly wouldn't appreciate being referred to in such a way.;)

Yeah, it just now occured to me how that sounded! :eek: I came back to edit...

The Sheck

15 Feb 2008, 02:56 PM

Sometimes people are held accountable for their words on here. That's all this is. If anything, maybe it's a wake-up call for everyone who takes something personally on here to think before they reply.

doves

15 Feb 2008, 03:03 PM

Waa waa, BigSug hurt my feelings. Come on people.

There's also, waa waa, BigSug got banned. ::Shrugs::

george

15 Feb 2008, 03:10 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 03:15 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

What does one have to do with the other?

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 03:15 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

I lost my decoder ring, can you translate that for me?

The Sheck

15 Feb 2008, 03:28 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

You do know one has nothing to do with the other, right?

akip

15 Feb 2008, 03:31 PM

big sug might have a big mouth, but i don't think he's killing indie.;)

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 03:36 PM

big sug might have a big mouth, but i don't think he's killing indie.;)

Everybody knows the real problem is kids these days.

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 03:38 PM

Everybody knows the real problem is kids these days.

Those damned Gen Y'ers!

Measure Up!

15 Feb 2008, 03:53 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

This station is in big trouble if it only counts on message board members as listeners. I doubt BigSug even listened to the station all that much.

Emperor Wog

15 Feb 2008, 04:00 PM

I doubt BigSug even listened to the station all that much.

He did. He was even the drummer in that band that won WOXY's 97Xposure 2001 Band of the Year!

Nellie Bly

15 Feb 2008, 04:10 PM

He did. He was even the drummer in that band that won WOXY's 97Xposure 2001 Band of the Year!

Indeed he was. I'll miss seeing him around here, but he did kinda put his foot in it.

monkey neck

15 Feb 2008, 04:56 PM

Mike, take a handful of Midol then read the following:

par·a·ble /ˈpærəbəl/ Pronunciation[par-uh-buhl]
–noun
1. a short allegorical story designed to illustrate or teach some truth, religious principle, or moral lesson.
2. a statement or comment that conveys a meaning indirectly by the use of comparison, analogy, or the like.

Are we too sensitive to think it was a direct threat? Unbelievable....:rolleyes:

monkey neck

15 Feb 2008, 05:05 PM

Oh, by the way, in case I just got myself banned, I just want to say I love you, akip.;)

akip

15 Feb 2008, 05:10 PM

Oh, by the way, in case I just got myself banned, I just want to say I love you, akip.;)

hey, i put in a good word for you, i swear!!

i really don't care about big sug, though---i just can't wade through his dark side of the moon. but i'm defending mike, anyway, 'cause he's my a.m. guy. ;)

twentyshots

15 Feb 2008, 06:15 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

that is the silliest damn thing yet.

classicgrrl

15 Feb 2008, 06:24 PM

The more I hang out on this board, the more I understand why this station keeps going out of business.

this is far far meaner than what sug said.

if you feel this way, hows come you're a senior member? and hows come you still listen to the station?

and you just put yourself down you know that right? :p

Tommyboy

15 Feb 2008, 06:26 PM

I'll disagree with everyone here. I'm quite happy to see him banned. He's the one and only reason I don't post more on CE/P, as I don't like being personnally attacked for merely expressing my point of view.

It's a tough job to mod boards but I think Mike did the right thing. I've caught myself several times getting ready to reply in the CE/P, but cancelled figuring why bother? As it will only get attacked, not discussed. In fact, whenever I read a post in CE/P, I stop when I reached the nonsense of BS, killing my interest to go further. BS belongs to a group of folks that believe they have to kick a fuss and attack with full force to win an argument. Banning is the only thing that works with em.

Comments have also been made about this being a tamer board then others. I think that is the very reason why I like to hang around here. I've known a few topic specific boards (Gaming, Sci-Fi) that had to remove their CE/P section because of ass clowns like BS. I much rather see a balanced ban then removing the topic here.

REMgirl

15 Feb 2008, 06:32 PM

"Comments have also been made about this being a tamer board then others. I think that is the very reason why I like to hang around here. I've known a few topic specific boards (Gaming, Sci-Fi) that had to remove their CE/P section because of ass clowns like BS. I much rather see a balanced ban then removing the topic here."

Well said, tommyboy. :)

the_birds

15 Feb 2008, 06:36 PM

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 06:52 PM

It's a tough job to mod boards but I think Mike did the right thing. I've caught myself several times getting ready to reply in the CE/P, but cancelled figuring why bother? As it will only get attacked, not discussed. In fact, whenever I read a post in CE/P, I stop when I reached the nonsense of BS, killing my interest to go further. BS belongs to a group of folks that believe they have to kick a fuss and attack with full force to win an argument. Banning is the only thing that works with em.

Translated: I don't like giving an opinion about something and having people disagree with me.

I suggest you all read the progression of the thread again, bigsug was right and I alluded to it in a later post. Prole is simply ignoring the fact that taking someones money might make them go criminal or revolt. Sug used colorful terms, but nothing that was a bannable offense.

You can review all his posts here:

http://woxy.com/boards/search.php?searchid=1824078

In context he is saying that if Prole decided it was fair to take all his money he might shoot him. Was anyone reading?

I realize liberals don't like to argue about things they're wrong about, but this is ridiculous. ;)

Let's review shall we.

Prole:
It's like this. Let's say I took all of your money and gave it to a homeless person. Guess what? Now you're poor.

And being the hard-working American values dude that you are, you're going to work your ass off. You're probably going to work overtime and possibly even take another job to try to get your kids through college, right? You'll work fast food if you have to. And you'll be good at it.

In comparison, that lazy dude at Mickey D's with the five kids who always fucks up my order? Well he doesn't have to work anymore, so he won't.

So now when I go to McDonald's my service is going to be ten times better, because I'll have you taking my order instead of that other dude. How cool is that?

See, now I got all the best talent and hardest workers working *more* and the crappy lazy people working *less*. I am maximizing the return from my best resources. How can this not be good for the economy?

...

Sug:
Prole, do you black out when you type and come to having then posted things you wrote during the blackout? Just wondering.....seems like it sometimes. We're all dumber for having read your last two posts....thanx.

Prole:
Well if you'd like I'd be happy to write it out as a mathematical proof, and then you can really feel dumber when you can't understand it.

I know more about economics than you do. Deal with it.

Sug:
you're right. you're a genius....i just reread your posts again (at great peril to my intelligence) and agree with you....i want to add one caveat. When you come take all my money and give it to Joe Blow at McD's, i'm not going to take his job and make your burger 10X faster, i'm going to get my gun and come shoot you in the head b/c you are a thief. that way, there'll be one less moron to feed. and then i'm going to go find Joe Blow and shoot him in the head, b/c at that point all bets are off. two less morons to feed. wonderful economic plan you've got there. it'll really keep the coffin makers in business!

i look very much forward to seeing your mathematical proof based upon your amazingly faulty conclusions drawn in your posts above. just remember, squiggly lines, angry faces and exclamation points are not part of any mathematical equation. annnnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddd.........go!

Guess what, if you come and take my money I might try and kill your ass too. Bannable offense? Or is the offense to suggest that some of us radically disagree that rich people should pay more in taxes because we think rich people create jobs?

The problem here is the ban appears more political in nature than anything else. Good grief we all have gone off on people and to claim otherwise is dishonest. And now we have people coming in and saying oh he deserved it, hated the guy, hated the attitude.

Riiiiight.

Golly jeepers I so disagree with all you fine folks. Let's gab about it.

patio

15 Feb 2008, 06:53 PM

He did. He was even the drummer in that band that won WOXY's 97Xposure 2001 Band of the Year!

I was there!!!

Angel30

15 Feb 2008, 07:23 PM

I have a problem with this particular boarder being banned because there have been others, others who participated in that very thread, who have called others names and attacked as well but they aren't banned. Maybe they were just lucky because the person they attacked were mature enough to let it roll off or maybe the mods didn't catch it. *shrug* Life goes on.

I will also state that the reason I come to the woxy boards is because it is tame. I don't care there are other message boards that will tear you a new one because you still like "that" band and someone else thinks they suck or aren't relevant anymore. I don't go there for that reason. Sushi stated very well how intelligent people are here for the most part and that is one reason I like to come into CE/P because I don't really watch the news but I still want to know and learn about what is happening. But, to be honest, most of the time the dialogue goes downhill by the end of the first page and I just never come back to see if it recovers.

Maybe Mike did the right thing, but I think that standard needs to apply fairly across to every boarder. My two cents, not that anyone cares but me. ;)

upwithpeople

15 Feb 2008, 07:25 PM

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/funny-pictures-cat-blocks-computer.jpg

Ambassador V3.0

15 Feb 2008, 07:32 PM

Personally I get a laugh out of him and the folks that fall for his tactics. I say bring him back for the laughs. It was always entertainment for me to read what he says, kinda like listening to Rush Limbaugh.

My sentiments exactly. Bring back BigSug! The personal attacks weren't always (or even usually warranted), but he is a one of a kind. I always looked forward to reading his "discourse" while I ate lunch at my desk--far more entertaining than reading patents, let me tell you! :)

I also feel a certain kinship to him, as he also likes tunes, booze and quoting cartoon characters. ;)

Frost

15 Feb 2008, 07:39 PM

oh let the big oaf back in.

Smoker29

15 Feb 2008, 07:42 PM

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 08:01 PM

Good grief we all have gone off on people and to claim otherwise is dishonest.

Who's claiming otherwise? In fact, it already seems this has been said.
Exactly, we all have been an asshole on here at one time or another. It comes with the territory.
But this is just silly. And also has been covered already.
I realize liberals don't like to argue about things they're wrong about, but this is ridiculous. ;)

The problem here is the ban appears more political in nature than anything else.

This is not about politics and it really is absurd to make it a liberal/conservative issue. Rather, it is about a member who went too far with his comments.
I suggest you read the progression of the thread again.

Unrequited

15 Feb 2008, 08:37 PM

I think with your writing style, you would be a huge success.

Puke :rolleyes:

Breeze

15 Feb 2008, 09:26 PM

Brian...If you're reading this, start a Blog. I think the word would get out to the blogosphere really quick. People would love you and others would love to hate you. I'm serious. I think with your writing style, you would be a huge success.

You Can Do It!

http://twitchfilm.net/pics/rob-schneider.jpg

On the contrary, without a constant supply of people to berate, such a blog would fold rather quickly. His act wouldn't work as a solo; he alone couldn't sustain an audience.

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 09:52 PM

Wow! I respect Mike, but what the hell? Was he even following the thread before he banned Sug? I can't see how it can be so, because then it would have been quite evident that Sug's comment wasn't in any way a personal attack, let alone a threat.

Dear denizens of the CE/P threads, let us be straight with ourselves, shall we? This board has always shown a pronounced liberal slant and an intense intolerance of any view perceived as "conservative". Ironic really, since I'd posit the unwashed masses have little or no understanding of conservatism (hint, it has nothing to do with current gub'min "Neoconservative" behavior"). BigSug might be a boorish lout, but it should be abundantly clear to all but the most mentally defective, thin skinned professional whiner that he is anything but violent.

I don't know why I'm still surprised when people demonstrate their stupefying inability to shrug off even the tiniest bit of information that might clash with their shockingly fragile ego. Do they experience such cognitive dissonance when encountering views that cross the grain of their own meager intellect that all foreign ideas are immediately interpreted as attacks? For God's sake, is this a political discussion forum or a daycare center? I wonder how some of you manage to get out of bed in the morning and function in the real world given how a semi-anonymous dude's words can so profoundly rattle your core. Here's a tiny hint: IT'S THE INTERNET, YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ ANYTHING YOU DON'T WANT TO! Ignore and move on!

I don't care if the mods received secret complaints concerning Sug's annoying tone once a year or on a daily basis; whining about his unpopular views in an effort to dispose of him is at least as if not more intolerant than his most inflammatory tirade. Plenty of people have espoused their radical views about burning SUVs, punishing meat eaters and blowing up medical testing facilities, yet they still are free to post here.

If Sug deserved to be banned, then scores of other people should have been booted over the years. Hell, I'm sure there are folks around here who'd just as soon see me get axed as well. It's sad really; plenty of people demonstrate their irritating side on these boards more than they should, but what would you do with them in real life? Lock them away?

Sorry, I call bullshit on this one.

Lovingly,

Phreon

jps

15 Feb 2008, 10:03 PM

Wow! I respect Mike, but what the hell? Was he even following the thread before he banned Sug? I can't see how it can be so, because then it would have been quite evident that Sug's comment wasn't in any way a personal attack, let alone a threat.

there are those of us that agree with you what you just said... apparently though this is of little consequence to anyone other than those of us that agree with you just said.

Sofa King

15 Feb 2008, 10:10 PM

there are those of us that agree with you what you just said... apparently though this is of little consequence to anyone other than those of us that agree with you just said.

This bleeding heart liberal* sure the hell agrees with just about everything Phreon said.

*This is just a saying. Please don't feel threatened. My heart wasn't stabbed and I am not in fact bleeding. I am okay. I don't condone stabbing hearts.

markalot

15 Feb 2008, 10:18 PM

I've watched the Outta Here video 5 times now.

The Sheck

15 Feb 2008, 10:25 PM

Just because the incident occurred in the CE/P forum doesn't mean he got banned because of his political stance. It'd be like posting in the music forum, personally threatening someone, and then saying the reason he got banned was because he liked Creed. The logic doesn't connect in either one, know what I'm saying?

Second, I'm 100% positive Mike, Shiv, Bryan Jay, and Joe have way more important things to do than moderate the boards like this. It's easier for everyone involved to put a ban on someone who doesn't follow the rules (unwritten or not) of message boarding than watch their email box fill up with complaints about board members. Now, in the past, this may have been different, where people and incidents festered and continue to fester, but maybe this is the proper 'wake-up' call to everyone to play nicer. Think of BigSug as a martyr if you want (he'd probably like you to do so, anyhow).

It is not anyone's right to post here, and the owners have every right to do what they want with people who are causing problems. I'm sorry, but some people are acting like this is their private playhouse where they can do and say what they want. If you want a place where you can do these things, start your own message board/blog/website/etc. Until then, play by the rules. It's pretty easy to follow.

Can we move on now?

Ambassador V3.0

15 Feb 2008, 10:34 PM

I don't care if the mods received secret complaints concerning Sug's annoying tone once a year or on a daily basis; whining about his unpopular views in an effort to dispose of him is at least as if not more intolerant than his most inflammatory tirade. Plenty of people have espoused their radical views about burning SUVs, punishing meat eaters and blowing up medical testing facilities, yet they still are free to post here.

If Sug deserved to be banned, then scores of other people should have been booted over the years. Hell, I'm sure there are folks around here who'd just as soon see me get axed as well. It's sad really; plenty of people demonstrate their irritating side on these boards more than they should, but what would you do with them in real life? Lock them away? Phreon

Here, here. Well said, brother Phreon! "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." (Hoping I don't get banned for a religious reference. Mammon is really my main man, though! :cool:)

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 10:36 PM

Quote squeezed down to the brain drippings.....

It's easier for everyone involved to put a ban on someone who doesn't follow the rules (unwritten or not)

Can we move on now?

What rule didn't he follow? If he did violate a rule, is it one infrequently violated by others? What were the consequences?

I think you should be banned for violating the unwritten "Boarders with names beginning with the letters "Shec" must not post at 10:25 PM" rule. It really, really, really, really, really, really, like so totally really offends me and stuff.

Phreon

The Sheck

15 Feb 2008, 10:44 PM

What rule didn't he follow? If he did violate a rule, is it one infrequently violated by others? What were the consequences?

I think you should be banned for violating the unwritten "Boarders with names beginning with the letters "Shec" must not post at 10:25 PM" rule. It really, really, really, really, really, really, like so totally really offends me and stuff.

Phreon

The unwritten rule of threatening others. Especially if this wasn't the first offense...

Whew. Well, I'm glad my board name starts with 'The' so I can avoid that violation.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 10:46 PM

Whew. Well, I'm glad my board name starts with 'The' so I can avoid that violation.

Close call. :p

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 10:51 PM

The unwritten rule of threatening others. Especially if this wasn't the first offense...
.

I agree. If you bothered to read the thread to full comprehension, you'd see he wasn't threatening anyone. Or at least admit claims are tenuous at best and up to loose interpretation.

Excepting the thread in question, find me a single example where BigSug directly threatened another human with violence in any way. Show it to me and I'll buy you a pint of good beer (taking geography into consideration of course). I need an excuse to risk getting mugged up in Northside anyway.

Phreon

P.S. I always read titles as "Sheck, The"; therefore you're still in violation. Following suit of many people on these boards, my opinions are the only ones that matter.

The Sheck

15 Feb 2008, 11:05 PM

I agree. If you bothered to read the thread to full comprehension, you'd see he wasn't threatening anyone. Or at least admit claims are tenuous at best and up to loose interpretation.

Well, I did read the entire thread. And I'm sorry, I wasn't aware threatening to shoot someone doesn't fall into your definition of threatening, even if he was kidding. Again, if someone on these boards feels harassed or attacked, they have every right to contact a mod to resolve the situation. The mods did what they felt was best, here. Besides, are you absolutely sure this was the first time someone had a complaint about BigSug and went to the mods for help? Since there's no exact way of knowing (without Mike or Shiv popping in here), given BigSug's consistency of making fun of other board members in the past, it's possible that it wasn't. Speculation, but there's a limit to what you can say on here without the higher-ups getting involved.

Excepting the thread in question, find me a single example where BigSug directly threatened another human with violence in any way. Show it to me and I'll buy you a pint of good beer (taking geography into consideration of course). I need an excuse to risk getting mugged up in Northside anyway.

If you want to look through his posts, you can. I think what's done is done at this point, and there's no use debating it further.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 11:09 PM

If you want to look through his posts, you can. I think what's done is done at this point, and there's no use debating it further.

I remember him posting once or twice that nobody would ever have the patience nor resources to look for such posts, because they tend to get buried quite quickly.
This cavalier attitude may indeed have found its way through to the mods. We have no way of knowing whether he'd e-mailed the mods at all in the past.

summerteeth

15 Feb 2008, 11:14 PM

From the Board Statistics:

"Threads: 39,638, Posts: 1,077,181, Members: 9,085
Welcome to our newest member, SugarBadforYou"

someone has a sense of humor...

suntzu

15 Feb 2008, 11:20 PM

I don't care if Big Sug is here or not, but as has been pointed out many times before, the jocks read the boards and moderate them, but primarily function as great, great music selectors.

That being said, I think one of y'all punkass bitches ratted BigSugar out, and seeing as he was in a hotly contested argument with someone at the time...

I'm just sayin' watch your backs because there are snakes in the grass.

http://www.midwestdrifters.us/sitebuilder/images/Snitches-467x345.jpg

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 11:22 PM

I'm just sayin' watch your backs because there are snakes in the grass.

http://www.midwestdrifters.us/sitebuilder/images/Snitches-467x345.jpg

Hah!
Indeed.

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 11:29 PM

Well, I did read the entire thread. And I'm sorry, I wasn't aware threatening to shoot someone doesn't fall into your definition of threatening, even if he was kidding. Again, if someone on these boards feels harassed or attacked, they have every right to contact a mod to resolve the situation. The mods did what they felt was best, here. Besides, are you absolutely sure this was the first time someone had a complaint about BigSug and went to the mods for help? Since there's no exact way of knowing (without Mike or Shiv popping in here), given BigSug's consistency of making fun of other board members in the past, it's possible that it wasn't. Speculation, but there's a limit to what you can say on here without the higher-ups getting involved.

If you want to look through his posts, you can. I think what's done is done at this point, and there's no use debating it further.

I have a firm grasp on what type of person BigSug is and can say with certainty he would not threaten a soul. Plus, he's a lawyer and would not make such a stupid mistake.

So now people should be banned for making fun of others? Should I be banned for saying you're a panty-waste for having no understanding of "allegory"? How 'bout if I said, "If you hypothetically stole something from me, I'd ensure you suffer negative consequences"? Did I threaten you? How bout if I said, "The Sheck, I'm going to [do something very negative] to you!" Do you see the difference? No? You're hopeless then.

Perhaps we should all have professional cyber-nannies protecting us from double-plus ungood words.

Phreon

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 11:33 PM

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 11:39 PM

BTW, I didn't interpret BigSug's post like he threatened anybody. I actually think this (earlier in the thread) is way more harmful:

Single most moronic rewrite of history...ever. You should be strung up and flogged for imparting this stupidity upon humanity. Please think before you post idiotic pieces of crap.

Or this...

Prole, do you black out when you type and come to having then posted things you wrote during the blackout? Just wondering.....seems like it sometimes. We're all dumber for having read your last two posts....thanx.

Or several other posts. And this is just one thread. Warrants mentioning that these posts were NOT edited. That's all he typed in response to people.

To be honest, I think he should have been banned ages ago.

Motti

15 Feb 2008, 11:44 PM

I have a firm grasp on what type of person BigSug is and can say with certainty he would not threaten a soul. Plus, he's a lawyer and would not make such a stupid mistake.

Well, all this could have been avoided if he chose his words better. He opted not to and ran the risk, I guess.

As for the lawyer part... Well, first, lawyers make mistakes too. Second, I can't fathom what kind of lawyer he is, except to say he's the type of guy that gives the profession a bad name. He can't be too good of a lawyer if he can't participate in a civilized discussion.

Ambassador V3.0

15 Feb 2008, 11:44 PM

"In Cincinnati, I know ya heard, I got fined for the cuss words..." --from the classic rap 'masterpiece' album "$hort Dogg's in Tha House" :D (Genuine recording straight from Oakland, California, via 1990-1991. Look it up! The cover art is exceptional.)

Shlep

15 Feb 2008, 11:44 PM

What Phreon sez. He raised a couple pretty cogent points which, quite frankly, had me slapping myself on the forehead for not thinking of them first.

Well put, my good Phreon/man.

frizgolf

15 Feb 2008, 11:46 PM

Phreon

15 Feb 2008, 11:58 PM

patio

15 Feb 2008, 11:59 PM

I vote no on bigsug's exile, someone make a poll!

suntzu

16 Feb 2008, 12:03 AM

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2004/09/19/obituaries/eddie_vietnam.jpg

Phreon

16 Feb 2008, 12:07 AM

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2004/09/19/obituaries/eddie_vietnam.jpg

That photo is incredibly poetic and vile at the same time. I'd love to discuss it with you, but I might get banned.

Phreon

DaHood

16 Feb 2008, 12:13 AM

Or several other posts. And this is just one thread. Warrants mentioning that these posts were NOT edited. That's all he typed in response to people.

To be honest, I think he should have been banned ages ago.I respect your view and I understand your disgust, even though I disagree.

And I like you more than I like BigSug.

See how easy that is, people?

suntzu

16 Feb 2008, 12:14 AM

That photo is incredibly poetic and vile at the same time.

Just like this thread.

Without the poetic part.

But hey, there are headshots involved so what do I know.

purple_octopus

16 Feb 2008, 12:14 AM

DaHood

16 Feb 2008, 12:15 AM

DudeMan

16 Feb 2008, 12:18 AM

phreon, i'm glad you joined the conversation, because you have raised a lot of great points.

i find the reaction of many in this thread to be very interesting. the person involved in the exchange has basically said, "i wasn't offended and didn't feel threatened, and i really prefer to be left out of it". that's a totally valid response.

but somehow that doesn't matter. the Faction of the Perpetually Outraged just doesn't like this person and would prefer he went away. that's what it comes down to, because there is no plausible argument to be made that anyone here felt threatened. you don't agree with someone's politics, and that person has disagreed with you forcefully in the past and now it's payback time.

another interesting thing about a lot of the naysayers here is, that they themselves have stirred up plenty of shit and said some pretty rude things in their own day. if anyone should be defending Sug, it's many of you guys. instead, they're the ones leading the parade to the gallows.

classicgrrl

16 Feb 2008, 12:21 AM

Well, all this could have been avoided if he chose his words better. He opted not to and ran the risk, I guess.

As for the lawyer part... Well, first, lawyers make mistakes too. Second, I can't fathom what kind of lawyer he is, except to say he's the type of guy that gives the profession a bad name. He can't be too good of a lawyer if he can't participate in a civilized discussion.

Brian is a very nice person. Gentle and very much concerned with doing the right thing. He can participate in a civilized discussion because I have heard him.

he uses this board to vent like the rest of us. Mike may have posted something to the effect of "watch your mouth" but an outright ban was a little much.

the bigger problem that I have is censorship. um...where is the line that I am not allowed to cross? I have looked in the FAQ's several times. it is not explicit enough in stating the "rules" of the board.

I've said some pretty bad things on here. usually not AT people but rather self depricating that rankled quite a bit of feathers.

What is permissable speech and what is not?

I've had this question in the past although I have never asked it outright to the mods. I'm a little afraid of the answer I would get. I've been here for nearly 8 years and I don't want to be banned, but nor do I want to be fearful of posting something that might get me in trouble.

my true fear is that sug's ban will change the delicate balance of the boards which would make me incredibly sad. :(

the conspiracy theorist in me is wondering if there is more to this story than we boarders are partial to....Sug was involved in the "scene" for quite awhile. there may be some festering ghosts from christmas' past involved...

frizgolf

16 Feb 2008, 12:23 AM

my true fear is that sug's ban will change the delicate balance of the boards which would make me incredibly sad. :(

What she said.

frizgolf

16 Feb 2008, 12:24 AM

the conspiracy theorist in me is wondering if there is more to this story than we boarders are partial to....Sug was involved in the "scene" for quite awhile. there may be some festering grudges from christmas' past involved...

We may never know...

Phreon

16 Feb 2008, 12:34 AM

but somehow that doesn't matter. the Faction of the Perpetually Outraged just doesn't like this person and would prefer he went away. that's what it comes down to, because there is no plausible argument to be made that anyone here felt threatened. you don't agree with someone's politics, and that person has disagreed with you forcefully in the past and now it's payback time.

I like that. Can we change it to the Church of the Perpetually Outraged, or CotPO?

my true fear is that sug's ban will change the delicate balance of the boards which would make me incredibly sad. :(

I feel a disturbance in the farce....

Phreon

Ambassador V3.0

16 Feb 2008, 12:44 AM

I vote no on bigsug's exile, someone make a poll!

This is a great idea--someone should do this! We could call our bar "Hell no, BigSug can't go!" The other side could label theirs, "Hey, Hey keep BigSug away!"

"As you can see from this chart, BigSugar is pure excellence and should stay."

Ah would, but Ah tai'nt 'nough of an In-ti-llectual' to do this here thing!

Motti

16 Feb 2008, 05:56 AM

Given the outrage over Sug's questionably violent statements, I'm still waiting for the uproar over Mike's very directed comment:

maybe you oughta get shot in the head for being an asshat. You're outta here. Enough is enough.

The silence if deafening.

No, there's no bias here,

I can't speak for Mike, but how about this little analogy: there's a customer at a restaurant that goes there everyday, but he is always antagonizing people. Loyal customer, yes, but he also scares away other customers. Someday, the manager of said restaurant decides it's enough and kicks off the obnoxious customer. And he snaps a little there too. Who would blame him? Once again: WOXY is a commercial enterprise and BigSug is bad for business.

And I'll admit there's bias against BigSug. I, for one, am extremely biased. That's because, once again, his body of work is atrocious. Time and time again he only wanted to provoke people. I'll quote this again, from the exact thread in which he was banned:

Single most moronic rewrite of history...ever. You should be strung up and flogged for imparting this stupidity upon humanity. Please think before you post idiotic pieces of crap.

He posted this after someone voiced his opinion in a civilized manner. Can we all agree thiis is unacceptable? If this was a retort to someone in ANY venue, it would be deemed unacceptable. Why would it be acceptable here? I think this is much, much worse than the "shot in the head" post, while somehow less horrible than some other things he has posted.

And why are people NOT upset with Mike? Well, because Mike has been nothing but extremely nice in all these years. I think he gets one or twelve free passes before people turn against him. So he endured years of BigSugar crap and maybe he snapped, so what? BigSugar's goals was to get a rise of people and he finally did, but with the wrong person.

Brian is a very nice person. Gentle and very much concerned with doing the right thing. He can participate in a civilized discussion because I have heard him.

he uses this board to vent like the rest of us. Mike may have posted something to the effect of "watch your mouth" but an outright ban was a little much.

Classic, it's obvious you know him better than I do and he might be like that in the "real life", but he wasn't anything like that here, quite the opposite. Wouldn't you agree?

Yes, we may all use this board to vent, but 99% of us do not use this board to vent at the expense of other people. Which is all he did.

the bigger problem that I have is censorship. um...where is the line that I am not allowed to cross? I have looked in the FAQ's several times. it is not explicit enough in stating the "rules" of the board.

I've said some pretty bad things on here. usually not AT people but rather self depricating that rankled quite a bit of feathers.

What is permissable speech and what is not?

I don't know, but maybe the rule is "get reported to the mods more than five times and you're out". Anyway, I'd bet he was the outright champion of reported posts. That's not something I'd be proud about.

Motti

16 Feb 2008, 05:58 AM

The ironic thing is that this discussion has happened before... in the "taser" thread.

Most people defended that the guy that was antagonizing the conference should be (i) kicked out; and (ii) tased. Including BigSug. Well, I guess you get what you wish for. :)

The Sheck

16 Feb 2008, 06:29 AM

I have a firm grasp on what type of person BigSug is and can say with certainty he would not threaten a soul. Plus, he's a lawyer and would not make such a stupid mistake.

Well...that's your opinion, though. A lot of people see him on here and label him a totally different person. Which opinion holds more validity is highly debatable.

Also, I have a pretty 'firm grasp' on what all has to take place before you get banned from these boards, and if BigSug is indeed permanently banned, it's hard to dispute that he didn't deserve it. Remember Harnk? People wanted that guy banned for months for his insulting, disrespectful posts (and PMs) before it finally happened. Like others have said, equally worse things have been said to one another on occasion and nothing has ever happened (except maybe a thread or two has been closed, and a verbal warning issued). And people really believe BigSug got banned because of this one offense? Please. Take your head out of the sand. How's about we not focus on the words that became the 'final straw,' and instead look at the entire picture? Which is an overwhelming pattern of negativity directed at other board members over a period of several years. I don't think you can really defend him with that in mind, unless you just like to argue.

So now people should be banned for making fun of others? Should I be banned for saying you're a panty-waste for having no understanding of "allegory"? How 'bout if I said, "If you hypothetically stole something from me, I'd ensure you suffer negative consequences"? Did I threaten you? How bout if I said, "The Sheck, I'm going to [do something very negative] to you!" Do you see the difference? No? You're hopeless then.

Did I say everyone should be banned for making fun of others? I'm a little stunned you go off on these tangents over things that no one actually posts. What I'm saying is a) people have every right on here to complain to a mod if they feel harassed or attacked and b) BigSug has a long history of disrespecting others on the boards, and he eventually crossed the line one too many times. I don't think that's too difficult to understand if one has spent any sort of time in the CE/P forum. That's all I'm saying.

The Sheck

16 Feb 2008, 06:32 AM

Great post, Motti. Hit the nail on the head with a lot of it.

Unrequited

16 Feb 2008, 07:01 AM

Plus, he's a lawyer and would not make such a stupid mistake.

Yeah, lawyers never do anything wrong. :eek:

Unrequited

16 Feb 2008, 07:09 AM

Some of you folks crack me up. Censorship? Get real. WOXY could shut this whole thing down, it's their show, their dollar, their right.

I've been banned from another Internet message board for far less bad behavior than BS demonstrated. And, so what? The people who run that board have the right to do so. There is no free speech issue here.

akip

16 Feb 2008, 07:19 AM

i think it's hilarious that people who post here think they are making the rules just 'cause they post here. when we start paying the broadband bills, then we can keep or kick off any big mouth we want.

it's nice that the station lets us carry on our chit chats and ridiculous quarrels here, the 40 or 50 of us who haunt this place like dead souls who can't move on.

mike ruled. it's over.

DudeMan

16 Feb 2008, 07:28 AM

i think it's hilarious that people who post here think they are making the rules just 'cause they post here.
i think it's not hilarious that you make statements that are blatantly untrue. no one here has said that they think they should make the rules. see #1 of my points in the original post in the thread. no one has disputed that woxy has the right to do this. but, people DO have the right to have an opinion on it. you have opinions on a lot of things, as your >14k posts attest. how about you stop denigrating other people for expressing their opinions too?

it's unfortunate that you have to resort to completely mis-stating other people's views in order to justify your biased, inconsistent "off with his head" stance. i take cream with my morning coffee... you apparently take righteousness with yours.

Phreon

16 Feb 2008, 07:44 AM

I can't speak for Mike, but how about this little analogy: there's a customer at a restaurant that goes there everyday, but he is always antagonizing people. Loyal customer, yes, but he also scares away other customers. Someday, the manager of said restaurant decides it's enough and kicks off the obnoxious customer. And he snaps a little there too. Who would blame him? Once again: WOXY is a commercial enterprise and BigSug is bad for business.

That's a bad analogy for several reasons. First, in your analogy, the said person is scaring away paying customers. How much do you pay to post on these boards? Even if you were frightened away from posting because of a BigSug post, would you have stopped listening to the streams? What if your hypothetical customers were bigots who were scared away because person was antagonizing them by being black? Perceptions are funny things; just because you have them, doesn't make them right.

There have been plenty of posters over the years who've said outright hateful things to me, yet I don't recall complaining about a single one of them. Perhaps I have thicker skin than the average Church of the Perpetually Outraged congregation that frequents this board.

Well...that's your opinion, though. A lot of people see him on here and label him a totally different person. Which opinion holds more validity is highly debatable.

The labels people attempt to attach to one another are funny things, aren't they?

Also, I have a pretty 'firm grasp' on what all has to take place before you get banned from these boards, and if BigSug is indeed permanently banned, it's hard to dispute that he didn't deserve it.

That's like saying a person is obviously guilty because they were arrested. Have you ever served on a jury? I hope not. So how many of BigSug's posts were positive in nature? I'd suggest you probably only noticed the posts you disagreed with.

Remember Harnk? People wanted that guy banned for months for his insulting, disrespectful posts (and PMs) before it finally happened. Like others have said, equally worse things have been said to one another on occasion and nothing has ever happened (except maybe a thread or two has been closed, and a verbal warning issued). And people really believe BigSug got banned because of this one offense? Please. Take your head out of the sand. How's about we not focus on the words that became the 'final straw,' and instead look at the entire picture? Which is an overwhelming pattern of negativity directed at other board members over a period of several years. I don't think you can really defend him with that in mind, unless you just like to argue.

Are you aware of the concept, "Tyranny of the masses"? There have been plenty of folks over the years who have exhibited equal or greater general douchbaggery than BigSugar, but the majority was never up in arms (i.e., sending complaints?) over their antics or the mods felt overlooking them was ok. So now I'm left wondering what the difference is here. The obvious answer, given the blatant intolerance of certain political ideologies displayed in CE/P over the years is that Sug's views were unpopular and therefore made him an easy target for the majority to zero in on. As I mentioned earlier, there have been posters who blatantly and consistently encouraged burning SUVs and blowing up research facilites. Either there were no complaints about the posts, which is appaling but not unexpected, or the mods had no problem with them, which is equally disturbing. In the end, what this sounds like is you're advocating people complain to the mods if they feel insulted, get their feelings hurt or just plain don't like someone. Again, is this a political discussion forum or a kindergarten? Would you feel better if we were all assigned a mod to hold our hand?

Did I say everyone should be banned for making fun of others? I'm a little stunned you go off on these tangents over things that no one actually posts. .

Pretty much so, yes. Either that or indirectly said only BigSug should have been banned for making fun of others.

Besides, are you absolutely sure this was the first time someone had a complaint about BigSug and went to the mods for help? Since there's no exact way of knowing (without Mike or Shiv popping in here), given BigSug's consistency of making fun of other board members in the past, it's possible that it wasn't.

Do you read your own words? I'm equally stunned how you consistently fail to connect the various ideas you espouse and/or can't remember what you post.

Phreon

akip

16 Feb 2008, 07:46 AM

i think it's not hilarious that you make statements that are blatantly untrue. no one here has said that they think they should make the rules. see #1 of my points in the original post in the thread. no one has disputed that woxy has the right to do this. but, people DO have the right to have an opinion on it. you have opinions on a lot of things, as your >14k posts attest. how about you stop denigrating other people for expressing their opinions too?

it's unfortunate that you have to resort to completely mis-stating other people's views in order to justify your biased, inconsistent "off with his head" stance. i take cream with my morning coffee... you apparently take righteousness with yours.

there ARE people here who have stated, every time this sort of thing happens, that the community should rule. i just chose not to name names, figuring it was obvious.

markalot

16 Feb 2008, 08:07 AM

Well, I did read the entire thread. And I'm sorry, I wasn't aware threatening to shoot someone doesn't fall into your definition of threatening,

I posted the series in this thread.

I'm starting to think I'm wasting my time here. I mean really, some of you can't even read or follow the progression of a thread.

Here, let me help you out.

Why would bigsug want to shoot Prole in the head? If you read the thread you would know. It certainly wasn't a random event.

Face it, most of you want him gone not because he posts vile nonsense but because you don't like his politics. You can claim otherwise till you're blue in the face. You and the conflict groupies who come over here just to pile on. There can be no other explanation.

Motti has posted why he is the exception to the above, but I disagree with his solution.

DudeMan

16 Feb 2008, 08:09 AM

if there is one GOOD thing that comes from an incident like this, it's that you really learn what people are made of.

i have gained an enormous amount of respect for people like sofaking and classicgrrl, with whom i rarely if ever agree on things, but who are viewing the situation in an objective manner despite being in philosophical opposition to Sug.

on the other hand, there are several people here whom i formerly respected, who have shown themselves to be biased, non-objective, vengeful, petty and ugly. i won't name names, but i don't have to. the day any of you make 1% of the same criticisms of "one of your own" as you do for non fellow-travelers, is the day that will never come.

i am 100% convinced that all of you anti-Sugs know in your hearts that you're wrong, but your egos are preventing you from admitting it. after your initial, visceral reactions, everything you've said since has been rationalization.

mike

16 Feb 2008, 08:31 AM

When the teacher gets called to the playground and continually sees the same person involved in a pissing match, eventually that kid's gonna get run. Teach isn't going to look for witnesses, issue subpoenas or seek a jury trial. Best analogy I can give you. And unless you have a long-seeded resentment of your 3rd grade teacher, I'd let it go....

As some folks have pointed out, my colleagues and I have infinitely more important things to do than police the boards. But, we get posts reported to us and we check ’em out. Usually, it's the same boarders registering complaints and the same boarders being complained about. Still, the majority of reported posts usually pass without action from us.

It’s all pretty simple, kids: don’t antagonize people on the boards. Posting in CE/P doesn’t give you a free pass in that regard. Seriously, if you get your jollies by cranking someone up, please go do it somewhere else. The degree to which a post may offend isn’t subject to a group vote.

Since we’ve had the boards, we’ve banned two - count ‘em - two long term boarders based on repeated, constant complaints from others: Duemellon and BigSugar. Duemellon has long been back and BigSugar has been sent off for limited period with the reason given as “not playing nice in the sandbox”. Y’see, we’re like football refs. I’m sure that there’ll be times that the one who retaliates is flagged as opposed to the instigator. Most of you here with a lot more frequency than we are. We will not catch every flagrant foul.

Since over 95% of the people who post here will never meet, I don’t think anywhere cares how a person is off the boards as it‘s precisely the board conduct that's in question! The fact that some of you know one another locally in Cincinnati doesn’t mean anything to someone living in California, Chicago or Brazil and means exactly zero to us. If said person acts differently in real life, maybe they ought to bring some of that persona to the boards.

I’ve said this before, so here goes: this is our house. You are our guests and we want you here but it’s like being at a party. If someone tells you another is out of line and we concur, that person either straightens up or gets tossed.

At the end of the day - dealing with stuff like this is just not worth it to us. The CE/P portion of our boards is for measured discussion, not a replacement for talk radio rhetoric. If that doesn’t do it for you, we ask to talk that kind of talk elsewhere. Or, join me in my own New Years Resolution by removing yourself from posting on those topics altogether.

Seriously, if we all can’t get along, I’ll confer with the rest of the guys about removing the CE/P section of the boards. In the meantime - go check out the Music Discussion. That’s what we’re really here for.