Jersey Girl wrote:...a THIRD poster has left on account of what's taken place on the board...
And he did so under his own volition. I did nothing 'troll like' in the thread where Mak somehow took offense and then decided to leave.
Again, I had already provided the solution to the pre-existing problem.
Others would like to fan the flames and see the fire burn unabated.
Are you one of those folks?
The propaganda continues...and the meme is in place.
Again...I provided a solution to the conflagration that resulted in a poster going 'nuclear' last month. I did not want to play any part in seeing that continue.
Why do you want to continue to feed the flames at this point?
Regards, MG
You are shifting the focus of my post.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Lemmie wrote:Seriously. Nobody EVER always agrees with ANYbody! How facile to suggest otherwise. And of course, who would want it any other way? One of the most fascinating things about this board is finding yourself in disagreement with someone whose opinion and intellect you truly value. I find the whole exercise to be extremely invigorating as you intellectually work through your opinions and positions with that other person, frequently a truly respected colleague and occasionally, also a rather intriguing adversary.
Agreed. Or do I disagree? Maybe I will argue with you. Wait. I agree with you... THIS TIME
THIS TIME
THIS TIME
THIS TIME
this time
this time
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Dammit, Kish. You made me laugh when I’m determined to hate everyone today, Including me.
“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”
― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951
Jersey Girl wrote:Who here (besides sock) has asked Shades to change his decision?
How about a vote?
I voted by putting the troll on ignore. A couple of posts above this post of JGs are 5 posts of the troll's that are blank to me. There is another post by the troll after JGs post, also blank. No one has responded/fed the troll in a page or two, those blanks are eye candy to me. No one has missed the troll's comments because there is no more intellectual content in his full posts than there is in the blank ones.
So I see this is the only way to vote on this board, a board that is not a democracy.
Don't fed the troll he dribbles.
Whoops, someone fed the troll....
a.k.a. Pokatatorjoined Oct 26, 2006 and permanently banned from MAD Nov 6, 2006
"Stop being such a damned coward and use your real name to own your position."
"That's what he gets for posting in his own name."
2 different threads same day 2 hours apart Yohoo Bat 12/1/2015
Lemmie wrote:Seriously. Nobody EVER always agrees with ANYbody! How facile to suggest otherwise. And of course, who would want it any other way? One of the most fascinating things about this board is finding yourself in disagreement with someone whose opinion and intellect you truly value. I find the whole exercise to be extremely invigorating as you intellectually work through your opinions and positions with that other person, frequently a truly respected colleague and occasionally, also a rather intriguing adversary.
Agreed. Or do I disagree? Maybe I will argue with you. Wait. I agree with you... THIS TIME
THIS TIME
THIS TIME
THIS TIME
this time
this time
Now you're just teasing me, Dear Reverend! I deliciously await our next "disagreement....."
Jersey Girl wrote:Who here (besides sock) has asked Shades to change his decision?
How about a vote?
I voted by putting the troll on ignore. A couple of posts above this post of JGs are 5 posts of the troll's that are blank to me. There is another post by the troll after JGs post, also blank. No one has responded/fed the troll in a page or two, those blanks are eye candy to me. No one has missed the troll's comments because there is no more intellectual content in his full posts than there is in the blank ones.
And this is why I didn't want to put the poster referred to earlier on ignore. I felt it best to see his posts rather than ignore them. Context is everything. Ignoring context while responding to other voices without understanding and/or 'seeing' the other person doesn't contribute towards an understanding and/or community among all participants. Even though I will/would not respond to the poster in question, at least I would know how his thoughts/contributions are adding to the overall conversation/discussion.
Otherwise, in a sense, I am running blind. And I don't see the sense in doing that. Others may.
From my vantage point I saw his behavior as troll like at times, or at least having a desire/impulse to fan the flames. But for me I didn't think it would be helpful to simply put him on ignore.
He left...and that was his decision. I would have no qualms with his returning and adding to the discussions through posting the source materials he has ready access to. I, along with others, enjoyed referencing/reading that material.
