I ask canpakes the moderator a question and I get the answer from one of the moderators sock puppets!!! This is awesome! You can't make this crap up. Again, who did I attack?? The rule says no attacks against family members. Please tell me what I said that was an attack?
I can answer that question.
!!!! !!!! !!!!! !!!
Better?
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
I had a bit of an epiphany re-reading this thread. I think there’s a reason why some people have a pathological need for negative attention-seeking behaviors. Most people instinctively fear failure, humiliation, and defeat. Some people fear it so much they have to cultivate a reality for themselves where they’re the ‘winner’, no matter how absurd it appears from an outside perspective. The question is where does this come from?
Imho, it’s childhood trauma of some sort, usually tied to either a significant singular humiliation event, or a series of persistent ones. And by trauma I don’t mean getting whipped or beaten up. It can just be as benign, to us, as being laughed at by family, or peers, or something most people eventually shrug off. But not the needy sociopath. They hold a deep-seated grudge against their offender(s), and their proxy(ies), for a lifetime. There’s not a lot of growth from when they were in grade school to their adult lives. They have the mental capacity of a child, and under no circumstances can they accept or deal with humiliation, failure, or anything that might chip away at their ego. They seek constant attention to validate their existence and delusions. <- Note the offender’s need to create a fantasy world meant to elevate themselves into an archetype they experienced as a child. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if, for example, our board’s troll had an adult someone in his life who was, in fact, a roofer.
For sociopaths, life is a zero-sum game and no matter the circumstances, they always have to be the winner, even in the face of an irrefutable drubbing like, for example, getting your ass handed to you over and over again on a discussion board. Their ego, their deranged and compulsive self-centeredness can’t handle any other narrative, so they have to convince themselves they aren’t weak-minded, fragile, and insecure. They cultivate a reality where they’re safe from humiliation, shame, embarrassment, and failure. They declare victory in defeat, and that is others who are delusional even when reality is clear.
This is why when, say, a chicken**** posts the way he does and mods or various board members indulge him in his endless circular game of provocation, lies, fantasy, and attacks they unknowingly validate a child’s need for attention because they’re dealing with a regressed and stuck pre-pubescent mind. He literally can’t behave any other way because it’d be psychologically devastating for him to acknowledge he isn’t a winner, that he’s not the butt of the joke, or the cause of his own humiliation. He’d suffer a psychological break, which we’ve actually seen him come close to when he goes on posting streaks blathering away.
The answer to this behavior, of course, are consequences and accountability, but our moderation team fills the role of co-dependent caregiver and cedes authority to an absentee father figure. This obviously emboldens the child who then pushes the boundaries repeatedly in an effort to establish control and dominance. Further exasperating the climate is when the absentee father figure actually shows up, and because he doesn’t really care about his family he makes arbitrary nonsensical judgements like banning a beloved family member for talking about their homeland and posting tasteful art, or he oddly puts the family through on an exhibitionist display of a weird fetish. He subsequently disappears again with some vague edicts the caregivers must unsatisfactorily resolve. Regardless, the family loves the father despite his neglect because he occasionally shows warmth.
The child, however, and without legitimate structure, continues to terrorize the family and will eventually get his way, or move on to another opportunity to terrorize others. In our board troll’s case we’re most likely stuck with his BS until the mods grow a damned set of balls and nut the “F” up, or Dr. Shades wrangles this piece of crap. But, whatevs. It’s y’alls sandbox.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
I can only say from my perspective is that when I took this position on, my deal with Shades included an agreement that I would moderate as he would. That’s not to say I have to ditch my utterly charming personality, but I have to approach moderation the way he does whether or not it is what I would do with my own forum. That’s my promise, if you will, and I take that pretty seriously.
So, growing a set of balls and nutting the screw up, as you put it, simply is not an option under my deal with Shades. With one notable exception that I’ve never understood, Shades makes great effort to give users every chance to exhibit good behavior or turn their behavior around before restricting their ability to speak. He doesn’t view consequences for rule violations as punitive. In fact, wereI of a frame of mind to punish a user for breaking the rules, I’d be automatically disqualified from taking any action under Shades’ system.
I don’t claim any special insight to why people behave here as they do. I just expect them to learn and make an effort to follow the rules. And act accordingly when they don’t.
he/him When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.
Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Further exasperating the climate is when the absentee father figure actually shows up, and because he doesn’t really care about his family he makes arbitrary nonsensical judgements like banning a beloved family member for talking about their homeland and posting tasteful art, or he oddly puts the family through on an exhibitionist display of a weird fetish. He subsequently disappears again with some vague edicts the caregivers must unsatisfactorily resolve. Regardless, the family loves the father ...
I think the absent father has quite a lot on his mind. I must confess, though, that I too was puzzled when Ludwig was banned. That seems to me a strange contrast with the extreme tolerance exercised towards people whose sole purpose, explicitly stated, is to disrupt normal exchanges on this board. But then what seems strange to me does not necessarily seem strange to Shades: I for one would never have tried to create a discussion board like this one - from which many good things have come, and continue to come. So there's that.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
Further exasperating the climate is when the absentee father figure actually shows up, and because he doesn’t really care about his family he makes arbitrary nonsensical judgements like banning a beloved family member for talking about their homeland and posting tasteful art, or he oddly puts the family through on an exhibitionist display of a weird fetish. He subsequently disappears again with some vague edicts the caregivers must unsatisfactorily resolve. Regardless, the family loves the father ...
I think the absent father has quite a lot on his mind. I must confess, though, that I too was puzzled when Ludwig was banned. That seems to me a strange contrast with the extreme tolerance exercised towards people whose sole purpose, explicitly stated, is to disrupt normal exchanges on this board. But then what seems strange to me does not necessarily seem strange to Shades: I for one would never have tried to create a discussion board like this one - from which many good things have come, and continue to come. So there's that.
For sure. Dr. Shades is a visionary for Mormon-related discussions. But an ethos of extreme tolerance just breeds what we’ve seen over the last six months. Obviously vigorous and good faith discussion is a beautiful thing - very few discussion boards exist any more on the Internet that reflects Dr. Shades mostly good and competent ideology. But if this ethos is so rigid that a mod, of all people, can’t or won’t put baby in the corner until baby grows the “F” up, then baby wins the day. Marcus is correct in their assessment that lurkers, competent lurkers, will see what’s posted by the baby and dip out. I think we miss out on a lot of beautiful thinking due to this policy position.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
Binger's back! After what, four weeks? Hmm.. I know the mods can't confirm or deny, but anyone want to make a small wager with me that oceanboy got a brief suspension and has decided to fire up a sock puppet?
I can't exactly figure out what you mean by that but if one is suspended, likewise are one's alts.
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
Last I read, Shades said that each poster could only have ONE screen name and no socks. Someone needs to get back on the horse with that. Just a heads up.
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
Binger's back! After what, four weeks? Hmm.. I know the mods can't confirm or deny, but anyone want to make a small wager with me that oceanboy got a brief suspension and has decided to fire up a sock puppet?
I can't exactly figure out what you mean by that but if one is suspended, likewise are one's alts.
Apparently if an old profile has been deleted and is no longer in use, a user can resurrect an unused alt as their main posting account, which I agree with as long as it’s their only account.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
I can't exactly figure out what you mean by that but if one is suspended, likewise are one's alts.
Apparently if an old profile has been deleted and is no longer in use, a user can resurrect an unused alt as their main posting account, which I agree with as long as it’s their only account.
- Doc
I don’t believe that ‘Binger’ was deleted. It was the sock that Cultellus decided to keep. So it would be expected, going forward, that Binger would use this alt for continued activity.
I ask canpakes the moderator a question and I get the answer from one of the moderators sock puppets!!! This is awesome! You can't make this crap up
