Is There A Requirement For Stupid Responses To Idiot Posters?

[Kathianne]

If not, why is Gnostic ijit so prevalent here? See nothing of substance. I'd ban him, but I doubt that's what the powers that be want, so I refrain.

[Abbey Marie]

Lol, I just posted that I will no longer respond to his posts, then saw this. :thumb:

[Little-Acorn]

I responded twice, which was how long it took to establish that he wasn't serious, and haven't bothered with him further.

[SassyLady]

Well, I guess I'm the wisest of all ... I don't even know who this is...... :slap:

[NightTrain]

Well, I guess I'm the wisest of all ... I don't even know who this is...... :slap:

Lucky girl.

[Jeff]

Hit the Ban button :laugh:

[fj1200]

http://www.trainingforwarriors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/28-fingers-in-ears.jpg

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I haven't been here very much the last couple months but even I got around to putting that troll on ignore last night.
And there it stays....-Tyr

[jimnyc]

Y'all likely would know my response already, which is that I don't want to set a precedent of banning people just because we don't like the message/viewpoint they throw out there. Should someone become a perpetual troll and not offer debate/discussion, then we can entertain what to do at that point. But however abhorrent many find the post referred to, myself included, it's not against the rules.

We have a serious lack of opposing viewpoints here. Many times in the past few years I have seen many call for the heads of a new member that had wildly opposing views. Quite a few good members over the years have started off controversially. We need to give things time - or some are more than welcome to do what they have done already, which is utilizing the ignore feature. Sometimes an off the wall post is meant to provoke discussion, and perhaps it's trolling. Only time will tell. But I don't want to make a decision based on an unpopular thread and someone who has been here less than a week.

[red state]

To make it easier on Jim and BETTER on our screens......simply ban lil' pukes from your personal screen and if/when the other respectable/liked members do that, these lil' pukes can simply go away cuz we'll not see what crap they spew.

The quote thing still allows them to sneak by (which is why I would prefer that some programming fix that or those responding to the trolls simply NOT quote them when responding). The programming may not be all that simple for Jim but our NOT quoting lil' pukes or NOT responding to them at all would most definitely FIX the problem we have with lil' pukes.

I think it would be better to avoid responding to them because, for one, they are not worth it and, two, they make us appear as hateful and childish as they are if/when we get a bit irritated and lash back. Don't stoop to their level so avoid or BAN them from your screen till Jim gets proper reason to give them the permanent boot to the @$$ that they are looking for. I just saw an old tag from ConHog and saw where Tye got upset and lost focus which eventually brought him to the level of ConHog. I don't care for Jafart either because there is no talking to that guy. He is set in his ways and refuses to see the TRUTH and avoids legitimate debate over facts presented to him. Look, if some of ya'll like arguing with a post for the sake of arguing.....so be it but I refuse to waste my time on them. I thought this was a very timely and profitable thread and I thank the author for bringing it up.

There are a few here that I TOTALLY disagree with but they do, at least, conduct themselves in an adult manner. I hate to see more rules used BUT that may be the ticket in straightening some of these problems. I also came across an old thread here at DP and it had many Fbombs that another member (whom I like a great deal) complained. I realize that vulgarity, slang and even Fbombs are allowed but the poster in question repeatedly and redundantly used this offensive language and that is due to a lack of intelligence and it makes DP come off as trashy or less than intelligent. I'm not saying that we need to tighten down on what I feel is FREEDOM but with freedom, there should also come respect for others. The members that this particular thread deals with have no respect for others and is hell bent on trolling for the sake of satisfying whatever sick conclusion they are searching for. I find these types far more offensive than Fbombs and your average, run-of-the-mill liberal who is both blind, deaf and STUPID......I only wish they were dumb (or mute).

This is a good site but the members who bring up TROLLISH threads just to get a rise out of some of us bring the site down and probably causes potential members to click to the next site where more intelligent threads and more mature discussion is obvious. I personally know of a few members who post elsewhere and rarely (if EVER) use this site to express themselves because of some of the problems here. That truly is sad because these are very thoughtful and well versed members here who contribute ONLY to other sites.

[red state]

Well, I guess I'm the wisest of all ... I don't even know who this is...... :slap:


HA!!!! Good for you, Sassy! I agree.....Agnostic-WHO?! That's the ticket!!!

[jimnyc]

The quote thing still allows them to sneak by (which is why I would prefer that some programming fix that or those responding to the trolls simply NOT quote them when responding). The programming may not be all that simple for Jim but our NOT quoting lil' pukes or NOT responding to them at all would most definitely FIX the problem we have with lil' pukes.

I've been looking for that fix from vBulletin for ages. Apparently coding it would be more difficult than it sounds. And even then, people can just copy/paste someone's reply and that too would get past the filters. But at least the feature does hide 90% of said persons postings.

And what I wrote above doesn't mean I disagree with others. My post wasn't about individuals or their actions, but rather about the board itself and how and when we should ban, and follow our own rules, and continue to balance "freedom of speech" for all while also keeping the forum respectable. We can rule the place to no end, and be left with 6 members. Or we can be much too lax, and see chaos reign like my old board. I know the balancing act isn't perfect, and there will always be some issues, but I think its better than alternatives.

[red state]

I've been looking for that fix from vBulletin for ages. Apparently coding it would be more difficult than it sounds. And even then, people can just copy/paste someone's reply and that too would get past the filters. But at least the feature does hide 90% of said persons postings.

And what I wrote above doesn't mean I disagree with others. My post wasn't about individuals or their actions, but rather about the board itself and how and when we should ban, and follow our own rules, and continue to balance "freedom of speech" for all while also keeping the forum respectable. We can rule the place to no end, and be left with 6 members. Or we can be much too lax, and see chaos reign like my old board. I know the balancing act isn't perfect, and there will always be some issues, but I think its better than alternatives.


Jim, it is MUCH better than other sites and you are correct that we could do as the main site that the 10+ active members Tyr, AT and I came from to where it is a stagnant pool of boredom and TOTAL CONTROL. That is not what I want so I will simply do what I can to fix the problem on my side fo the wire and let others (including you) do the same. In time, we'll fix it cuz (as you said.....and I've seen this before) the supporters of such trollish members will simply copy/paste to get around whatever programming you could come up with. Thanks for you post....and update pertaining to the technicalities and programming. Don't worry yourself one bit.....it'll come out just fine. I would like to know if you plan to work on file settings and such. I was going to send your brother some photos of a resent trip to Chattanooga but was unable to do so within the PM. I believe PM's should be equipped with almost unlimited options. So get busy! HA!!!

[jimnyc]

Posting from phone on road... when I get home I may be able to make it so attachments can be made in pm. Remind me if I forget!

[red state]

GREAT!!! I have tried to send music and all kinds of other stuff to friends but never complained.....just rerouted our PM from the site. The only problem with that is some being a bit uncomfortable in giving out their private email. I thought I was doing something wrong and was too embarrassed to bother you again on what I was having difficulty with but it is good to know that the only stupid questions are still the unasked ones. THANKS!

:thumb:

[fj1200]

The quote thing still allows them to sneak by (which is why I would prefer that some programming fix that...


I've been looking for that fix from vBulletin for ages.

Jim, it is now officially your fault that some people are exposed to some fact, logic, and reason and their little brains have to suffer the throes of independent thought.

[Jeff]

Y'all likely would know my response already, which is that I don't want to set a precedent of banning people just because we don't like the message/viewpoint they throw out there. Should someone become a perpetual troll and not offer debate/discussion, then we can entertain what to do at that point. But however abhorrent many find the post referred to, myself included, it's not against the rules.

We have a serious lack of opposing viewpoints here. Many times in the past few years I have seen many call for the heads of a new member that had wildly opposing views. Quite a few good members over the years have started off controversially. We need to give things time - or some are more than welcome to do what they have done already, which is utilizing the ignore feature. Sometimes an off the wall post is meant to provoke discussion, and perhaps it's trolling. Only time will tell. But I don't want to make a decision based on an unpopular thread and someone who has been here less than a week.



Fair enough, then lets Ban Jim :laugh:

Just hit the Button :laugh:

[red state]

We can't ban Jim.....every crew needs a fall guy. Besides, who else can attract as many nuts as Jim has been able to do.

Thanks a lot....JIM! :pokenest:

[Drummond]

I just took a look at the list of post comments this Gnostic character has treated us to.

Maybe some of the impact or relevance is lost without considering contexts .. but all I've read not only comes across as trolling, but quite low grade trolling at that.

I don't think s/he's even WORTH putting on 'ignore', to be honest. Simple, actual ignoring more than suffices ...

--- To Gnostic. Suggest you get involved in some worthwhile debate here, instead of what I've seen so far. Go for it.

[red state]

No, Sir Drummond......not "go for it"......just......simply (GO). Just responding to you as an aid to help catch you up.

So, where ya been? I wasn't aware that you had been 'un-involved'. But now that you're back, you can definitely see where things stand. I actually thought you had commented since this "character" had been trolling. I did see your post with AT about another newbie here. Now that is a poster worth responding to; a bit of a mystery in ways but well worth some respect (unlike our mutual friend agnostic). HA!!!

[Jeff]

We can't ban Jim.....every crew needs a fall guy. Besides, who else can attract as many nuts as Jim has been able to do.

Thanks a lot....JIM! :pokenest:



OK then Jeff for President ( or leader of the board ) than we can ban everyone :laugh:

Who is in favor of over throwing our current leaders !!!

A vote for me is well stupid :laugh:

[tailfins]

A one word response to the original question: Yes.