Baron Max banned again?

[mordea]

Click on his name and review his recent posts. In particular, note how many times he repeated points that had previously been debunked. Note also that I personally warned him not to troll in at least 3 separate threads.

Can you please post some examples, and explain how each constitutes trolling? Lately quite a few members have been banned for trolling, so I think it's only fitting that we know exactly what constitutes this offence, in order to avoid committing it.

In my time zone, Baron's last post prior to being banned was at 5:12 am. My first post of the day was at 9:34 am. There was no debate immediately prior to the ban.

OK, fair enough, I am wrong on that issue. I must have been reading threads which were a little old. Nevertheless, you have had a number of arguments with Baron in the past few months where you saw fit to belittle him.

S.A.M. was given a full 24 hours to apologise for libel. She was not banned immediately after debating an issue with me, either.

Why would S.A.M 'libel' you unprovoked? The very fact that she did so suggests that there was some form of altercation between you two.

And just out of curiousity, how many posters have been banned for supposedly misrepresenting the views of others in the past?

For a new member, mordea, you seem very concerned to inject yourself into arguments with moderators here all of a sudden...

What does my status as a member have to do with your moderation? Surely you can answer a few simple questions without getting personal?

 

[S.A.M.]

Hells bells, Bells

When did ignorance become a point of view???

Anyway, no hard feelings here, even if you do seem certifiably insane.

I've decided to approach the whole thing as though I am communicating with schizophrenics. No idea what they'll read into what you write.

 

[pjdude1219]

You..

You mean...

You mean there's no favouritism?

AMG!






I wonder, how long until Tiassa enters and screams out about how this ban is unfair and biased as he did previously with another member? I wonder if he is going to fight as valiantly for Baron as he did for another member?

He has remained quite silent thus far in this thread..

shitty standards enforced fairly are still shitty standards

 

[pjdude1219]

More like vegemite.

Who doesn't like peanut butter?

people allergetic to it.

 

[Bells]

Hells bells, Bells

When did ignorance become a point of view???

When humans first started to think.

Anyway, no hard feelings here, even if you do seem certifiably insane.

I resemble that comment!

I've decided to approach the whole thing as though I am communicating with schizophrenics. No idea what they'll read into what you write.

That's how you like your pumpkin cooked? Freak!

 

[Tiassa]

He ain't heavy, he's my Baron

Quite the contrary. I, as your former associate, asked that you not be so biased.

Yes, and as I recall, the advice was to just look at the situation objectively. Not much for an argument, I must admit.

And your opportunity is here and now.

So make a case and give me something to work with. I mean, you're genuinely complaining, right? And not just trolling?

One of the very people who questioned her ban is questioning his in a very similar manner. So where is your well worded defense?

Perhaps it is in search of an issue?

Surprising really, considering how such things are recorded.

Yes, people always write stellar, exacting notes about offenses and action, right?

In this case, the note offers nothing of substance. I don't even know where to start.

You have the inside track.

Which leads nowhere.

But I guess it's easier for you to be a lazy troll than to actually present something of a real case. Jesus, Bells, now you're not just asking me to see what you see, you're asking me to do your work and thinking for you.

That's pathetic.

I am not disagreeing with his ban. Just as I didn't disagree with the other ban. You're the one who annointed yourself the defender of the right and demanding fairness and no bias, because apparently he was biased in banning her. Tell me Tiassa, was he biased in banning him, in your opinion? Are you biased in not defending him?

Oh wait, that's right.. This time it's Baron who has been banned..

That's not a very intellectual or rational approach, Bells. Certainly the last thing you should have to do is establish the legitimacy of your complaint.

The Ban List note on Max's fourteen day suspension is for "repeated trolling". To the one, that's nothing new for his behavor; to the other, maybe, as you suggested, S.A.M. is the catalyst; to a third, perhaps you're just being tawdry. Take it up with James. The fact that something wrong happens in front of me does not make me Superman with those cute boots and that nifty cape and those sexy red trunks and the super-sight and hearing to figure out where a crime has occurred in Metropolis.

Be useful, Bells. Nobody came out and declared their reading comprehension difficulties or bruised egos this time. You would pretend the situations are similar, I would only ask that you establish that.

Is it overwhelming
To use a crane to crush a fly?
It's a good time for Superman
To lift the sun into the sky.

Because it's getting heavy.
Well, I thought it was already as heavy as can be.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .—Flaming Lips​

 

[S.A.M.]

When humans first started to think.


I resemble that comment!


That's how you like your pumpkin cooked? Freak!

Or something like that!

 

[pjdude1219]

considering how well the last attempt at a pissing contest for fairness and decent standards went should we try and avoid it?

 

[S.A.M.]

Well pjdude, since the world is biased and unfair as a rule, I'm sure the Baron, realist that he is, knows just where he stands in it, exactly as I do.

Being "normal" under the circumstances probably qualifies as a mental illness.

 

[Bells]

Yes, and as I recall, the advice was to just look at the situation objectively. Not much for an argument, I must admit.



So make a case and give me something to work with. I mean, you're genuinely complaining, right? And not just trolling?



Perhaps it is in search of an issue?



Yes, people always write stellar, exacting notes about offenses and action, right?

In this case, the note offers nothing of substance. I don't even know where to start.



Which leads nowhere.

But I guess it's easier for you to be a lazy troll than to actually present something of a real case. Jesus, Bells, now you're not just asking me to see what you see, you're asking me to do your work and thinking for you.

That's pathetic.



That's not a very intellectual or rational approach, Bells. Certainly the last thing you should have to do is establish the legitimacy of your complaint.

The Ban List note on Max's fourteen day suspension is for "repeated trolling". To the one, that's nothing new for his behavor; to the other, maybe, as you suggested, S.A.M. is the catalyst; to a third, perhaps you're just being tawdry. Take it up with James. The fact that something wrong happens in front of me does not make me Superman with those cute boots and that nifty cape and those sexy red trunks and the super-sight and hearing to figure out where a crime has occurred in Metropolis.

Be useful, Bells. Nobody came out and declared their reading comprehension difficulties or bruised egos this time. You would pretend the situations are similar, I would only ask that you establish that.

Is it overwhelming
To use a crane to crush a fly?
It's a good time for Superman
To lift the sun into the sky.

Because it's getting heavy.
Well, I thought it was already as heavy as can be.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .—Flaming Lips​

And people wondered why I resigned...

As I said previously, I am not disagreeing with his ban. Nor am I complaining about it. What I am questioning is your utter silence on the matter.

But again, it's Baron, so your silence is expected.

 

[S.A.M.]

Actually if I were tiassa, I would just shut the fuck up.

What would be the point of presenting reasoned, supported arguments to people who can't read? Or won't?

 

[Tiassa]

Is there a specific reason to make noise?

As I said previously, I am not disagreeing with his ban. Nor am I complaining about it. What I am questioning is your utter silence on the matter.

On what basis?

But again, it's Baron, so your silence is expected.

Bells, I know that in your life, evidence hasn't really been all that important to the outcomes you've participated in, but I would ask that for once you please give it proper due.

Are you suggesting that I should protest every temporary suspension as a blanket policy?

Or is there something about this one that should compel my involvement?

 

[pjdude1219]

actually given baron's past 2 days of posts(just looked them up) I can't really see anything I would label as repeated trolling. Some of the stuff could be wellspringed into a decent Idea. I mean he was being a potentially annoying asshat with differing views but I would hardly label it as trolling. I mean if one were interested in making such a point one could possiblely say this was used as an attempt to show balance with SAM's banning as a bone thrown toward those whop felt SAM's banning was a result of something other than fair enforcement of the rules(I doubt it though).

 

[Bells]

Bells, I know that in your life, evidence hasn't really been all that important to the outcomes you've participated in, but I would ask that for once you please give it proper due.

Are you suggesting that I should protest every temporary suspension as a blanket policy?

Or is there something about this one that should compel my involvement?

I am merely questioning your silence on the actual issue.

I am merely questioning your bias.

I thought that was blatantly obvious. As I pointed out in the other thread, if it had been Baron who had been banned, you would not have said a single word in protest. And here we are.

Reality.

 

[mordea]

The Ban List note on Max's fourteen day suspension is for "repeated trolling". To the one, that's nothing new for his behavor;

Ahh. Then perhaps you could cite some recent concrete examples of Baron trolling, along with an explaination as to why each example constitutes trolling?

 

[S.A.M.]

Trolling, like ignorance, is a point of view

 

[mordea]

Trolling, like ignorance, is a point of view

It often is, simply because it's hard to judge intent over the internet.

 

[S.A.M.]

And what does intent mean in a discussion forum? One that is open to anyone from precocious 10 year olds to perverted old veterans who like to talk about the colour of genitals?

 

[James R]

Here are a few examples of Baron Max's trolling over the past week or so for those who are concerned. Feel free to read the original threads in full and count the LOLs, the twisting and misrepresentation of people's words, the false attribution of views to people who do not express those views, and the repetition of points previously debunked. Most importantly, gauge how many of these posts aim at getting an angry reaction from the recipient.

As I understand how it all actually works in the USA, of course, only blacks can make accusations of "racism". If whites say it's "racism", people will just laugh and ignore them. Yep, if blacks think it's "racism" then it's "racism" .....but only then! And no where in your post did it say that any blacks had commented yet.

See? So we'll have to wait for a black man, or Rev Sharpton, to make the accusation. Until then, everything is fine. [post=2465496]Link[/post]

In [thread=98899]this thread[/thread], Max did little other than troll. Look at all the instances where he tried to put words in other people's mouths, for a start.

#41 Are you, James, wanting all countries of the world to conform? Do you want to eliminate all diversity from world governments? ...all rules and laws to be exactly the same?

#42 I wonder, ....does all that mean that, to the people of Sciforums, the freedom and rights of ONE homosexual is more valuable than the freedoms and rights of tens of thousands of starving African children? Seems so, doen't it?

#58 [not directed at me] Great! Are you suggesting that the homosexuals of Uganda follow that advice? I, for one, think it migth be in the best interest of their health ...if not their lives. Good suggestion ....can you pass that on to the gays in Uganda?

#59 [not directed at me] Or is that what you want? To be able to tell everyone and every nation on Earth what to do and how to do it?

#66 James, I thought you liked and supported diversity in human cultures and societies. Yet here you're obviously wanting everyone to think, act, feel and say exactly what you think, act, feel and say.

#81 [not directed at me] Uganda's new law? I think they can pass any law that they want to pass and there ain't jack-shit that any of us can do about it. So now, ...all this thread amounts to is a bitch n' moan session.

Okay, ....let's bitch n' moan about it.

#87 [repeat of #41] You make claims of advocating diversity, yet you're here arguing that everyone should act, think, talk, believe exactly the same. That ain't diversity, James!

#89 [repeat of #41] But aren't you sort of doing that with the Uganda government by making this very thread topic? You want them to act and think like you, and pass laws that you like.

#93 [not directed at me] Gays can still be gay, but they can't act on their urges or feelings. Being gay is not illegal or punishable - ACTING gay is! But think of it this way, lots of people can't act on their urges or feelings either, so what's the big deal? When people have to shit really bad, they still know that they can't shit on the sidewalk, right? So they hold it, or they go to jail. If gays can't hold back their abnormal, perverted (according to the Ugandans) urges, then they go to jail. ....

Until then, if the Ugandans want to criminalize homosexual acts, then I see it as they're right to do so as a sovereign nation. Or do you suggest that western nations begin to interfere with any and all other nations, and force them to do things our way?

#107 [yet another repeat of #41] Until everyone and every nation on the planet thinks alike, acts alike, talks alike, enjoys all the same things, dresses alike, have the same style homes, ......, etc. And all of the people exactly like James R.?

The wonders of modern-day "diversity" at work, James? Everyone exactly the same? Is that really what you want?

#111 Do you hate all defense attorneys who fight for defendents' rights?

#137 Or, James, is it your position that one single, very small group, should be permitted to cause such trouble for a whole, large society of people?

Is it your position, James, that a few rules/laws by the UN should be permitted to force large, unified, cohesive societies to accept irritating, disgusting, offensive people into their midst?

And you expect all of this to be done without violence or hatred?

Note the emoticon on this one, too.

#144 Or do you want to be selective about it all? When it's to your advntage, you want human emotions. But when emotions cause you problems, you want to rid the issue of emotions so you can invoke logic and rational reasoning?

That's enough for that thread.

Max decided to carry over his bullshit from that thread to a few other threads. For example:

So what's all that mean, James? That morality is ...following along with whatever others do? That there's no "right or wrong", just copy-cat actions? "If Joe Bumfuck does it, then, by god, I'm gonna' do it, too!"

And, James, with you lashing out emotionally at everyone, can you now see why and how the Ugandans feel about the gays? [post=2465509]Link[/post]

Then there's this thread:

Well, yeah, that's exactly what seems to be going on here in this thread. Anyone can argue in any direction taht they choose because of a few words on a silly bumper sticker! So, Doreen, if they can interprete the bumper sticker however they wish, then I can also interpret it and what they say, right? Right? Huh? [post=2465994]Link[/post]

And many more like this scattered throughout the same thread.

And another one [not directed at me]:

So what are you saying? That all the data on climate is accurate and can be trusted to base entire theories on without worry or concern?

Answer this question: Is all of the data on climate change accurate? Yes or no? [post=2466108]Link[/post]

Look! Here's one directed at S.A.M.:

Yeah, but while only a few people in India are living high on the hog, millions of people are starving and poverty-stricken in the slums all over India. And you can actually say "....with our vast labor resources...."? Don't you mean almost slave labor, SAM? [post=2466116]Link[/post]

---

These posts are just the tip of the iceberg, and these are just from the last few days.

Has anybody noticed a pattern in the above quotes? No? I'll tell you. There's a pattern Max has of phrasing his trolling posts as questions. Those questions are usually framed so as to give the impression that other posters hold ridiculous views. Those questions are framed in such a way as to build straw men of the views that other posters actually hold. In so doing, Max attempts to dismiss and divert legitimate discussions into silly, repetitious nonsense. He's not even particularly clever about it. You can almost hear him chuckling to himself as he composes his next post aimed at provoking an angry reaction from one poster or another, anticipating the reaction he will get.

---

Now, I'd like mordea to tell me that the above does NOT constitute trolling, in his opinion. I expect that's what will happen.

 

[S.A.M.]

You can almost hear him chuckling to himself as he composes his next post aimed at provoking an angry reaction from one poster or another, anticipating the reaction he will get.

Did it work? Because it didn't, with me. I understood what he said. It was the exact same thing he said to madant here:

Originally Posted by madanth: "Anyway, the average American generally doesn't give a shit about politics."



No, no! With farm machinery and the cook's stew, it makes a major difference in the final outcome. However, in American politics, giving a shit makes almost never makes a difference!

Look ....is it so difficult to see what's occured just recently in politics? The American voters elected Obama because of his promises to change American politics. What has he done? Well, golly, it's the same damned thing that's been done for the past umpty-eleven centuries in American politics!! Virtually nothing has "changed", has it? Oh, yeah, point out some minor little tiny things as examples, but ...has anything actually changed?

Farmers and cooks care about things because it makes a difference. American voters don't give a shit about poltics because nothing ever changes. We could vote Genghis Khan as president, with Joseph Stalin as vice-president, and nothing would change. Why should Americans care?

Baron Max