S.a.m.
- Thread starter Michael
- Start date
- Status
Evidently only the accuser knows what "trolling" actually is. I've asked over and over and over and....., no one seems to know for sure what it is. Which, of course, makes it easy to accuse someone of doing it.
Baron Max
She certainly wasn't doing one thing.
To me trolling is when you really do not care about the topic and the discussion, but you like getting reactions. Most of the time I felt like when SAM was provocative she was expecting to use the reactions as support for her point of views. She is a sneaky fighter. She could piss me off. Sometimes it felt evasive, like winning was too prioritized. But trolling....I don't think this happened so much. To some degree we do need to know the attitude of the person to be sure.
Oooh, close...
I don't see you as trolling, though I could have missed where you did somewhere. You can be annoying but that doesn't qualify and who isn't annoying. Oddly I would say in style you are the most similar to SAM.Evidently only the accuser knows what "trolling" actually is. I've asked over and over and over and....., no one seems to know for sure what it is. Which, of course, makes it easy to accuse someone of doing it.
Baron Max
1) you take on a role that often minimizes making assertions - you do make assertions, but you may go for long periods without doing this.
2) you ask a lot of questions and it feels strategic. One gets the sense that you and SAM are not, in a given moment, laying your cards on the table, but rather pulling your opponents out into the center of the board where they can be attacked. Say like a King's Indian Defense that give up the center in chess. You are manouvering your opponents rather than directly engaging them.
Oh. I thought she was a big fat hairy meany liar.
I haven't figured out how to guess her B.M.I.
I mean, hell, she's and interesting discussion partner or opponent. All this 'here's what I believe and why' is fine and good. And then all the 'you said this, but this is incorrect because of this....' is also just peachy. But she's strategic. She's seeing what she can elicit that might be useful ten posts later. She's big on let's see if you put your foot in your own mouth.
There are a lot of her positions I agree with, probably more than the people she bothers as a rule. And then I also disagree with her on some issues.
But she seems to add to me to the range of discussion and the kinds of discussion.
Miraculously I think sciforums would survive her. So I do not think she is indispensible.
Somehow that doesn't seem like the issue.
Evidently only the accuser knows what "trolling" actually is. I've asked over and over and over and....., no one seems to know for sure what it is. Which, of course, makes it easy to accuse someone of doing it.
Please don't tell lies. I have posted the definition of trolling for you at least twice in the past.
Ignoring things after you've been so carefully taught is... trolling.
One of the things I appreciate about her. She makes me think.
Yeah Sci survives. We've lost a few really good posters over the years.
agreed. I miss Oli tremendously :bawl:
Tiassa has decided to take a conversation from the Moderators' forum and repeat it in the public forums. I do not particularly feel like repeating myself here. Nor do I feel it necessary to defend my actions. The events leading up to SAM's ban are on the record for all members to read.
Yes. I take full responsibility.
I disagree. Besides, I have no personal hatred for SAM. In fact, I find it difficult to think of any examples of people I actually hate. I'm not a hating kind of guy.
Yes. I take full responsibility.
I disagree. Besides, I have no personal hatred for SAM. In fact, I find it difficult to think of any examples of people I actually hate. I'm not a hating kind of guy.
"Indispensable"... thats a strawman you built.!!!
PS
Do you thank Plasma sees you as indispensable.???
Really? The way some people here are whining about SAM, you'd think a month away for her is some great loss to the forum. It has been pointed out, by the way, that she has voluntarily taken a similar amount of time off in the past, with no obvious ill effects that I can see.
No. Few people are indispensable.
And I've made it clear that if the moderator/admin group ever loses confidence in me, I will step down from any position of responsibility here.
I never was arguing if she was or was not, I thought you can judge if she is or not based on that story for your self.
James R,
If I was a Admin I would have one account dedicated to administrating, making brief decree but never post anything extensive and certainly not talk to members, because once members know the admin will reply to them they will make an all out assault on authority against me, everything I say will be used against me to claim tyrannical rule. So as such if I was an Admin I would stay in the shadows and never expose my self, of course I would have sock puppets who would mingle with the little members and make general havoc but that because I'm a sick fuck.
Last edited:
“ Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
"Indispensable"... thats a strawman you built.!!! ”
It is a loss to the forum an it ant gonna end wit jus a mounthe... youv'e got perma-ban on the brane as you have alredy demonstrated.!!!
Thats irrelevent... escept to bolster the strawman you'r revertin bak to... lol.!!!
Well i voat "step-down"... an i thank you woud be happier as a regular poster anyway... then you mite have time to add a vegetarian recipie to the thred i started in "Free-Thouts"... ect.!!!
PS
To whome it may concern:::
I am volenteerin for any administrator positons that mite open up in the near future.!!!
I don't think this is a fair assessment. A parking ticket is no great loss for me, at this particular time in my life. But if my car was out of town on that date of my alleged violation, I will probably put up quite a ruckus, especially if I thought something personal was at stake for the meter human - in this case I don't know enough to say that was the issue, but at least one person thinks that is the case. People react to smaller issues because of the principles invovled. Which is a good thing. If we always wait until they are critical issues the job will be that much harder. To say people think she is indispensible was a misrepresentation and makes the objections to her banning or missing of/respect for SAM seem silly and something other.
The only post that strikes me as whining in this thread is this one....
Other than that people either disagree with the administrative action or have said positive things about SAM - those that can be seen as supporting her.
Shall we take your posts as whining about people not seeing her or the ban as you do?
I think James' decision is based on a long trend of behaviors that SAM has demonstrated that are simply against forum rules. I suspect SAM had plenty of warning but simply ignored it. That is neither James' fault or problem.
- Status