@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:
Doesn't matter if it's 'cool' or not 'cool'.
It's their right to post, and the right of other board members to respond/ignore/thumb up/thumb down.
I'm well aware of the status quo, Beth, but it is not "their right to post", rather it is their privilege. This privilege is granted by Robert, at his discretion alone. He claims that he will not use his gut instinct, because it wouldn't scale well, but this is simply not true or it would be impossible to reconcile his claims with his actions/inactions.
How could one reconcile these two posts, for instance?
Robert Gentel wrote:Seriously supporting rape, crime or violence on able2know is something that I will not host and that is not up for discussion. If someone comes here and advocates rape the content will be removed and they will be banned. We are talking about opinions that can be construed that way with a bit of hyperbole.
Robert Gentel wrote:
Oh I don't think he's in favor of rape either (I do think he's a misogynist though). His problem is that he'll occasionally make a statement that is inordinately inclusive of what he says shouldn't be called rape. Like when he says something like how spousal rape should never be considered rape. That is inclusive of as brutal a rape as is possible but he also doesn't like backing down from anything he says, so he'd rather stick with a pro-rape rap and wear the mantle of unpopularity like vindication than moderate his extremes and retract a brainfart.
Clearly, he recognizes Shorteyes' deliberate advocacy of rape, but chooses to cater to him anyway, based on his gut instinct alone.
~~~~
ehBeth wrote:What I would like to see, if it came to banning, was anyone who could be determined to be running sock puppets (other than Penny's current handler). Straight out permanent banning - with the user name blocked in perpetuity.
I think it's more disrespectful to the board and administrators to misuse resources here than to post idiocies - because we all have quite different views of where the idiocy line is drawn.
You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, Beth. Though I do not agree that offense trumps misogynistic trolling for sport; I’d prefer there be no sock puppets too, which is why I hit the report button when I saw evidence of them. I can’t say I was thrilled to read the most popular posts I’ve ever made were the result of puppets, as it didn’t suck to think my views were being that well received for a change. <Shrugs>
If Robert is correct about the responsible party being Brooklyn, then I think your rule would result in the site losing a very valuable, respected and much loved member, who apparently had had enough of the demented trolls and took it upon herself to change the status quo. I don’t know; you’d have to ask her.
It would affect me not at all, as I’ve never had a second account, and Brooklyn and I haven’t relied on A2K as a contact point since the interruption of PMs (so if that’s your intended path, it’s a dead end)
The good news is; your rule would most certainly disappear RM and his idiocy forever, because compared to that illiterate fool, the possum is a master of disguise. Community-wide, your proposed rule could prove to be a net benefit, because Brooklyn’s never had the time to post enough to counter the negative value of RM’s incessant display of demented idiocy.
