Should able2know ban people for having untoward opinions?

I AM GLAD <O>
please take control of key-board

POUR UN FLIRT AVEC TOI <!> XXX

I got it! I really understand now!
Simply provide a thread that, like honey, attracts all those who have absolutly nothing to do with their life and have them battle it out. This leaves the rest of the forum open to someone with an idea!

Damn, I am slow.

I agree. Jespah needs to evict this "Robert Gentel". He's just a sock puppet for the "Craven" account anyway.

Yes, and it's so painfully obvious . . . has he no shame ? ! ? ! ?

Doesn't seem so..

ahaha - too clever, Thomas!


oh, and whilst I'm here, not that it's got anything to do with the price of toothpaste, but I think OccomBill's a "f*cking good guy" too! He speaky vociferously and I think it can add fuel to the fire and maybe does not achieve the results he's looking for, but that's just my opinion (froward or not!) - and as for any other sock puppets - well, if Brooklyn was using different accounts - actually, it makes little difference to my opinion of her as person - coz I f&cking love her to pieces.

OK... gone - being waaaaaaaay too outspoken for my normal nauseating self


One other thing - very, very few peoples "poison" opinions that I've read usually don't sway my opinion of an individual - I make my own mind up of who I believe is reasonable, right, wrong, indifferent... add in whatever word. Then again, there are even fewer people I 'trust trust' so... I attempt to the give the benefit of the doubt until I see otherwise, or I'm pointed in the direction of "their views" or go to those whose judgement I trust. As I said before - there are people here who make me crawl - and they are realllllllly popular with other posters (gag)! And so it goes...

People whose opinions I value usually keep me on the straight and narrow. Done.

I have no intention of concealing my meanings in posts although I am prepared to admit that I occasionally do my readers the honour of assuming they have risen above that level of literacy which is comfortable with the operating instructions on packs of clothespegs. The Trivia threads are where I do it most often as standards on there are quite refined. Indeed, deceptively so.

If you have never laughed at the instructions on items from the shops your sense of humour needs some attention. You are too much where you are rather than where you should be: which is in the meeting where they were composed. I cannot read anything without imagining the scene the writer is in. I feel these days that I have actually been present in Laurence Sterne's library or Gustave Flaubert's study. Proust has addressed me from a bar stool on many a one of those quiet evenings when his day has led him into a particularly laconic frame of mind.

Like Sterne's and Flaubert's basic kit, the desk, with the bottom drawer containing mementos of past and ongoing liasons with extraordinarly devious members of the opposite sex, bless their tender and compassionate hearts, we have, as our basic kit the keyboard and the screen. The inclination can be assumed. It is not a job of work with us as it is for so very much of what we waste our time reading.

One of Stendhal's desks overlooked the waterfront in Civitavechia when he was French consul and being very carefully watched by an early version of the DHS. Dear Marcel was in bed most of the time being pampered like a young Florence Nightingale might well have pampered her favourite doll. Albeit in a more sophisticated manner. Gustave had a stuffed parrot by him.
Simone de Beavoir's praise of Stendal more than counterbalances all the accusations of misogyny he has been subjected to. And she was a sometime Sartre tart.

These men, and others like them, much preferred desire to consummation so in a world dedicated to the opposite (Now you see this one-eyed midget shouting the word "NOW" sort of thing) one might expect them to be on Ignore and getting thumbed down. Whether or not a hypothesis could be erected that that thumbing down has been the basic cause of the financial near-meltdown I don't know but it would be a pretty theme for a PhD thesis I should think.

PS--I've been wondering about Bob in this way after reading his amusing contributions recently.

This page opened with one hallucinating psychotic addressing another - though fortunately both are known to be in psychiatric treatment - and comes to a close with your literary masterpiece. Said masterpiece in no way addresses whether A2K should ban posters, however, and this is the topic here:)

She's on one of her tears!

I'm sorry someone thumbed down your post, Pepijn, and wish you great success in this latest effort - you 2 will be very happy together

It was intended to add weight to the side that resists banning posters and deploying simple Neronic gestures to undermine them. I don't know what strength an argument needs to be to satisfy you HS but linking the financial near-meltdown to the thumbing down of a certain attitude to life must be getting close to convincing.

Those writers I mentioned, and many more, have been stolen from our youth by a PC brigade using Ignore and thumbing down skills and are only being kept alive by a few fanatics.

This, like so many other questions, really resolve down to the demarkation between the individual, i.e. unit of social structure, and a social structure. Individual human rights, and human rights common to all.
How does one effect a social structure without violating the individual, or in other terms, how does one add a unit in order to make a collective of units without violating the unit of discourse.

My whole project on language is based upon that one single idea. It resolves to the convention of names itself, to words, the foundation of logic, which has never been formulize and thus taught. It was forgotten in history.

So, I can only say, until one is willing to learn the principles of reason, it is simply a joke to pretend to be able to reason to begin with.

I thumbed down a car once.....it was red.

You, sir, should be banned for an untoward opinion on where to get your coffee.

can we hope that you move to do the same?

so, you have tea on ignore?

here's where I keep getting stuck

do you not see that reasonable and civility have very personal meanings?

you have over the years put forward requests for some variation of "reasonable level of civility" as if there were a universal agreement on what that means, and I really don't believe there is

as I posted earlier, using my definition of reasonable level of civility would likely have cjhsa as a regular ongoing poster and O'Bill gone as a poster. Also, people identified as having used sock puppets to vote would be gone as site members as I believe they've gone beyond the pale in terms of civility toward other site members and site administration. There are some posters I'd lock out at particular times of the day as they seem unreasonable - to me - after certain times.

I suspect nearly every poster on the site has different boundaries - partly because we define "reasonable level of civility" differently. We all also have different tolerance levels.

That's what I see ignore/voting for. Ignore is to maintain my own boundaries - voting is to "help" the board benefit from my perspective.

As he's posted many times, Set doesn't use the ignore feature.

I do.

One of the reasons for the problem with words is that they have an infinite capacity of expression. That is the only one of our faculties which is not finite. No matter how fast athletes learn to run, (fancy having to learn to run), there is a limit. Words expressing ideas is a limitless universe. Especially when the ideas are secondary to other ideas and then to others and so on until finally becoming grounded in some revelation of a truth either scriptural, scientific or a news item such as that the oil spill was caused by the stupid Brits and you should all be getting $50 grand each in compensation.



That's just a fancy way of saying what we all know about those who butt in to conversations in the pub. The difference being that A2K invites butters-in and the pub conversation doesn't. That's why OB's comparison to a bar breaks down. It was superficial. The NCSE doesn't invite butters-in.

I remember a butter-in once in a pub. We were discussing the form for the next big race, I can't remember which one, it's a long time ago, and this lady butted in, a stranger but very well organised physiognomically, to ask us to let her through to the interface between respectable alcoholics and the Chancellor of the Exchequer: the bar. One of our number engaged her in repartee and when her friend came to see what she was doing "all this time" (5 minutes at most) she also was absorbed into the group and completely altered its nature. We lost two members that night. They gradually fell away. Now they are domesticated in nice suburban estates with these two ladies and have five children between them one of whom is said to show promise at playing the violin. Which shows how creative butting-in is. They were trolling really. And I won't describe the inflammatory nature of the upshot. Those of us who don't grow hair on their faces are not called "trollopes" for nothing. Harriet Harman called the Financial Secretary to the Treasury a "ginger rodent" the other day. You don't rise as far as Harriet without being a good butter-in. His response was tasty.

You will probably enjoy George Steiner's Real Presences, phil, if you're on a language project.

To the question at hand, NO. I believe society sorts out who's out of line and who's not and what to do about them. I heartily dislike rules and regs in the first and last place.