Why is evince banned from so many threads

[Commander Dutch]

Will JPP leftists canonize Desh (like they did RBG) now that she's apparently dead?

I don't know what anyone will do. OTOH, the fact you dragged up a two year old thread means you are lonely and tired of playing with yourself.

 

[Legion]

I don't know what anyone will do. OTOH, the fact you dragged up a two year old thread means you are lonely and tired of playing with yourself.

Really? Does that theory apply across the board, or only to me?

 

[archives]

Your opinion has been accorded all the consideration it merits.

What's your opinion of people who announce that they're "putting you on ignore"? Are they "afraid of being invalidated"?

Yes, not being able to exchange shows a lack of confidence in what you are saying

 

[Legion]

Yes, not being able to exchange shows a lack of confidence in what you are saying

Is that right?

It's one thing to thread ban habitual trolls.

I ban people.

I often have a thread ban list when I start a thread.

I don't allow racists, or haters in.

Does not seem cowardly to me. Like other mature adults who respect social etiquette, it just makes sense to exclude known racists, belligerent bigots, girlish gossipers, and libelers from civilized conversation.

I thread banned his ass so he couldn't shit the place up with his stinking shit.

It is every poster's option to ban as many others as he/she decides. It is an exaggeration to say that anyone here is 'banning everyone.'

Banning all the idiots is the best first line of defense.

I've never put anybody on ' Ignore ' but my reserve thread ban serves useful purposes. Once you've been a member for some considerable time here you can anticipate the reaction of the forum trolls to any given topic. Sometimes you might want to investigate a topic with other reasonable members and so you post your ban to eliminate the dross from your thread

There are a handful of posters here who are such good-for-nothing trolls they don't deserve to be allowed to post in my threads. Or anyone else's either. Ergo, I ban only them from every thread I start.

I only ban obvious trolls and posters who blatantly engage in overt racism, misogyny, bigotry, libel, and slander. Those are not forms of "free speech" and they are not even remotely close to conventional political speech. The only reason anyone could make it onto my thread ban list is if they are either a troll, or they are a terrible human being.

The trolls often derail the thread. I think banning trolls is fine.

If you're trying to have a serious discussion, whether it's off-topic or about politics, there are some who just cannot act like adults and should be excluded.

Then I’m a coward and proud of it. I will ignore them and ban them.

I must have missed your posts lecturing your fellow leftists about proclaiming that they put people on ignore.

Link up.

I'll understand if you can't, of course.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Really? Does that theory apply across the board, or only to me?

In your case, it's probably 100% accurate. For others, it depends. It's easy to fix; just explain why you decided to drag out a 2 year old thread. People can decide for themselves if it's reasonable or not.

Of course, you can just refuse to answer, which is an answer all by itself. All I'm requesting is a better theory.

 

[Legion]

In your case, it's probably 100% accurate. For others, it depends.

What does it depend on? Whether you agree with the person's politics or not?

 

[Commander Dutch]

Is that right?

I must have missed your posts lecturing your fellow leftists about proclaiming that they put people on ignore.

Link up.

I'll understand if you can't, of course.

Lemme guess, you're lonely and tired of being threadbanned.

I actually agree with you that it's lame. The difference between us is that you are a massive user of thread bans and I've never threadbanned anyone because I don't support it. I could even see a tit-for-tat use of threadbans against fueders, but since I've never banned anyone, much less you, that doesn't explain your reasoning for massive thread bans.

People have to decide for themselves what they choose to do and why. Isn't that fair?

 

[Legion]

Lemme guess, you're tired of being threadbanned.

I'm not the one complaining about threadbans. Am I?

 

[Legion]

I actually agree with you that it's lame.

My exchange with Anchovies was about people proclaiming that they are putting someone on ignore, not threadbanning.

 

[Commander Dutch]

What does it depend on? Whether you agree with the person's politics or not?

You seem to fear confrontation about your own "babies", your threads. The fact you refused to engage in honest, adult conversation, and this isn't the first time for you, proves you are a disingenuous and deceitful person.

Like I said, in your case it's probably 100% accurate. The parts you refuse to answer proves what I said and are bolded below. As always, people should decide for themselves.

In your case, it's probably 100% accurate. For others, it depends. It's easy to fix; just explain why you decided to drag out a 2 year old thread. People can decide for themselves if it's reasonable or not.

Of course, you can just refuse to answer, which is an answer all by itself. All I'm requesting is a better theory.

 

[Legion]

You seem to fear confrontation about your own "babies", your threads.

So you say. If that were true, wouldn't I ban the habitual trolls from every thread I start?

Do these people "seem to fear confrontation" about their own babies, their threads?

I ban people.

I often have a thread ban list when I start a thread.

I don't allow racists, or haters in.

Does not seem cowardly to me. Like other mature adults who respect social etiquette, it just makes sense to exclude known racists, belligerent bigots, girlish gossipers, and libelers from civilized conversation.

I thread banned his ass so he couldn't shit the place up with his stinking shit.

It is every poster's option to ban as many others as he/she decides. It is an exaggeration to say that anyone here is 'banning everyone.'

Banning all the idiots is the best first line of defense.

I've never put anybody on ' Ignore ' but my reserve thread ban serves useful purposes. Once you've been a member for some considerable time here you can anticipate the reaction of the forum trolls to any given topic. Sometimes you might want to investigate a topic with other reasonable members and so you post your ban to eliminate the dross from your thread

There are a handful of posters here who are such good-for-nothing trolls they don't deserve to be allowed to post in my threads. Or anyone else's either. Ergo, I ban only them from every thread I start.

I only ban obvious trolls and posters who blatantly engage in overt racism, misogyny, bigotry, libel, and slander. Those are not forms of "free speech" and they are not even remotely close to conventional political speech. The only reason anyone could make it onto my thread ban list is if they are either a troll, or they are a terrible human being.

The trolls often derail the thread. I think banning trolls is fine.

If you're trying to have a serious discussion, whether it's off-topic or about politics, there are some who just cannot act like adults and should be excluded.

Then I’m a coward and proud of it. I will ignore them and ban them.

In response to your question about posting in this thread, it was predicated by the death of RBG and the related discussion of the likelihood of Desh's demise in the War Zone.

Now that I've answered your question, I'll ask mine again.

If someone whose politics you agree with reopens an old thread, do you exhibit this kind of behavior, or not?

 

[CFM]

She's banned because the thread starter is afraid of her. It happens to me a lot by JPP cowards like Teflon Don/ILA/Joe Hiden/et al, Legion and other douchebags.

Glad you agree it's fear when it comes to the likes of Cypress, OwlWoman, LV, christiefan, et al and quite often guno, and many other douchebags banning me from their threads.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Glad you agree it's fear when it comes to the likes of Cypress, OwlWoman, LV, christiefan, et al and quite often guno, and many other douchebags banning me from their threads.

Quite being a douchebag and I'll be happy to defend you.

 

[Charoite]

I don't know what anyone will do. OTOH, the fact you dragged up a two year old thread means you are lonely and tired of playing with yourself.

He bumps old discussions about Evince. With her not here, it makes the possibility of a little troll crush even more likely.

 

[Commander Dutch]

He bumps old discussions about Evince. With her not here, it makes the possibility of a little troll crush even more likely.

I think his only friend is the little piece of flesh between his legs.

 

[Charoite]

I think his only friend is the little piece of flesh between his legs.

Well, he's supposedly a Morman, so maybe his trolling is acting out.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Well, he's supposedly a Morman, so maybe his trolling is acting out.

He may have been raised Mormon, but he's certainly not one unless it's one of the flaked out cults compose of one nutjob, six wives and 30 kids hiding in the mountains eating squirrel and roots.

 

[CFM]

Quite being a douchebag and I'll be happy to defend you.

Quite?

I'm using your standard to apply to those I mentioned. What's wrong with that?

 

[Charoite]

He may have been raised Mormon, but he's certainly not one unless it's one of the flaked out cults compose of one nutjob, six wives and 30 kids hiding in the mountains eating squirrel and roots.

Trolling can often be an act in response to feeling repressed. One look at Morman undies and I feel bad for them.

 

[Legion]

Well, he's supposedly a Morman, so maybe his trolling is acting out.

Who told you that? It certainly wasn't me. I practice no religion, as a matter of fact.