Time to Ban Swan?

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

James_ wrote:
What's worse than a toxic website?

GasGuzzler wrote:

James_ wrote:
What's worse than a toxic website?

A case of Bud Lite.

James_ wrote:
While this is a toxic forum, no one ever answered to anyone. Just never happened.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James_ wrote:
While this is a toxic forum, no one ever answered to anyone. Just never happened.

Where is IBdaMann? No posts in almost 2 weeks.

I was reminded of IBdaMann hearing about Safemoon and their slush fund today.

James_ wrote:
I like Lite Beer. Swan is the toilet that didn't flush.
Your opinion Swanee? And I think Gas Guzzler drinks Lite Beer!

p.s., There's free speech and then there's just being stupid.

James_ wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikT7Cp9Nu14

This is a toxic forum people avoid. With IBDM, I hope one day he
posts in here again but there is war. It's n Europe and it's in the Middle East.
Yet this is a toxic forum. We're not Russia or Israel.

Spongy Iris wrote:

James_ wrote:
While this is a toxic forum, no one ever answered to anyone. Just never happened.

Where is IBdaMann? No posts in almost 2 weeks.

I was reminded of IBdaMann hearing about Safemoon and their slush fund today.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

James_ wrote:
While this is a toxic forum, no one ever answered to anyone. Just never happened.

James_ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

If nothing else Swan will know while this site was toxic before he posted here, now
what? What's worse than a toxic website?

James_ wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

James_ wrote:
While this is a toxic forum, no one ever answered to anyone. Just never happened.

Where is IBdaMann? No posts in almost 2 weeks.

I was reminded of IBdaMann hearing about Safemoon and their slush fund today.

If he is/was Russian then difficult to say. He wasn't American still in here he was/is one of us.

James_ wrote:
Search Robert Hansen and Alaska. It's scary when people don't have issues.

Spongy Iris wrote:
Actually I don't believe in censorship, even for Swan, the local hobo ranting on this commuter train.

Now I miss IBDM...

Swan wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
Actually I don't believe in censorship, even for Swan, the local hobo ranting on this commuter train.

Now I miss IBDM...

A schizzo is never alone, even in solitary confinement.

Fact

Spongy Iris wrote:

Swan wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:
Actually I don't believe in censorship, even for Swan, the local hobo ranting on this commuter train.

Now I miss IBDM...

A schizzo is never alone, even in solitary confinement.

Fact

If it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

GasGuzzler wrote:

James_ wrote:
What's worse than a toxic website?

A case of Bud Lite.

Im a BM wrote:Harvey summed it up pretty well and hit the nail on the head.

Im a BM wrote: It is difficult to imagine a moderated discussion where there would not be cause for the banning Swan.

Im a BM wrote: To Swan's credit, he did not feel the need to post or repost the name of another site member's sons and mother, with a map to the home address, phone number, e mail, full name, birthdate, and more.

Im a BM wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harvey summed it up pretty well and hit the nail on the head.

It is difficult to imagine a moderated discussion where there would not be cause for the banning Swan.

They all have at least some kind of red line where common decency is just not being respected to the point where the behavior is intolerable.

For some moderators, the habit of mockery with posts for the sole purpose of being a heckler and a pest would be enough.

Other moderators might be more tolerant of the spam and mockery, but would draw the line at overt racism and homophobia.

To Swan's credit, he did not feel the need to post or repost the name of another site member's sons and mother, with a map to the home address, phone number, e mail, full name, birthdate, and more.

Even Elon Musk has a red line around doxxing.

But that wouldn't have been enough to get Swan banned at THIS website.

Just ask IBdaMann and Into the Night. Nine and eight years, respectively, of trolling with impunity.

But if someone pesters Branner enough, he will at least remove the specific posts where a member gets doxxed in the manner described.

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote:Harvey summed it up pretty well and hit the nail on the head.

Often he does.

Im a BM wrote: It is difficult to imagine a moderated discussion where there would not be cause for the banning Swan.

You mean a censored discussion in which Swan is not banned. On internet fora, when people say "moderators" they really mean censors. Moderators facilitate discussions, they don't ban people. Censors ban people and modify/delete posts.

If I were a censor, I wouldn't be a censor. Why ban Swan? Try this: when you come upon a post you don't wish to read, skip over it.

Im a BM wrote: To Swan's credit, he did not feel the need to post or repost the name of another site member's sons and mother, with a map to the home address, phone number, e mail, full name, birthdate, and more.

Too funny. Are you still on that? You posted a link and asked the board to go to it. At that link was your personal information. When I saw the information you wanted me to see, that was your cue to cry like a baby about being "doxxed".

Robup Northert is not your name, by the way.

You can't be doxxed if you are providing the information.

James_ wrote:
No ethics necessary, er censorship. Would IBDaMann look away from her nude photos or her nude photos while in bed with another woman? He can ignore those because if not then he would not be allowing for how politics influences the climate debate.
Just showing IBDaMann that chances are you might be Branner. After all, LiteSong got banned for posting about climate change.

James_ wrote:
IBDamann, I'm going to focus on what's important in life. And Trump is right, a man should enjoy having a "good" woman in his life. After all, "climate change" can be
"good" when done with "good" people, don't you agree.
After all, being in the "right" company would make any interest in "climate change" like "is it getting hot in here" more meaningful. And I think The Donald
had the right idea but it was very poorly executed.

p.s., This photograph of Melania was taken at a public function.

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:
IBDamann, I'm going to focus on what's important in life. And Trump is right, a man should enjoy having a "good" woman in his life. After all, "climate change" can be
"good" when done with "good" people, don't you agree.
After all, being in the "right" company would make any interest in "climate change" like "is it getting hot in here" more meaningful. And I think The Donald
had the right idea but it was very poorly executed.

p.s., This photograph of Melania was taken at a public function.

That is not a photo of Melania Trump's chest

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:
IBDamann, I'm going to focus on what's important in life. And Trump is right, a man should enjoy having a "good" woman in his life. After all, "climate change" can be
"good" when done with "good" people, don't you agree.
After all, being in the "right" company would make any interest in "climate change" like "is it getting hot in here" more meaningful. And I think The Donald
had the right idea but it was very poorly executed.

p.s., This photograph of Melania was taken at a public function.

That is not a photo of Melania Trump's chest

I didn't see anything so have no idea what you're talking about Alan.
I'm just commenting on what the New York Post has said is causing global warming. We need transparency in politics without ugly censorship, wouldn't you agree?
https://nypost.com/2016/08/01/trump-camp-melanias-nudes-are-celebration-of-the-body/

I have better things to do so Bye!

James_ wrote:
Are those really hers? I found a picture like you wanted Swan.
Besides, I need to finish my project so I can have surgery instead of answering your questions about a picture.

Im a BM wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harvey summed it up pretty well and hit the nail on the head.

It is difficult to imagine a moderated discussion where there would not be cause for the banning Swan.

They all have at least some kind of red line where common decency is just not being respected to the point where the behavior is intolerable.

For some moderators, the habit of mockery with posts for the sole purpose of being a heckler and a pest would be enough.

Other moderators might be more tolerant of the spam and mockery, but would draw the line at overt racism and homophobia.

To Swan's credit, he did not feel the need to post or repost the name of another site member's sons and mother, with a map to the home address, phone number, e mail, full name, birthdate, and more.

Even Elon Musk has a red line around doxxing.

But that wouldn't have been enough to get Swan banned at THIS website.

Just ask IBdaMann and Into the Night. Nine and eight years, respectively, of trolling with impunity.

But if someone pesters Branner enough, he will at least remove the specific posts where a member gets doxxed in the manner described.

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:
Unfortunately, there is no moderation, and banishment unlikely. If a Phd can't get administrative action, it's unlikely anyone else will. The pathetic loser will continue to plague this site. He has no other source of attention, good or bad.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harvey summed it up pretty well and hit the nail on the head.

It is difficult to imagine a moderated discussion where there would not be cause for the banning Swan.

They all have at least some kind of red line where common decency is just not being respected to the point where the behavior is intolerable.

For some moderators, the habit of mockery with posts for the sole purpose of being a heckler and a pest would be enough.

Other moderators might be more tolerant of the spam and mockery, but would draw the line at overt racism and homophobia.

To Swan's credit, he did not feel the need to post or repost the name of another site member's sons and mother, with a map to the home address, phone number, e mail, full name, birthdate, and more.

Even Elon Musk has a red line around doxxing.

But that wouldn't have been enough to get Swan banned at THIS website.

Just ask IBdaMann and Into the Night. Nine and eight years, respectively, of trolling with impunity.

But if someone pesters Branner enough, he will at least remove the specific posts where a member gets doxxed in the manner described.

I have been following this chat room for more than 4 years, and I have not found any other commenter here I believe to be decent.

If decency is a prerequisite for a chat room, then all chat rooms may as well be shut down.

Facebook, Twitter, Instagram are just peddling sexy pics, either explicitly or implicitly. Nothing more than cyber brothels.

Food porn and cute baby pics are about the maximum amount of decency you will find.

Also...

Maybe some adorable animals. Beautiful nature pics. And people showing off their talents.

But my point is, you cannot find any decent conversations on the internet.