Who Wants to Have Josh Banned?

[vankirkc]

I have to say I'd be in djolds1 camp on this one. Posting a poll like this is a banner ad saying 'let's get rid of ....'. It's odd that you don't see it that way.

Interesting. I think it odd that you do. Perhaps if I had listed a liteny of reasons TO get rid of him, I would agree. But I listed none until others misconstrued my intent.

I only read the one AGW thread in this forum, and I can see that the guy maybe plays loose with facts and could use a few tips in measured response, but I didn't see anything in that thread that rose to the level necessary to ban someone.

That is what I wanted to find out, whether anyone would say that anything had risen to that level. At least one poster had previosly mentioned it (pique or not) and I was curious.

Well..it's a bit weird to be posting a giant banner saying 'should we ban so and so' if you have no compelling reason to do so, isn't it? I can't recall ever seeing anyone else do such a thing. You really can't see the hostility implicit in that?

How about if someone posted a poll saying "Who thinks we should shoot KitemanSA in the head and burn his house down?" As you say it's just a question, just to see if there's really any interest or need to do so. It wouldn't be a friendly thing for you to see, though, would it? I'd like to think that this isn't a forum where that kind of sentiment can find a voice, either.

To clarify, I guess my point is that a ban, or silencing, is a kind of violence you do to someone. so the subject shouldn't be broached lightly, as appears to have been the case here.

[hanelyp]

How hard would it be to add individual killfile lists to the forum? Josh Cryer has long since passed the point where I pay little attention to his posts.

[djolds1]

How hard would it be to add individual killfile lists to the forum? Josh Cryer has long since passed the point where I pay little attention to his posts.

Then don't reply to them. If in your opinion he' a troll... you starve trolls, you don't feed them.

[seedload]

I have to say I'd be in djolds1 camp on this one. Posting a poll like this is a banner ad saying 'let's get rid of ....'. It's odd that you don't see it that way.

Interesting. I think it odd that you do. Perhaps if I had listed a liteny of reasons TO get rid of him, I would agree. But I listed none until others misconstrued my intent.

I only read the one AGW thread in this forum, and I can see that the guy maybe plays loose with facts and could use a few tips in measured response, but I didn't see anything in that thread that rose to the level necessary to ban someone.

That is what I wanted to find out, whether anyone would say that anything had risen to that level. At least one poster had previosly mentioned it (pique or not) and I was curious.

Well..it's a bit weird to be posting a giant banner saying 'should we ban so and so' if you have no compelling reason to do so, isn't it? I can't recall ever seeing anyone else do such a thing. You really can't see the hostility implicit in that?

How about if someone posted a poll saying "Who thinks we should shoot KitemanSA in the head and burn his house down?" As you say it's just a question, just to see if there's really any interest or need to do so. It wouldn't be a friendly thing for you to see, though, would it? I'd like to think that this isn't a forum where that kind of sentiment can find a voice, either.

To clarify, I guess my point is that a ban, or silencing, is a kind of violence you do to someone. so the subject shouldn't be broached lightly, as appears to have been the case here.

Just FYI, this post was in response to a post by a moderator in another thread that suggested that he may be banned. As such, this post could be taken as a defense against his being banned - the compelling reason that you speak of.

I don't think he should be banned.

regards

[Roger]

Well..it's a bit weird to be posting a giant banner saying 'should we ban so and so' if you have no compelling reason to do so, isn't it? I can't recall ever seeing anyone else do such a thing. You really can't see the hostility implicit in that?

Correct, the civil thing to do would be a few behind the scenes emails, instead of some half baked citationless hit piece.

I think its ego and hostility and an inability for Kiteman to remotely have the capacity to put his feet in another mans shoes. ANd this thread is a case of using a jack hammer when a toothpick would have sufficed.

Of course on the OTHER hand, wasn't it Josh who got the politics started on this web site ? Or am I remembering wrong?

Just thought i'd throw that out there.

DO you know Duane, Tall Dave, MSimon?

I think the site was better before the politics got dragged into it, but since pandora's box has been opened,

Absolutely accurate,

Seems like almost evewryone on this forum is VERY civil and tolerant EXCEPT Josh. I've often thought this was a high-class crowd.

There those of us on the left who laffed like crazy at this comment Kiteman, because I think the crazy moother fooker neo lib neo con jerkhoughs that populate the General section are pack herd thinking right wingers who like to gang tackle anyone who dissents. Which is why I dont spend any appreciable time in General, I cant hardly find civility there 90% of the time .

Kiteman, lots of folk I know wont pay talkpolywell any props because its run by rabid rightwingers, they just dont come here. I think you should honored by Josh's presence, many wont come to talk polywell, but Josh does, he tolerates this sort of rude uncivil treatment

I have to say I'd be in djolds1 camp on this one. Posting a poll like this is a banner ad saying 'let's get rid of ....'. It's odd that you don't see it that way.

I agree, its an ego driven cheap shot hit job, completely lacking in etiquette and grace & Internet maturity.

MSimon, I like that thread about cabin fever. Its shows restraint and wisedom. Hopefully Kiteman will learn from it.

[MSimon]

There those of us on the left who laffed like crazy at this comment Kiteman, because I think the crazy moother fooker neo lib neo con jerkhoughs that populate the General section are pack herd thinking right wingers

I dunno. Locke, Smith, Jefferson, Hayek. Friedman. A herd I'm glad to travel with.

No blood for oil? I'm down with that. Sweat is cheaper. So why aren't we using known resources to avoid the blood?

[Diogenes]

Kiteman, lots of folk I know wont pay talkpolywell any props because its run by rabid rightwingers, they just dont come here.

Hey! That's not fair. Not everyone at Talk Polywell is a rabid right winger. Just me, I think.

MSimon is more of a Libertarian, as are many of the other Denizens of this Demesne.

For what it's worth, I think i'm pretty civil to any individual, but when it becomes a case of "Them" vs. "Us.", then the long knives come out. Sometimes I feel as though I show too much restraint.

[MSimon]

Kiteman, lots of folk I know wont pay talkpolywell any props because its run by rabid rightwingers,

It runs that way in engineering from what I can tell. Why should a board that caters to engineers be any different?

And note: it is not as if I haven't tried the other flavors. I was a Democrat, then a progressive, then a hard core communist, then a Libertarian, and for now a libertarian Republican.

It is amusing that civilization is dependent on a bunch of right wingers to keep the wheels turning. So why don't lefties go into engineering much? Too much thinking not enough feeling.

Engineers also tend to be hard men. Why?

“Physicists dream of Nobel prizes, engineers dream of mishaps.” Hendrik Tennekes

That by its very nature tends to make engineers conservative.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

Spoken like a true engineer.

[Diogenes]

Of course on the OTHER hand, wasn't it Josh who got the politics started on this web site ? Or am I remembering wrong?

Just thought i'd throw that out there.

DO you know Duane, Tall Dave, MSimon?

I'm thinking we're both wrong. Looks like it started about here.

viewtopic.php?t=746&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

The Thread title is :
"Which party will support this effort?"

I'm just remembering Josh because I recall him posting a message in this thread which I think had lots of cursing and damning in it. The guy who STARTED the thread was Robthebob.

There were a few previous political references and comments, but I think the thread I cited is where it all went to H3LL.

[MSimon]

And Joe chimed in.

[KitemanSA]

Just FYI, this post was in response to a post by a moderator in another thread that suggested that he may be banned. As such, this post could be taken as a defense against his being banned - the compelling reason that you speak of.

Thank you for seeing that.

Perhaps I do lack "internet maturity" as suggested by another. I was curious about what others felt wrt this matter so I asked. I have not advocated a position, I haven't even voted. I have to press the "see results" button every time to see the results.

What I was not expecting to see (which may be a sign of my lack of maturity) was the attack on me and some folks assumption that I somehow had an ax to grind or had a "political agenda" to silence him. Oh well, live and learn, I hope.

[KitemanSA]

Well..it's a bit weird to be posting a giant banner saying 'should we ban so and so' if you have no compelling reason to do so, isn't it? I can't recall ever seeing anyone else do such a thing. You really can't see the hostility implicit in that?

Correct, the civil thing to do would be a few behind the scenes emails, instead of some half baked citationless hit piece.

Hmm. If I actually had an agenda to get rid of Josh rather than just find out what people thought, that would probably have been the way to go. But since I had no such intent...

I think its ego and hostility and an inability for Kiteman to remotely have the capacity to put his feet in another mans shoes. ANd this thread is a case of using a jack hammer when a toothpick would have sufficed.

I do have a reasonable size ego. I have no hostility to Josh (though I do toward his behavior at the end there). Again, if you do not understand the purpose of the posting, you can't properly judge the tools used.

Seems like almost evewryone on this forum is VERY civil and tolerant EXCEPT Josh. I've often thought this was a high-class crowd.

There those of us on the left who laffed like crazy at this comment Kiteman, because I think the crazy moother fooker neo lib neo con jerkhoughs that populate the General section are pack herd thinking right wingers who like to gang tackle anyone who dissents. Which is why I dont spend any appreciable time in General, I cant hardly find civility there 90% of the time .

I said "tolerant" not agreeing. If they weren't tolerant, Josh probably WOULD have been voted out. It is quite obvious that some of them have strongly held opinions on certain issues of current import, but argument is not intolerance.

Kiteman, lots of folk I know wont pay talkpolywell any props because its run by rabid rightwingers, they just dont come here. I think you should honored by Josh's presence, many wont come to talk polywell, but Josh does, he tolerates this sort of rude uncivil treatment.

I must admit, I did not read all of the threads that Josh frequented with his AGW opinions. The subject doesn't float my boat much. However, I don't reacll seeing any instances where anyone called Josh a liar or an idiot or other ad-hominum type attacks. I DID see a number of instances where Josh did those things,

in set aside boldface!

Maybe I have a bias and I didn't see them but I would have to see a number of instances where one individual did what Josh has done to judge them both incivil and intolerant.

[KitemanSA]

I have to say I'd be in djolds1 camp on this one. Posting a poll like this is a banner ad saying 'let's get rid of ....'. It's odd that you don't see it that way.

I agree, its an ego driven cheap shot hit job, completely lacking in etiquette and grace & Internet maturity.

Think what you will, but if your judgement is that far off here, it may explain why you are a Democrat!


(Now you see, THAT was a cheap shot hit job! See the difference?)

[MSimon]

Kiteman and Roger,

It got so bad near the end that you couldn't even agree with him without being called a liar.

[seedload]

Kiteman and Roger,

It got so bad near the end that you couldn't even agree with him without being called a liar.

Curious. What does "near the end" mean? Was he banned? Or has he just walked away and that is what you mean by "the end"?