Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Farewell to Fascism; it was fun while it lasted. KE (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Farewell to Fascism; it was fun while it lasted. KE
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
The following is msquared's blanket statement made after his fascist "secret police" investigated us, tried us, and after he sentenced and carried out the sentence, without warning, without presenting evidence, and without giving us the chance to face our accusers or respond to their accusations.

quote:
In particular, they provoke personal attacks, or initiate hostilities with other members of the site. They troll the forums by posting 'attack ads' rather then discussing issues. They belittle other users of the forum.—M2
Below I provide evidence that the vast majority of my posts defy the unfounded accusations made by Mod2, and of my assertion that I have been objective and nonpartisan. A claim few here can make.

At worst that statement should read, “They have at times….” To state it the way he does totally ignores the vast majority of our posts and the contributions we have made to the forum. There are still threads that I started, for the pure benefit of the OA community, in use today.

As for the Ornery 8, even I admit that Gary shouldn’t have been on that list. And Enumclaw only as much as I, which is to say only slightly more than Gary, and only slightly less than WmL, TomD, John L, or mv. None of us had been warned, nor had we flaunted the rules to the extent of Murdock, Pete at Home, Baldar, or even Ken Bean. (I hate to be blunt, but as this is my last post I feel obligated to be honest and forthright, even though with the exception of Baldar, who I don’t know, I like all of the aforementioned people to varying degrees.)

Paul posted the following through Ev:

quote:
The next few sides are the ones that Ornery really wants to
have around. You have the two sides of people whose minds are
mostly made up, but who can discuss an issue reasonably and take
the other side's points into consideration. They can frequently
and cheerfully admit that the other guys have a good point or
points, and can even think about changing their minds or at
least modifying their position based on those points.--Enumclaw

If you agree that this is the kind of poster the forum needs, then I say the above ( C ) group includes me the vast majority of the time. And when I have strayed, and admittedly I have, it is in response to other offenders. And even when I have strayed I have been quick to apologize and to delete posts if asked and even when not asked if I felt I had gone over the line. (Ask WP, nice of you to say nothing on my behalf when only the previous day you made a fool of yourself and I offered and did delete all my posts up until you stuck your foot in your mouth so as not to cause you embarrassment.)

To be labeled a cancer ( Starkus), hooligan’s (ATW), a destroyer, a hothead (potemkyn), and a detriment to the forum, and all of the other horrible things said about me and the group that was singled out is incredibly hurtful and unfair. But what hurt the most was the lack of support from the people I had considered friends; Ev, SB, Kelcimer, Zyne, SG, WP. The silence was deafening. Wait till they come for you, my friends.

quote:
They have shown that they can engage in productive debate with reasonable people. Most of the others never could. They never showed the ability to have a civil debate, and they dragged others down with them.-- Potemkyn
That’s true of me potemkyn? I never showed the ability to have a civil debate? The following posts put the lie to that claim. Even as ideological opponents I had respect for you, and I was hurt to see that you would use this situation to further your right-wing cause, very Christian of you.
quote:
Since some on this forum have been seriously concerned about seperation of church and state (Ev, mudrok, KE, etc) I would assume that you would not be to pleased by this ruling. Church and state get a lot closer now, it's just the state is controling the church at this point.—Potemkyn

It sounds like they are insisting that the CC hire only Catholics and preach to everyone they serve? That's stupid. I'll have to study it more but it seems I agree with RUN's and Pete's first posts. The Catholic church IMO has a lot of rules that hurt people for the sake of increasing their congregation, but the government shouldn't be telling religions what to do. Happy potemkyn?--KE

Hey, but I still get points for being fair about government intervention even when it comes to religions since we didn't know that they were taking public money at the time right?—KE

That's what I said in my first post. Whether they get money or not it seems ridiculous to punish them for not being discriminatory or for not preaching at everybody they deal with.--KE

Potemkyn’s accusation having been proven false and biased, if you still doubt my assertion that I could be, and was objective, that I could take the other side’s points into consideration, and even applaud when the other side made a good point, the following is more proof.

quote:
”Serious harm is being done to the U.S. by frothing-at-the-mouth hatred of President Bush.—Mr Xin Ku”

This is a tricky problem. I agree with the Lamberts on the Useful Idiots problem in Iraq. Once we were committed all the dissension here did was encourage Saddam to hold out and resist. But the War On Terror is a different story. Any and all American presidents are going to do their damndest to cut Ossama's head off. And in this area I believe Bush is doing everything he can to do just that. Hell, being a Texan I think he would love to wield the sword himself.--KE

quote:
A black comedian made a good point on Tough Crowd the other night. He said; I'm from Louisiana, and they used to have laws against inter-racial marriages. And if you broke those laws they threw you in jail. I'll take this ssm seriously when they start throwing them in jail.--KE
quote:
Now, of course I'm in favor of ssm, but he has a point.—KE
quote:
Yeah, I meant to post on that. Of course what Bush did in regard to Muslims post 9-11 was a great thing. Failure to give credit where credit to do is a problem we should all try to overcome.—KE
quote:
Damn you FIJC, quit being logical. It makes it very hard to argue with you. (Seriously, though I disagree with her politics, I give credit where credit is due. Another good point, FIJC.)
quote:
Wrong. As Enum and I prove. I at least, despise Bush, but funny is funny.--KE
quote:
I don’t see how we can blame 9-11 on Bush. Even if he was too focused on Iraq, we can’t know that anything he could have done would have prevented it, can we? And surely no one here thinks he let it happen on purpose? So the worst that can be said, is that he, like Clinton, failed to prevent it, right?--KE
quote:
Good arguments Gary. I anticipated them, because you people are very sharp, and you are right as far as it goes.--KE
quote:
Since there is nowhere else to say it I would like to say I can't stand watching Kerry say "Bring it on!". Shouldn't we expect more from our candidates than stupid childish catch-phrases? He's a senator for God's sake! --KE
quote:
Taking a cue from KE (displaying an ability to see good in the opposition), I saw this idea from John Kerry, that, although I don't understand the particulars, looks pretty good on its face.-- meworkingman
quote:
It seems to me that if the Bush administration is being blamed for not implementing the report recomendations, what about Clinton and Gore? Especially considering the very short transistion period.--RedSkullvw

If Clinton and Gore are culpable they should be held accountable as well.—KE

quote:
I don't think we can hold Bush and company any more responsible for 9-11 than we can Clinton or Bush 1. I believe that Bush was doing what he thought best and would have done anything to prevent the attack. But the commission is necessary to find out what went wrong,--KE 4-10-04 Condi Rice Comes Clean by WP
And as my last proof of nonpartisanship, I even agree with Ron Lambert.

quote:
Ron: Some may wish to defend OrneryMod by saying that the administrator has dictatorial power. But that power is limited by my power to vote with my feet.
You people proclaim to want to argue the facts; well there are the facts. As proved by my quotes above (and there could have been many, many, more) there are countless times, over my 1755 posts, that I have conceded a point, applauded the opposition’s point, been open to differing opinions and shown the ability to be objective. The glee of my right-wing opponent’s at my inclusion on the cancer list is understandable, if unfair. (potemkyn I think you know what you said was unfair and the quotes above put the lie to my inclusion in your list. And how convenient that I was included despite the evidence to the contrary, and how convenient that the person you saw as the most “hotheaded” was your political and ideological opposite.). I admit that I said WmL’s posts where long, tiresome, and repetitive, and even thought they are, I could see being warned or asked to retract, but the vast majority of my posts where not in this vein, and to categorize me as a cancer is grossly unfair. But, the vitriol of the religious-right is understandable if hypocritical. However, the hurt I feel at the lack of support of my “friends” here at Ornery is too much to bear. Et tu, Ev? I decline to continue to participate in a forum that has turned, without warning, into a fascist farce of what it was purported to be, and one in which I can’t even count on the support of my friends when I am silenced without warning, and denied a fair hearing; very “American” of you all. Pat yourselves on the back; your “Ornery” forum has one less passionate voice.

I waited 2 weeks to cool down my “hothead” before posting this, but I still can’t believe the censorship and fascism that has taken over this forum. I value my integrity more than I do this forum, so in protest I wll be un-registering myself. If recent history is any guide, then considering the rampant editing and thread locking, I'm sure few will ever read this, but that will be just further proof of the fascism that has taken over what is laughingly still referred to as "Ornery American's". A place your not allowed to be "ornery" and is about as un-American as you can get.

The Last Post of Knight Ender of the Ornery 8

(John L. Myers IV)

[ April 29, 2004, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE, I wrote you my condolences when you were banned, but now after reading this, I'm glad that you and Enum got to find for yourselves what it felt like. If you think you were better than I was, then I think you are in denial. Yes, we could have had better warning, and the rules could have been more clear. But it seems a little hypocritical for you to cry about the "fascism" of having the same rules applied to you and Enum as you and Enum wanted applied to me.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ryoko
Member
Member # 911

 - posted      Profile for Ryoko   Email Ryoko   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE,

First of all, I wish you the best in life whether you continue to post here or not. I've enjoyed many of your posts.

I can understand why you feel hurt and unfairly judged. I imagine that most of the posters (and lurkers) at ornery would not agree on who "should" have been part of the "Ornery 8".

That being said, I think it is unfair of you to castigate the mod or anyone else. Something had to be done and I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision. I especially think it is inappropriate for you to say what you said about Everard.

If this place was as fascist as you claim, then you would never have had the opportunity to make this farewell post.

Please don't think that I am your enemy for saying this because you certainly are not mine.

Posts: 65 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE, I was just a lurker here for several months, and it saddens me to see you go because your posts were often very enlightening and eye-opening during the short time that I was lurking here.

Just wanted to say that, so you know that there were many people who appreciated your posts.

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE, if it's any consolation, both ATW and Starkus are trolls from another forum who, having been offended when I recommended this place as an example of more civil and informed discussion, were delighted to learn that I had been banned here just a few short days later. They posted on that thread primarily to gloat and poke fun at me; you shouldn't take their opinions seriously, as a consequence.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WarrsawPact
Member
Member # 1275

 - posted      Profile for WarrsawPact   Email WarrsawPact   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE - You're right.

I didn't support any of the Ornery 8 and I'm sorry. You treated me with respect and I did not show my support for you or the others. I deserve every comment you made regarding my silence. I am sorry.

When I saw that several people had been suspended, I was focused on Murdok. I didn't know what the others had been up to, since I had only sparingly been posting in other discussions and not really paying attention to who was saying what. Many topics I simply ignored at that time because I was sure they would not offer up good conversation.

I did have the idea that things were heating up on Ornery and some people were saying incendiary things simply for the sake of saying them. Some people were tossing around insults, sometimes thinly veiled and sometimes not. It is precisely because I turned my back on those conversations that I was not aware who was and was not guilty of violating Ornery's rules in word or spirit.

You're not the last to leave Ornery.

Posts: 7500 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
KE, I don't think that you were a cancer, a hooligan, or a destroyer; I enjoyed talking to you and you did give and take. Hell, I defended you on many of the religous threads. I did email my support to you when you were banned, and if I hadn't been banned myself at the time, I would have said something on your behalf.

But you said nothing on my behalf, and here you are on this thread saying that my banning was justified, but that yours was not. People said some of the same stupid stuff, and some outright false representations of what I had done to get banned, and you never stood up for me, after all your protests of being my friend. Well sorry, pal, you got a tiny dose of the medicine that you perscribed for me. You were at least as bad as me in every way, and compared to me you got off easy. So stop feeling sorry for yourself and get back in the game. You know the rules now, so adapt. I did.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
simplybiological
Member
Member # 1344

 - posted      Profile for simplybiological   Email simplybiological   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
JL...
thing a:
calling me out on the board is not the way to go about it... you know full well how to get in touch with me (you even know my *realperson* email). if you have a beef with me, you should talk to me.

thing b:
the statements others made were unfair (no one always or never does anything). that's true. but you *have* been a hot-head. you've acknowledged this. i think some bannings were more deserved than others, but i do know that the names were arrived on through a pretty thorough process. i like you as a person, you're a nice guy, and i was a little miffed that you were banned- but i'm not looking at it objectively.
people who think john L is funny were sorry to see him go, whereas i was delighted. maybe if i didn't like you, and i didn't often agree with you, i would have been happy to see you go.

i support the mod's right to ban, and i really don't have a problem with the way he went about it- thus my comments on that thread. i'm sorry you were included, sure, but i don't really think you have the right to demand that i take up your cause. had a i read more carefully, i might have been compelled to comment more, that is true.

if you wanted my support, you should have emailed me or IMed me and asked me what i thought- waiting several weeks and then retroactively acting pissed isn't going to solve anything.

Posts: 1742 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
"That’s true of me potemkyn? I never showed the ability to have a civil debate? The following posts put the lie to that claim. Even as ideological opponents I had respect for you, and I was hurt to see that you would use this situation to further your right-wing cause, very Christian of you."
KE, prior to the time that you were suspended, you had been showing many positive signs of civil debate. When I first started posting here, you were not always very gracious to anyone who was religious. However, I think you had definately been getting better at respecting the viewpoints of religious folks later on.

In defense of potemkyn, when he said that you had previously been a hothead, I never had the impression that it was out of a malicious intent. In fact, I remember you consenting to that very same point. I think you should also take into consideration the fact that in that very same statement you highlighted, potemkyn had publically stated on the forum that you had gotten much better at being civil prior to your suspension, and I agree.

Part of true friendship and honest debate is keeping each other accountable for our actions, with the understanding that while no one is perfect, we are all in this for intellectual development and the betterment of our personhood. It has been my experience that only people who do not care for you as a person avoid keeping you accountable in being totally honest about one's actions. I think you are unfairly painting potemkyn's actions as being hypocritical. I wonder, if he was not religious, would you be looking at him in such a distrustful and cynical light? I just think you are seeing what you want to in this situation.

Again, I know that I am not always the nicest person (look at my recent interaction with Ricky), but I think that you are being unfair to potemkyn.

And if potemkyn is a right-winger, then I must be facist, which I know I am not. [Smile]

[ April 29, 2004, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
While the other terms were totally unfair, I'm not sure why you even take offense at the word "hothead," KE. Other than Kentuckian and LR, just about everyone on Ornery fits that description at one time or another. I think that you and I are both hotheads, KE, but I think that we also both contribute to Ornery, and that we have also both demonstrated the capacity to learn from our mistakes. Your whole post above is hotheaded, and I can identify with wanting to post something like that to bitch out all the people that let me get screwed, 'cause I'm a hothead too. I'm betting that you'll come back, and I'll welcome you when you do.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ben5
Member
Member # 1488

 - posted      Profile for ben5     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
i was alwayse against all the bannings, even Pete's
Posts: 138 | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zyne
Member
Member # 117

 - posted      Profile for Zyne   Email Zyne   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, first, it was never a banning for you, KE. A suspension.

Second, I said as much as I thought useful, considering Moddy's position. Suppose I might have read too much in: From here, it sounded like the mod made a decision she found very difficult to make. I did not see any utility in attacking the moderator, or even arguing directly against the suspensions.

Third, and most personal for me, this is yet another illustration of my own lack of power. I know that I could not have changed the mod's mind through force or argument, and that being forceful or loud would have only made the moderator cling to the hard decision. (Not that the moderator is terribly bull-headed, only that a good amount of reflection had gone into the decision and I would have only been repeating things Moddy said to herself.) Better for me to quietly dissent from the act while supporting the person in spirit.

Finally, you sound hurt, and you obviously hadn't heard the responses on this thread when you posted the first post here. So I'll speak for all of us and say we won't hold you to any decision you might or might not have made to stay or to leave.

PS-I am still on the fence on banning, and think it only appropriate in the worst cases, which were not those of the eight (who weren't banned, anyway). I think I posted in support of most of the eight--including you--but the point of that particular post was how conflicted I was about Murdock (said conflict being resolved when Our Hero decided to create some new IDs). And I didn't name names, and you can't read my mind so, yea, I can see how you would not read what I would have wanted you to hear.

Posts: 4003 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gary
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
KnightEnder covered what was said two weeks ago, I'll cover what's being said today. I will also make this post permanently available at http://www.ai-jane.org/forums/

quote:

I wrote you my condolences when you were banned, but now after reading this, I'm glad that you and Enum got to find for yourselves what it felt like.
--- Pete at Home

Shame on you Pete. You of all people should understand KE's (and all of ours) position. Being happy that an outrage has happened to others so you could feel some kind of warped vindication is a disgrace.

quote:

Something had to be done and I'm sure it wasn't an easy decision. --- Ryoko

Something had to be done ... I'm sure that phrase echoes through history as the justification for many things, none of them pleasant. Be sure you repeat that line to yourself when they come for you.

quote:

KE, if it's any consolation ... They posted on that thread primarily to gloat and poke fun at me --- TomDavidson

I assure you it is no consolation. We were investigated together, prosecuted together and sentenced together. Consequently, the insults were shared and meant to be so. Why are you even on this forum? Your last email indicated you would not return unless all members of the Ornery secret police came clean. I have not read the forum much over the last two week but have seen no confessions. You indicated you knew all the member of this secret group and had been communicating with them. Have you joined them or are you merely a sympathizer now? I had expected better of you.

quote:

calling me out on the board is not the way to go about it... you know full well how to get in touch with me (you even know my *realperson* email). if you have a beef with me, you should talk to me. --- simplybiological

That is the established procedure on this board: public persecution after private prosecution. Too late to cry foul when it happens to you if you did not do it when it happened to us.
quote:

i support the mod's right to ban, and i really don't have a problem with the way he went about it- thus my comments on that thread ---- simplybiological

How did he go about it? In that thread, you were sure we had all been emailed and warned although we had not. Now you seem to have some insight into the private investigation that occurred. You very well may know more than I do about it, msquared refused to respond to my mails. I know only what was publicly posted.

quote:

if you wanted my support, you should have emailed me or Imbed me and asked me what I thought- ... --- simplybiological

Someone who thought he was your friend was wrongfully denounced in a public forum and subsequently denied the ability to defend himself. He was counting on you (among others) to stand up for what was right and defend him. Having to request your friend do the right thing for you makes you no friend at all. Supporting the actions against him to satisfy your own vendetta against John L is contemptible. There is a lesson in this. Serotonin's Gone, are you listening?

quote:
In defense of potemkyn ... --- FIJC
One of the few to openly speak out and here she again defends others. I am sure he did not email and ask her for it, she did it because she believed it to be the right thing to do. Her strength of character and integrity is a beacon in the darkness. There is a lesson here as well. simplybiological, are you listening?
quote:

I'm betting that you'll come back ... --- Pete at Home

That's a bet I will take, name your stakes.

quote:

this is yet another illustration of my own lack of power. I know that I could not have changed the mod's mind through force or argument, and that being forceful or loud would have only made the moderator cling to the hard decision. --- Zyne

This is an illusion you have built for yourself. You are a long time member that can make a powerful voice here if you only choose to do it. By keeping your silence, you supported KE's and all of our unjust suspensions. If you do not come here to try to learn how to make a difference, then why are you wasting your time?
quote:

Finally, you sound hurt, and you obviously hadn't heard the responses on this thread when you posted the first post here. So I'll speak for all of us and say we won't hold you to any decision you might or might not have made to stay or to leave. --- Zyne

Betrayal by those he believed to be friends - should he not be hurt? For every thread you point to in his support, I can point to another in this very thread by those he thought of as close friends stabbing him in the back again. Only Warsaw Pact has the courage to see the truth of KE's words and realize the mistake he made.

As for speaking for "all of us", do you also speak for those that called us a "cancer" and all the other insults hurled our way when we were silenced? Why didn't you speak for all of us when we had no voice?

There were many of you that had a number of terrible and vile comments to make when we were silenced and could not respond. Others stood silently by while this happened. Shame on all of you. This was a moment for all of you to display your true character. Whether you realize it or not, you did.

A secret police was created. Secret investigations were launched. Secret trials were held with the sentences carried out. As long as the secret police exist here with me on their list, I can not speak openly or honestly. If I cannot do that, then what it the point of speaking at all?

Like KE, I decline to continue to participate in this farce. Fortunately I have been able to create a new home. I will enjoy freedom from the secret police there and help create what this should have been. I invite all of you to join me and the remainder of the Ornery 8 at http://www.ai-jane.org/forums/. It ain't perfect yet but it's improving every day.

[ April 29, 2004, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: Gary ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pickled shuttlecock
Member
Member # 1093

 - posted      Profile for pickled shuttlecock   Email pickled shuttlecock   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
*YAWN*

Honestly, why do we need to throw around terms like "secret police?" It reminds me of the accusations I used to hurl at my parents about dictatorships and the like...

Go ahead and try this: set up a forum that's run as a representative democracy. Make sure every offender gets due process. Heck, assign lawyers, or let them choose. Decide by jury. Write laws, and proscribe punishments.

See if it doesn't collapse under the weight of legal action. I guarantee you most of the time will be taken up with argument, and most of the posts will be full of silly rhetoric like we've seen on these kinds of threads.

Posts: 1392 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Serotonin'sGone
Member
Member # 1219

 - posted      Profile for Serotonin'sGone   Email Serotonin'sGone   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
blah blah blah. sounds like a bunch of high school drama queens bickering over who is going to make the cheerleading squad. it's a forum.

i thought some of the suspensions were uncalled for (two to be precise). I didn't say anything because, quite frankly, i don't give a damn. i take weeklong posting breaks from ornery all the time--what's the big deal?

Posts: 1117 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
simplybiological
Member
Member # 1344

 - posted      Profile for simplybiological   Email simplybiological   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
quote:
calling me out on the board is not the way to go about it... you know full well how to get in touch with me (you even know my *realperson* email). if you have a beef with me, you should talk to me. --- simplybiological

That is the established procedure on this board: public persecution after private prosecution. Too late to cry foul when it happens to you if you did not do it when it happened to us.

two wrongs don't make a right. if having decisions made off the board and then posting them without privately notifying is wrong, then don't do it. clear enough to me. also, at the time, i was not aware that you guys DIDN'T know what was going on...

quote:

quote:
i support the mod's right to ban, and i really don't have a problem with the way he went about it- thus my comments on that thread ---- simplybiological

How did he go about it? In that thread, you were sure we had all been emailed and warned although we had not. Now you seem to have some insight into the private investigation that occurred. You very well may know more than I do about it, msquared refused to respond to my mails. I know only what was publicly posted.

like i said, i didn't know that you hadn't been contacted... since then i've spoken with someone (not msquared) who had some insight into the process. i think that info should be made available to you guys, but i'm not the person to do that.

quote:

quote:
if you wanted my support, you should have emailed me or IMed me and asked me what I thought- ... --- simplybiological

Someone who thought he was your friend was wrongfully denounced in a public forum and subsequently denied the ability to defend himself. He was counting on you (among others) to stand up for what was right and defend him. Having to request your friend do the right thing for you makes you no friend at all.

i'm not going to argue for someone until i know how they feel about the issue. i would not attempt to speak for someone without asking them first. as i said, i have no problem prima facia with bannings, and i would have rather heard what KE thought before saying anything.

quote:
Supporting the actions against him to satisfy your own vendetta against John L is contemptible.
that's not what i said. i think john L very MUCH deserved to be banned, by anyone's criteria. however, other people disagreed, thought he was funny. i brought up the point to illustrate that how strongly you support someone's banning is not generally an objective view. i'm sure there were people who had a BIG problem with KE, and maybe i didn't see it because he doesn't bug me. i was *not* saying that i didn't protest banning just so john L would be gone.

quote:
There is a lesson in this. Serotonin's Gone, are you listening?
you know, gary, a lot of people say you didn't deserve to get banned. well, when you say **** like this, i think you probably did deserve it. i would say that referring to someone's private, personal relationship in a post is out of line, particularly when you are asserting that he should "watch out" for me. well, joke's on you, big guy- we broke up. not over ornery, though.

quote:
One of the few to openly speak out and here she again defends others. I am sure he did not email and ask her for it, she did it because she believed it to be the right thing to do. Her strength of character and integrity is a beacon in the darkness. There is a lesson here as well. simplybiological, are you listening?
again, a nice solid personal attack. guess what, gary? you don't know me. you've never met me. you know nothing of my strength of character or my integrity. my posts on ornery are really not a useful tool by which to judge my personality- in my real life i'm nothing like i am on this board. you live in austin, right gary? maybe we've seen each other around... i'm sure you'd recognize me, what with the dark clouds of depravity and weak character surrounding me.

see, here's the thing- i don't take this board seriously. it's a forum. on the internet. who bloody CARES? if i thought that it really mattered, i would have been the first to come to someone's defense if i had seen injustice. I like KE, but i don't really *know* him. you're acting as though i let my best friend go down on the titantic, when in reality a nice guy on the internet got suspended from a forum. wah.

everyone needs to watch the OC or something, get their dose of drama for the week so they can all chill the hell out.

Posts: 1742 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
"see, here's the thing- i don't take this board seriously. it's a forum. on the internet. who bloody CARES? if i thought that it really mattered, i would have been the first to come to someone's defense if i had seen injustice. I like KE, but i don't really *know* him. you're acting as though i let my best friend go down on the titantic, when in reality a nice guy on the internet got suspended from a forum. wah."
If you don't care, why are you posting on this thread? That is a weak answer--appealing to apathy in order to defend your actions or the lack thereof.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
"I didn't say anything because, quite frankly, i don't give a damn. i take weeklong posting breaks from ornery all the time--what's the big deal?"
I have been involved with student government, student groups, and newspaper boards my entire academic career. I know how people my age generally tend to act and think. These types of answers are what first caused me to slowly lose faith in my generation. And no, I am not being melodramatic-I have observed this type of behavior in all young people who wish to shirk responsibility and their conscience.

Also, do you always not bother to capitalize your i's?

[ April 30, 2004, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Serotonin'sGone
Member
Member # 1219

 - posted      Profile for Serotonin'sGone   Email Serotonin'sGone   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
yes, for the entire time i have been on ornery, i don't believe i have ever capitilized my i's. often i don't capitalize the first word in sentences either. why?

and because i couldn't possibly make this thread any more useless, i'll even explain why. i had a rather progressive english teacher my freshman year of college. he believed that capitalization was going to become obsolete in the future, and only used to indicate emphasis. He also believed that the parenthesis, the comma, the semicolon and the colon would all be replaced by the dash. I also think he had some theory about the question mark and the exclamation point disappearing but i can't recall exactly what it was. strange little man, but very entertaining...

[ April 30, 2004, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: Serotonin'sGone ]

Posts: 1117 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
simplybiological
Member
Member # 1344

 - posted      Profile for simplybiological   Email simplybiological   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
If you don't care, why are you posting on this thread? That is a weak answer--appealing to apathy in order to defend your actions or the lack thereof.
because i'm not as perfect as you are, darling.
i'm posting because i've got some time to kill between now and bed, because i like some people on the board and it irks me to see my character attacked. i'm about to leave, and when i get back i'd like to continue posting... so i'd rather not leave in a cloud of accusation that i'm a jerk.
however, at the end of the day it's STILL JUST AN INTERNET FORUM. if i could never post again it would affect me for about... oh... 5 minutes.

quote:
Do you always not bother to capitalize your i's?
you're calling apathy weak, and in the same breath harp on someone's capitalization?
Posts: 1742 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Serotonin'sGone
Member
Member # 1219

 - posted      Profile for Serotonin'sGone   Email Serotonin'sGone   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
have been involved with student government, student groups, and newspaper boards my entire academic career. I know how people my age generally tend to act and think. These types of answers are what first caused me to slowly lose faith in my generation. And no, I am not being melodramatic-I have observed this type of behavior in all young people who wish to shirk responsibility and their conscience.

are you done? you lay into me as a symptom of the troubles of society because i failed to care about a forum suspension? you know absolutely nothing about me. please spare me your self righteous disdain.
Posts: 1117 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
Then don't try to tell me that you two are actually different people. Either that, or you two hang out way too much together.

Honestly, I have my doubts as to whether or not your identities are actually separate. I may be naive about certain aspect of life, but I know people. I study people; it's what I have been trained to do. Of course, I could be wrong. Afterall, I am not perfect.

[ April 30, 2004, 12:28 AM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
simplybiological
Member
Member # 1344

 - posted      Profile for simplybiological   Email simplybiological   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I know how people my age generally tend to act and think. These types of answers are what first caused me to slowly lose faith in my generation. And no, I am not being melodramatic-I have observed this type of behavior in all young people who wish to shirk responsibility and their conscience.
ok, whoa. again let's step back and remind ourselves that you don't KNOW the person you're talking about. i've lived with SG for two years, and dated him for longer, and i can certainly vouch for his responsiblility and his conscience. he's an amazing person, smart and caring, and he has a really good heart. i think i know better what kind of a person he is, so don't go there, FIJC. just don't.

i don't (and SG doesn't) think that an internet forum is something that need be treated as if it is reality. the arguments are just words, the words just text. sometimes i say things here i don't even believe, just to try them out. if you want to judge SG and me, then judge us by our actions in reality. if you can't comment on those, keep your mouth shut.

quote:
Then don't try to tell me that you two are actually different people. Either that, or you two hang out way too much together.

Honestly, I have my doubts as to whether or not your identities are actually separate. I may be naive about certain aspect of life, but I know people. I study people; it's what I have been trained to do.

we are quite separate. we were (until recently) dating for 2 and a half years, and we've lived together for 2. we are currently sitting side by side, about 4 feet apart. i'm female. he's male. i have no idea how i would PROVE this beyond all shadow of your doubt, but rest assured that it's quite true.

[ April 30, 2004, 12:29 AM: Message edited by: simplybiological ]

Posts: 1742 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zyne
Member
Member # 117

 - posted      Profile for Zyne   Email Zyne   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Some say that, in some places, the battles rage so hot, because the stakes are so small.

You're better than this. So freaking stop it.

Posts: 4003 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zyne
Member
Member # 117

 - posted      Profile for Zyne   Email Zyne   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Just to clarify, I am 110% convinced SB and SG are not the same person, or the same gender, and I am neither of them.

And I would like to take this opportunity to plug dis'traction de'jour (very kewl game thing):
http://kids.discovery.com/games/whizzball/whizzball.html

Posts: 4003 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ivan
Member
Member # 1467

 - posted      Profile for Ivan   Email Ivan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
i had a rather progressive english teacher my freshman year of college. he believed that capitalization was going to become obsolete in the future, and only used to indicate emphasis. He also believed that the parenthesis, the comma, the semicolon and the colon would all be replaced by the dash. I also think he had some theory about the question mark and the exclamation point disappearing but i can't recall exactly what it was. strange little man, but very entertaining...

In order to not disturb the enlightening discussion here, I've created this thread to discuss the merits of capitalization. Any takers??
Posts: 1710 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FIJC
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
"i don't (and SG doesn't) think that an internet forum is something that need be treated as if it is reality. the arguments are just words, the words just text. sometimes i say things here i don't even believe, just to try them out."
Okay, I suppose if that is how you feel, then I really have nothing more to say. So, our actions on the internet and our actions in "real life" are inherently different, and therefore, should be held to different intellectual, moral, and ethical standards. Such great lengths of rationalization boggle my mind.

At Zyne's request, I will freaking stop this discussion. If you two are different people, I apologize. [Frown]

[ April 30, 2004, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: FIJC ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Murdok
Member
Member # 1225

 - posted      Profile for Murdok   Email Murdok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hey - can somebody pass the popcorn? This is getting fun! [Smile]
Posts: 954 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ivan
Member
Member # 1467

 - posted      Profile for Ivan   Email Ivan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
And I would like to take this opportunity to plug dis'traction de'jour (very kewl game thing):
http://kids.discovery.com/games/whizzball/whizzball.html

GOAL!!!!!!!
Posts: 1710 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zyne
Member
Member # 117

 - posted      Profile for Zyne   Email Zyne   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I would pass the popcorn, but apparently it has been deleted or edited into something not nearly so tasty.

[Big Grin]

Posts: 4003 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kelcimer
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
But what hurt the most was the lack of support from the people I had considered friends; Ev, SB, Kelcimer, Zyne, SG, WP. The silence was deafening.
I'm sorry.
But.
One of the first things I did was e-mailed you to ask how you were and there was no responce. Since you didn't seem to want to talk about it privately I did not think you would want to have it discussed publicly. I assumed that you were established in a dialogue with the mod and did not want to involve third parties in that dialogue. I'm with SB it that I wanted to know how you felt about the issue. I also assumed that the Ornery 8 had been contacted prior to the suspensions.
Stupid me, apparently.
Sorry.

I don't agree with how it all went down. I very much disagree with some certain things, but am as yet unsure how I want to approach it all.

Since the 15th I've only made 4 posts (yes, including this one. Since I've been here it has been rare for me to go a day without 3-10 posts.). I'm mulling things over for a bit. Obviously, I've been lurking. I don't know if I'll be a regular poster again or if I'll even continue to lurk. I'm taking some time to think it over so I don't act rashly.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Shame on you Pete. You of all people should understand KE's (and all of ours) position. Being happy that an outrage has happened to others so you could feel some kind of warped vindication is a disgrace.
You didn't read what I said very carefully, Gary. I DO understand KE's position: I understand it better than HE does. I *did* support him through this, and in return he attacks me on this thread. I wasn't happy that it happened to him or to you, until he started this hypocritical self-pitying thread saying that it was justified when it happened to me and to certain others that he named, but not to him or to Enum.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Murdok
Member
Member # 1225

 - posted      Profile for Murdok   Email Murdok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I have to stand up for Pete here. He wrote to me about one of my threads and asked me to keep it going. He was engaged even though he was suspended. He obviously cares about this place otherwise he would not have been reading the posts.

So Pete - come on over and visit us at:

http://www.ai-jane.org/forums

A nice and friendly place with one or two token liberals or as some in here call us - lefties and a whole bunch of conservatives and/or moderates.

Posts: 954 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
potemkyn
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
KE,

I owe you an apology and the Ornery American Forum one as well. I have been lazy and I did not take full account of what my words might have meant to others.
I did not mean to offend, but as so often happens, intentions carry us only so far. I made assumptions and generalizations that I see now are extremely painful to others, and for that I apologize profusely.
I messed up on this one. Plain and simple. I wrote not what I wanted to say, but what came easiest. I was more concerned with putting down something in a response to Thymar than to putting down something of merit.

This post has me deeply saddened and I have emailed KE with my apology.

Potemkyn

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
potemkyn
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
FIJC,

Thank you for the defence. You're kindness and understanding on this forum benefit us all. Unfortunately, I do not feel I am fit to post here at the present.

I told seagull that the only time that I would leave is if I felt my posting here would be a discredit to the forum and bad for it. I think that time has come. I am placing myself on indefinent suspension. This is not an easy thing for me to do but I think it is best for the forum and for myself. I have dishonored myself and KE and through this, the forum. I don't feel confident in posting here.

Potemkyn

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Enumclaw
Member
Member # 876

 - posted      Profile for Enumclaw   Email Enumclaw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Well, I've been wondering if this topic would rear its head in here. [Smile]

Here's my thoughts. I've been reading the ai-jane forum for a while now. I find it pretty interesting that all of the "Ornery 8" *except* for me were invited to join over there, but I can't really figure out WHAT to think of this interesting factoid. [Confused]

(The life of a moderate, I suppose- neither the conservatives nor the liberals think enough of one to want them around full time. I suppose it's because moderates are a pain in the butt- you never know when they're going to agree with you or disagree with you. Everyone else you can count on, one way or the other. [Smile] )

Pretty much all of the 8 have joined that other site and have refrained from posting here on Ornery since the Great Suspension Crisis of 2004 occurred.

I can understand and sympathize with why they've chosen to do so. I disagree with the slinging around of terms like "fascism" and "secret police", but I can see why/how they've come to that conclusion.

As far as the whole process went... I can live with OM getting some help with scanning through posts and trying to identify problem areas on Ornery; as I said in my apology post on that thread, I agree that there's been a falloff in civility and so forth.

What I do think was bogus was the utter lack of notice this was happening; there was no indication that OM was taking this tack.

I think it was bogus to not name the people on the Anti-Ornery-Activities-Committee (AOAC), or to even mention that there WERE people doing this.

I think it was bogus to just drop the bomb on people without even the courtesy of an email letting them know that it'd happened until after the fact.

I think it was bogus to dump people without being able to give specific examples of anything they'd done wrong.

I think it was bogus to dump people that the AOAC didn't have a consensus opinion on; I have heard from at least two different members of the AOAC that OM was using (and there weren't many members) that both said they specifically recommended I not get the boot.

(Of course, they might just be saying that to me, but just as OM trusted them to be honest, so do I.)

Finally, I think it was bogus to try and strike any kind of "balance" to the ideological tilt of those that were getting the boot.

If either side had a bunch of nitwits that had to go, then boot them; the fact that you're booting people for their politics instead of for actually DOING the things you're claiming to boot them for is so mind-bogglingly stupid I'm surprised that anyone would admit to it.

I have a few further observations.

1) KE is right- there was a ton of character assassination that occurred, targeted on the Ornery 8.

Frankly, many of you said things that you should be ashamed of (IMO) in that thread, and were guilty of doing the exact thing that the 8 were accused of- confusing and combining one's opinions or words with one's character.

To take that a step further, I think that Ornery Mod/Msquared in particular has one thing to apologize for.

Mark, you posted the original message in the banning thread under the OM nickname... and then later, under "Msquared", you posted a very supportive message about how great you thought it was that OM was taking this action.

If there could be a more pathetic excuse of a self-serving post than that, I don't know what it would be. That was really weak.

I didn't call you on it despite knowing at the time that you WERE both Msquared and OM, but you should know that it was noticed.

(I didn't point it out because even though it was incredibly weak, it didn't really have to do with the question at the time- the attempt to change the environment of Ornery. Even though I thought you were going about it in completely the wrong way, I supported- and still do support- that goal.)

2) The process for suspensions/bannings somehow became totally screwed up. I don't care how anyone paints it, that's what happened.

For a long time we had an environment where someone would get repeated, numerous warnings of specific behaviors, phrases, words, and postings that were over the line. Short-term suspensions were handed out, usually at least a couple, before any longer-term suspension or banning happened.

Despite revisionist attempts at lumping the Ornery 8 with previous bannings/suspensions, the fact is that those in the past had ample warning and knowlege that they were out of line, at least in OM's opinion.

Much of the Ornery 8 had zilch, zero, nada. Boom. One day you're fine; the next, yer gone.

That's just wrong. The fact that the suspensions were switched from 6 weeks to a single week indicates that this was wrong, wrong, wrong.

3) Was it a fascist witchhunt? Naw, I don't think so. I think it's a terrific example of how the road to hell can be paved with good intentions.

The aims were great- clean up Ornery, try and ID the problem spots/posters, and bring things back to the level of discourse we once saw here.

What it really demonstrates is that when you're doing something like this, transparency, fairness, and properly notifying people of what's going on is much more important than previously thought.

How would I have handled it? After the investigation by the AOAC, I think OM should have done two things.

First, posted to the board a simple notice:
quote:
Lately, the level of discussion on Ornery has slid. There have been threads discussing this. In an effort to bring things back to where they once were, I have asked several long-term members to help me in indentifying problem spots and Ornery members who might be adding to the problem instead of rectifying it.

I have emailed these people privately and told them of why I think they are problematic, and asked for their help in fixing the problem.

That said, I think everyone here needs to understand this effort. Therefore, we're all starting with a clean slate.

Additionally, there will be a change to the past policy on suspensions/bannings. Upon receipt of complaints via the "report post" button, I will take actions and provide feedback on those to the complaining member.

If a post, series of posts, or overall tone warrants, a member will get an official warning via private email.

After that, with repeated offense, they will be suspended for XXX days/weeks/months. After that, with another offense, they will be banned.

Let us all start fresh and anew, and work to make/keep Ornery a great place to meet and discuss things.

-Love, Ornery Mod

Second, OM should have sent the following email to the Ornery 8:

quote:
You will no doubt notice the post I put up about bringing the level of discussion back to previous standards.

I have had a small group of folks helping me to identify problem areas and problem posters. Unfortunately, your name has been mentioned.

Specifically, what has been pointed out in regards to your postings is XXXX.

Starting now, we're all starting fresh. I am asking you to try and moderate these problem areas. You are an intelligent person who has important things to say, and Ornery is a good place to say them.

That said, if you step over the line, you're subject to the new policy (see the post online for it).

We're all starting fresh, but I must say that since you have at least some past history of problems, you might get a little less latitude than others in this area. I am sorry if you think it's unfair, but it's how it is; stay clean and keep the discussion on a good level (as I know you can) and there will be no problems at all.

-love, OM

Pow. Problem might not be solved, but it would certainly have put everyone on notice as to what was going on and how things were going to change.

Had this been done, none of the Ornery 8 would have had much at all to complain about.

Msquared, I sincerely hope that you take my observations at face value. I think you got a lot closer to this suggestion with the resolution to the Great Suspension Crisis of 2004, and believe that we can move onward from this point.

Well, after I take care of a little personal business in the next post. [Mad]

Paul

Posts: 1656 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Enumclaw
Member
Member # 876

 - posted      Profile for Enumclaw   Email Enumclaw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
KE, I wrote you my condolences when you were banned, but now after reading this, I'm glad that you and Enum got to find for yourselves what it felt like.
From this, we can only conclude that you are a small, petty person, Pete; the above statement proves it to everyone on Ornery.

That you would drag me into this thread via a personal attack, when up to this point I've had nothing to do with the posts here demonstrates what's really important to you- scoring points on me, and anyone else you dislike or think has crossed you in the past.

Your gloating and happiness at others' misfortune is noted.

You might think you've "adapted", but your true character still shows through.

Paul

Posts: 1656 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
OrneryMod
Administrator
Member # 977

 - posted      Profile for OrneryMod   Email OrneryMod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I would like this to get back to the point. I have no intention of deleting this thread. I have never deleted a thread that has been critical of me, although it has been implied that I use my moderation powers to do so.

Pete, you brought Enum's name into a discussion with out provocation. This was KE thread. That was uncalled for.

OrneryMod

Posts: 1260 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Murdok
Member
Member # 1225

 - posted      Profile for Murdok   Email Murdok   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Enum - You're invited. Come on over...the waters fine.
Posts: 954 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
EDanaII
Member
Member # 1062

 - posted      Profile for EDanaII   Email EDanaII   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Oh, for heaven's sake, guys. Get over it.

The only mistake OM made was not to issue warnings before the suspensions. He has since promised to offer warnings before hand, so that mistake has been corrected. Other than that, he asked the aid of others in determining who, if anyone needed to be suspended. So, everything appears, to me, to have been arrived at by a fair process.

Now, let's put this into perspective, shall we? You were SUSPENDED. Not raped, tortured, incarcerated, fined or deprived of life and liberty. And you now have your privileges restored.

Get on with your lives, for cryin' out loud.

Ed.

Posts: 3504 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1