patrick.net

Rew says

rando says

I suppose that is no longer insulting another user, so OK.

That was just investment advice.

I thought he forgot to say "Alexa" before adding items to his shopping cart

errc says

He'll be back

I'd guess within a couple months.

errc says

He'll be back

That was one reason I never banned him before. It's essentially impossible to block any one person who is willing to re-register and use different devices from different locations.

But he might be easily recognized by his comments.

That and so long as he doesn't already have some aliases stashed, his reincarnate born on date

errc says

Poobah, put the Donate tab back up in the header!

OK, done!

Hey Ironman, if you read this, go check witopia :))

Lol, we will still know him by his comments.

Anyway, I never quite got the idea of giving up your identity to a VPN provider who will hide your identity only as long as it's convenient/profitable for him.

rando says

People will self-segregate into relatively like-minded groups.

Anyone like to join me in the critical thinking group.

I can't stand Ironman's opinions, ideas and beliefs, but don't believe anyone should be banned.

The closer patrick.net stays to free expression of speech, regardless as to how inflammatory, ill-informed, etc., that speech, the more patrick.net distinguishes and elevates itself above almost all other sites where inter-user discourse is the point.

I am one of the few here who probably believes that ad hominem attacks be allowed, along the lines of "sticks and stones" and all so forth.

I'm a fervent 1st Amendment and free expression hawk, and detest barring, banning, suppressing, etc ANY speech.

p.s. -'I say this as someone who HATES (a powerful word and strong emotion) both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, believing both are treacherous, hideous, compromised individuals, unfit to lead, and fatally flawed in terms of morality, but I honestly believe that Trump is legitimately clinically insane, is both a sociopath and psychopath, not to mention a fraud and con-man, does NOT care about average Americans whatsoever, really is in deep debt/hock to many banks, including many foreign ones, and is the least fit person to serve as dog-catcher, let alone president, in the history of our nation.

I liked Ironman, he knew how to make the conversation interesting. Otherwise we just have few people constantly agreeing with each other hating Trump, Republicans, anything that's not a direct hand out to them, followed by Dan posting some insults, or male port (weird guy) as his form of revenge.

Dan8267 says

HEY YOU says

Those that ban others must have Straw for backbones.

I'm more than willing to debate this issue with you. Justify your premise that no one should ever be banned. I'll go first because I have brass balls.

Freedom of speech goes both ways. It means that a willing audience can hear ideas they want to hear, but that also means that no person should be allowed to prevent a willing audience from hearing those ideas. This is why those who shout down presenters are kicked out. It's also why trolls are kicked out. Trolls aren't silenced by bans because they can start their own threads. However, they are prevented from disrupting other people's conversations.

Your turn.

This is a written free speech forum. It's a little hard to disrupt a written conservation,if the reader doesn't respond.
Oh! Yea of little willpower.

If one doesn't like what another says on a free speech forum they might not understand free speech.
If everyone is not happy,it's not F.S.?
As for me,if one says something I don't like,I'm taking my threads away from them.
I have such tender sensibilities & a perfect value system.

FortWayne says

I liked Ironman, he knew how to make the conversation interesting.

Well, you can still find him on his other favorite site.

He also made the news.

HEY YOU says

It's a little hard to disrupt a written conservation,if the reader doesn't respond.

Actually, no, it's not. Empirically piggy has disrupted many conversations.

Besides, the ban feature doesn't ban people from the site, just from a particular author's threads. It's a halfway feature between a public free-for-all and a private conversation. You just don't tolerate disruptive people, but still welcome everyone else regardless of the argument they are trying to make.

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

I liked Ironman, he knew how to make the conversation interesting.

Well, you can still find him on his other favorite site.

He also made the news.

You are a sick man Dan, get help while you still can.

You have no sense of humor, like most conservatives left or right.

I don't like mobbing.

Thanks Patrick....great idea to block constant attackers.

rando says

So Ironman is deleted, along with all his posts and comments (I have backups). And he's banned by IP.

I hereby protest. Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

Strategist says

Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

It looks like it was the doxxing and calling Roberto's place of work that tipped the scales. That's a whole other level of anti social behavior.

rando says

Lol, we will still know him by his comments.

Anyway, I never quite got the idea of giving up your identity to a VPN provider who will hide your identity only as long as it's convenient/profitable for him.

Because it's better than nothing. From the number of hassles I get from google (especially google), craigslist, banks, credit card companies, etc., etc. when they detect a vpn ip it seems that they are very upset at not knowing your actual IP address. I'm not letting them map every aspect of my online life if I can avoid it.

YesYNot says

Strategist says

Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

It looks like it was the doxxing and calling Roberto's place of work that tipped the scales. That's a whole other level of anti social behavior.

Why would I believe that? Consider this. Rumors are not provable, and in America we do have to "prove" before calling someone guilty. Hello, remember that whole "innocent until proven guilty", it's one of our amendments.

YesYNot says

Strategist says

Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

It looks like it was the doxxing and calling Roberto's place of work that tipped the scales. That's a whole other level of anti social behavior.

I was not aware if this.

Wow. That's bizarre behavior akin to stalking.

I also would have preferred not banning Ironman. DIdn't agree with him about most things, but he did not bother me that much. I don't know the story about Roberto; what caused it, is there proof? On the other hand, the way people here have been attacking Ironman, it feels like mobbing, and that I have an aversion to.

Strategist says

I hereby protest. Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

He already has tenure as professor of animal husbandry.

FP says

DIdn't agree with him about most things, but he did not bother me that much.

That's not why he has been banned by Patrick or anyone else. The was a disruptive troll.

I doubt anyone other than the conservative right and a few conservative leftist would ban someone for making a compelling counter-argument. Piggy never made a compelling counter-argument. He just threw poo and presented misinformation as fact.

YesYNot says

Strategist says

Ironman has been here long enough to earn tenure.

It looks like it was the doxxing and calling Roberto's place of work that tipped the scales. That's a whole other level of anti social behavior.

I would agree it was the wrong thing to do, but that was a long time ago. Isn't there a statute of limitations?

I though some of his comments had substance. More than many of mine for sure :)

Lots of cats calling the kettle black here for sure......

Graybox says

Lots of cats calling the kettle black here for sure......

That's racist.

FP says

I though some of his comments had substance.

Unfortunately, that substance was a frothy mixture of lube, feces, and goat semen.

Strategist says

Isn't there a statute of limitations?

If he had recognized the problem with what he did and fundamentally changed his behavior, I would agree with you. When Roberto came back as a different person, Ironman went right back at it. He couldn't just let bygones be gone and discuss the facts at hand.

FP says

I though some of his comments had substance.

Some of his comments did - a very small percentage, though, because of the sheer number of his useless posts. I never thought that he was a complete moron. He was just anti-social to the degree that he blocked much more useful conversation than he inspired. That's my opinion anyway. I actually thought that he might be nudged in the right direction rather than having to be banned, but he was immune to advice from the likes of me.

Because you are not a judge, jury and prosecutor at the same time, with Dan cheerleading from behind.

FortWayne says

Dan cheerleading from behind.

Is that a joke about Democrats 'leading from behind' or a secret wish of yours coming out in a Freudian slip?

rando says

a bunch of aliases

that list really made me LOL

It's trippy to think how bizarrely Ironman (whatever his real name is) acted IRL.

I have read accounts of such behavior but this is the first time I've been on a forum where I've encountered another member who went this far.

Dude needs serious help.

AllTruth says

It's trippy to think how bizarrely Ironman (whatever his real name is) acted IRL.

I've always said that piggy is a self-hating homosexual unhappily married to his fat beard wife, and that's why he's so hateful. He sees all the videos of people enjoying life, enjoying sexual freedom, enjoying being themselves and he is overcome with envy because he knows he's trapped in the miserable marriage he entered to hide his homosexuality. If he were openly gay, he would not be nearly as miserable, but now he's old and has no opportunity to find true happiness with another soul, and it drives him crazy. That is why he's obsessed with gay bashing and spitefully attacks anyone who has a happy life. Envy drives his hatred just like envy drives the hate of many conservatives on the left and the right.

rando says

I found he had a bunch of aliases, all of which show the tone of his conversations:

So basically, he attacked every single regular poster who wasn't alt right. And people wonder why there are so few regular posters on PatNet. Maybe now that he's gone, PatNet can grow by attracting new blood. ...at least if the other trolls can tone it down.

Personally, I'd like to see new people posting.

HEY YOU says

Sorry DAN,you can't be in the Critical Thinkers Group.

You just broke your own rule!

I agree with Dan that free speech doesn't mean that you get to say what you want whenever you want however you want. IRL, this creates a conflict where people are drowning each other out.

Online, everything gets posted, so nobody gets silenced. It's a different issue. If people were able to ignore the silly insult posts, the abuser would go away. But here, like elsewhere, there was always someone willing to argue with him and give him space. If Ironman just accepted the ignores, things might have worked out differently. But he repeatedly created alts just to stalk/troll people who wanted nothing to do with him. That's fucked up.

HEY YOU says

Free Speech is about one being able to say what they choose.

There is always a limit. The question is really what that limit should be.

You cannot yell "Theater!" in a crowded firehouse for example. ;-)

But seriously, I think the important thing is to remain open to all honest debate, no matter how politically incorrect.

Insults and doxing are outside the realm of honest debate.

HEY YOU says

"productive conversations." only apply as long as everyone agrees or at least as long as Snowflakes agree?

That's a straw man argument. I never said anything that could even remotely be interpreted as that by any reasonable person.

HEY YOU says

Free Speech is about one being able to say what they choose.

Saying "we should drown puppies in the river" is free speech. Shouting it with a megaphone into someone's ear is not.

Free speech is about content, not tactics. It's about function, not form. It's about the message, not the delivery.

I have never, ever prevented or hindered someone from making a counter-argument, no matter how flawed, nor have I ever avoided addressing any person's question even the ones that are obvious traps and gotchas. My approach has always been to directly contradict the person's thesis with evidence and reasoning. I challenge you to find one example where I do not do this.

You assertion that I avoid conversations with those I disagree with is unfounded. I welcome all challenges. However, trolling is not challenging. Trolls do not express differing opinions or counter-arguments. They destroy conversation and debate. There is a huge difference between a person presenting a compelling counter-argument and a troll like piggy. It is ludicrous to even compare the two.

To prove my point beyond any doubt, I reissue my standing challenge to debate any person on any subject in a thread moderated by Patrick and judged by real world judges with debate experience. There is no subject and no idea that I am afraid to address or debate. None. If you do not understand that, you do not understand me. The fact is that the best possible debate to me is one that changes my position on a subject. That, to me, is the ultimate victory.