|
1266. RosettaStone - 9/27/2000 12:05:12 PM MM: Muel claims that he does post on mote, although under another moniker, and I've never recognized his ID.
DH1000 was here at the beginning in the Politics thread but got beat up badly by our heavyweights (I'm as thin as a twig), and never returned. 1267. CalGal - 9/27/2000 12:24:28 PM Michael,
At least we keep our garbage hidden. (g)
Besides, we have a lot fewer obsessives here. 1268. Indiana Jones - 9/27/2000 12:51:46 PM What can you tell me about Stinky's Piggery (a website allegedly set up by the soon to be former Mote Gatekeeper, IndianaJones)? Have you ever been there?
Once again, the liar Nostra-dumbass wishes to stir shit rather than find truth. (Previously he demonstrated as much by not contacting Mary Beth Williams herself, who would easily know the answer to this matter without an "investigation" and who was the person I suggested, but rather Nostra-dumbass contacts a third person--making a jackanapish fool of himself in the process--and thus continues the libelous, hamhanded smear.)
Please check the first post in the following TableTalk thread in Salon Central: "To be opened in the the event of my death: The Last Will and Testament Thread."
You will see the post links to the URL for the so-called "Stinky's Piggery." You will also see that the post below that one describes the linked page as empty...and I could use that evidence to say the site has always remained empty, but it has not. (In fact, it currently houses the Mote Movie. Incidentally, the real problem cazart has always had with the site is that he didn't like the selection of Peter Lorre for his image and wrote to wabbit asking her to make me change it. Which I "sort of" did, hee-hee. Tell me, Nostra, just for curiosity's sake, who's the bigger crybaby, you or cazart?)
The topic has never been deleted from Salon Central, nor has the post linking to the Web site been deleted either. I suggest that were "Stinky's Piggery" to have ever housed a site "stalking" Mary Beth Williams, TableTalk would hardly have allowed a link to it to remain in Salon Central. Nor would the thread likely contain less than 25 posts, all of them purely boring in content.
1269. Indiana Jones - 9/27/2000 12:52:01 PM (cont.)
In contrast to the bumbling, jerka-troid who accuses me, I will also state categorically that I have never lied about any sysop (as has Nostra-dumbass about wabbit) nor harassed one to a fraction of the degree Dumbass has done to wabbit in this very community. So by his own standards, I suggest he has sentenced himself to never be trusted with any position of authority here, including thread host or gatekeeper.
Actually, it has occurred to me to request that Nostra-dumbass be banned for his accusation. That is, if his accusation is true, then he has revealed real-life information about me, which is clearly in violation of the Rules of Engagement. (As I dispute said information, it is impossible that I have revealed it on this forum, and since it's only existence is in the mind of cazart, I have not revealed it elsewhere either.) Therefore, if Nostra-dumbass believes his slur, then he has committed a bannable offense; if he does not, then (despite his lofty protestations) he's a slanderer and liar (which of course he is, but that's beside the point). As ChristinO correctly points out, the history he relates is no way pertainable to events on this forum, which according to the RoE is all that is addressable re other posters.
And Dumbass's allegation clearly would be real life information in the sense that it is likely a real life criminal offense punishable by real life courts. 1270. Indiana Jones - 9/27/2000 12:52:18 PM ChristinO: I apologize for again muddying this thread with my personal Fugitive saga ("I didn't kill my wife!" either), but as long as the dumbass crybaby is allowed to continue his genuine harassment of me, I prefer to not go unarmed. 1271. Indiana Jones - 9/27/2000 12:58:21 PM Michael Mele: Welcome to the Mote. I hope you'll stay as you will be a great addition.
BTW, this Nostradamus nonsense started up only in the last week and is not typical. If anything, the community has been excessively calm lately. 1272. Michael Mele - 9/27/2000 5:25:44 PM Nostradamus --
The difference is, they don't promote regular Joe TTers to Marybeth status, do you get the distinction? Here, this guy was (and as far as I know, still is) the gatekeeper. Do you not see why this makes concerns about prior privacy violations valid?
Frankly, no. I understand what you're trying to sell, but I'm not buying. I never had the patience for usenet, but that has to do with the software and the technical flakiness of Usenet. When I go out to play I don't feel unsafe. I post in my own name, and I'm easily located.
Because of the vast number of teenagers and fools on line, I prefer a moderated forum with a lock on the door -- but I am more inclined toward anarchy (which presupposes a civilized polity) than not.
I have an abiding prejudice against people who feel a compulsion to yammer endlessly about the faults of other posters -- although I will admit that I will gossip as readily as the next person. You are welcome to your crusade, Jones seems very equipped to defend himself.
1273. Michael Mele - 9/27/2000 5:27:26 PM Nostradamus –
BTW, now that I know more than I needed to know about this, I want to say that the warmth of your welcome to me is considerably diminished by the fact that one of the first things you did was to ask if I know "Stinky." Attempting to drag a newbie into your fight was not an act of kindness. It tends to undercut your claims of acting for good, as opposed to pursuing a vendetta.
1274. quivver - 9/27/2000 9:13:37 PM I've seen all these lovely personality types in other arenas online, from Nos/God/happyfuzzball to Calgal to Irv to arky and so on. It's kind of fascinating how the internet draws certain sorts of people into online community situations where they play out certain roles. Sometimes those roles are related to real-life, other times not.
I won't speculate on what this particular group of people will do in the next sixmonth or so (the mote will limp along at least that much longer, i can already tell), but it will be interesting to see how these personalities play out long-term, to see if certain patterns occur in this environs.
It is always a new adventure entering a community and watching humans interact positively and negatively in beautifully delineated patterns. I wish vr was viable currently. Anyway, enough quasi-sociology. Consider it all the comment this new kid chooses to make on the debating and whatnot and derive what meaning one may from it. :D Bom dia.
aem. 1275. PsychProf - 9/28/2000 12:55:23 AM Well Quiv, I've been here since 1996...how long term do ya want? 1276. quivver - 9/28/2000 1:03:35 AM I've only been bouncing round online since 95. By long-term I meant within the comfycouch zone of the mote, not necessarily other online fora i may or mayn't have observed mote peeps in action. ;D I'm old skool in a few places online, but a wee newborn kitten here. And I digress...
aem. 1277. PsychProf - 9/28/2000 1:12:12 AM Quiv...I meant here in the Mote/Fray...many of us have known eachother since 1996-1997. 1278. quivver - 9/28/2000 1:22:34 AM I know a lot of you have been together since whenever. I used to bumble around the Fray back when slate was almost cool to read, but not in anything other than a random infrequent way. In fact, it's that past history that is the fascinating aspect of the mote, seeing how this group will function with its old core from the larger forum, the new-old that have been around most of the past year, and the new-new, who have been around less than a sixmonth. It's uncommon to have several groups like that all interact in such a cosy environs. So I'd like to hang around and see how things go. Largish groups of smart people always yield surprises. :D 1279. PsychProf - 9/28/2000 4:28:28 AM Good to have ya. 1280. AceofSpades - 9/28/2000 5:39:58 AM
Kuligin,
Please. We all know who's ready to rumble and who's more or less here for nice chit-chat.
In real life, you'd distinguish between someone picking on a polite soul and someone insulting an insult-artist.
In the former case, you'd call the baiter a cad and jerkoff. In the latter case, you'd call the insults fair play. 1281. AceofSpades - 9/28/2000 5:42:46 AM
And this isn't a case of who's "Connected" or what not. Granted, Diva *is* connected. But, to an extent, so am I. I doubt Nos would have been banned for baiting me.
So it's not a matter of who's in better favor. It's just a simple matter of real-life social rules -- you don't go after someone who avoids fights. You only pick fights with people who like fighting. 1282. KuligintheHooligan - 9/28/2000 5:44:15 AM Diva,
Again, I didn't see the posts. I only saw that he had said something to you. But there were so many posts that I missed, that I didn't have the time or desire to wade through them all.
But that isn't really my point. So you say my kids have three heads and hump turtles. Do you think I really care what you say? I don't. Sometimes people just take themselves waaaaaay too seriously here. And I don't mean you. You were just the example I saw noted in the Suggestions thread. I just think it is silly to get so worked up over these things. That you ignored him was your best option I suppose. But others did not. No, they throw barbs right back at him, then go whining and crying to the management about how awful he is. That is just pathetic.
There is clearly a "linch mob" mentality in this place. With some people, you can treat them entirely like shit and we don't care. But oh, man, don't mess with this or that person, or we'll ban your sorry ass.
Pathetic really. In my humble opinion. 1283. theDiva - 9/28/2000 5:48:54 AM Hoolio
man, all I can say is, I hate being involved in such things in any way. 1284. KuligintheHooligan - 9/28/2000 5:49:29 AM Ace,
So if I understand this correctly, Nostradamus was banned for attacking Diva. And Diva never said anything to him back, she just ignored him. So what we basically had was Nostradamus posting things to or about Diva, and she saying nothing, and he got banned. Is that correct?
Somehow I don't think it is. The posts I at least saw had many people attacking him and he fighting right back. I didn't see the posts in question concerning Diva, so I somehow doubt that this was all about Diva.
Again, it is just a mob mentality. Nothing else.
As for your basic point, I see it but don't agree. Some people attack in very overt ways, others in very covert ones. Who determines how to act for which ones? Obviously, at least in this case, Diva didn't respond or ask for banning, and it happened anyway. So someone else made the decision. I suppose that in the future, should I choose to whine about being attacked, I can expect similar banning of the offensive party?
Somehow, I doubt it very much. But in one sense, that isn't even my point. I don't care what you say. Get a life people! Someone on the Internet is saying untrue nasty things about you. Who cares??!!! 1285. AceofSpades - 9/28/2000 5:49:48 AM
Kuligin,
It's "Lynch" mob, by the way, named after a chap named Lynch.
|
