Printable View
Now that we have an Engaging with Tumpsters category, I think the next step is to prevent cyberanvil from posting in this category (National and International politics).
At times he can be a useful irritant, but too often just irritating.
Any comments?
FYI, as is, I've been holding many of cbyeranvil's posts out of the digest, but still allowing his posts to this category on the website, which also sends out individual emails of his post to everybody who has posted or expressed gratitude to any post on a given thread.
I've thought about closing down any thread cyberanvil responds to. I find him a complete prick. :heart:
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
The problem with you and others is that you want a closed old boys club where everyone pats themselves on the back. Face it, there is never any actual debate. It's all about giving high fives and scoring points. Like the native American tradition of counting coup.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by sealwatcher:
Once upon a time is was "Talk to a Conservative." Now it's "Talk to a Trumpie." Gee, what a concept, people that don't agree with you, It's clear too many have a objection to having their flaws pointed out.
Jeff, you can start by looking in the mirror when it comes to having your flaws pointed out.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
I'd like to see more truthsherpa and less cyberanvil. Trump is a huge mountain of shit and needs a few sherpas to get the truth to the top. Maybe recover some dead bodies on the way down.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
I think another thread should be "What is the difference between a trumper and a conservative."
Trumpers have surgically removed family values as a requirement.
In another time period you could just burn him at the stake.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Having lived in West County for over 10 years, it's all about peace and love as long as you don't express any opinions that depart from the "herd" who consider themselves so damn enlightened and intellectually superior.
Sad.
Maybe he s a prick, I don't know, but have you listened to the things you all say about Trump? I know, it's ok because you hate him. That justifies you.
Why not the same hatred for Pelosi's Corporate Chinese Communist Corruption and abuse of power? She really is screwing our country.
Good thing I don't take any of this too seriously...
I'm not a steady visitor to Wacco: I tend to drop in and out and sometimes am gone for months. So I may not have the steady experience with cyberanvil that gives many of you such a negative feeling about him. But I don't find anything particularly wrong with his posts or posting style, based on just lookeding through 50 or so of his last posts and my experience in following posts where he posted.
I would say that most of his comments seem to be short and of the "gadfly" sort, picking up on points where he thinks others have missed an important fact or way of looking at an issue. So I suppose it's easy to think that "disruptive" if one is predisposed to agree with the point he is critiquing.
But imho I don't think he should be banned. I think that should be only for serious disruption or violation of specific norms of forum conduct.
Just my two cents.
Well, having been a moderator (and sometimes admin) at one huge international forum, and 2 medium sized ones... all dealing with controversial topics... I have mixed feelings.
I'm still not sure if they are a troll talented at playing both sides. Or just.....
I haven't looked into which forum software you are using here... some have an option when enabled that allow users to block/hide posts from a specific user.
To me... the very user name- Cyber Anvil made me instantly think troll. Someone more interested in stirring the pot than contributing.
But still... they can actually come up with a post here and there that is worthy of more thought than a lot of longtime and respected far left members here. For all the problems they may cause here- I think their input is worth more then a at least a dozen members here who I can predict which point they will parrot.
You undoubtedly see more of the issues they cause. And you know what, if any warnings have been given.
In my experience as mod they don't qualify as a troll worthy of instant ban. Warnings probably appropriate. If they have been given and violated a 2-4 week ban is probably warranted... or severe curtailment of where they can post.
Almost always, any attempt to have a meaningful exchange with Trumpies goes nowhere. Instead of discussing issues, they immediately resort to distraction and disparagement (ie, name-calling and changing the subject). It's as if they're incapable of rational discussion, maybe because their point of view is so often irrational.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
I'm not sure C_A is a "Trumpie" so much. They may indeed be one of there better trolls. But they kinda seem more like one of those disaffected Americans. The 10%+ of Bernie supporters that voted for Trump in 2016.
Kinda reminds me of the "where on the political spectrum are you" thread I did many years ago.
IDK. Maybe they are just a troll. Or maybe there are like a not insignificant portion of Americans. Fed up with the system that is. But amorphous on many issues- leaning, often far, left on some issues, right on others.
While I'd say more then a few posts of there's border on trolling...surely "gotcha politics" bs... they can articulate a thought at times without just posting a link of someone else doing their thinking for them.
They piss me off a lot. I'm not sure that's a bad thing. They challenge my thinking more than a lot of other people here...which is a good thing.
debate would be interesting, and probably wouldn't get bounced from this category. "Debate" would entail multiple plausible points of view. Debate with Trump defenders doesn't work like that. I have yet to see a Trump defender able to make a case for the wisdom of his actions. So sure, I bet this topic bores most people to tears because of its lack of content.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
I don't believe I'll take any advice from you. Hope that doesn't hurt your feelings too much.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Valley Oak:
Shit? Did you actually use the term shit?Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Thad:
I've posted more documentation than most on this BB.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
You are entitled to your opinion, but I resent your use of the term Troll.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
Yea, sure of fountain of wisdom.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
You and the Pod make a great couple.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
Last transmission from the Truth Sherpa
Participation on this BB has been interesting, enlightening and to be truthful, a not so pleasant experience. Being attacked like a tuna in a pod of sharks can never be called a pleasure. An honest exchange of viewpoints it is not.
I participate on a number of political forums, but this is the first time I’ve been called a prick. Will the member (Seal) feeling free to use this derogatory term be sanctioned or applauded? Guess we all the answer, right?
I’ve been labeled as an irritant and more, really? How shortsighted and dismissive. Once upon a time there was a Talking to a Conservative topic. But I guess two conservatives weren’t enough to satisfy. When one dropped out, well so long topic. And now we have an Engaging with Tumpsers topic. Was this misspelling an attempt at humor or another derogatory dig?
So I’m movin' on up
To the east side
To a deluxe apartment in the sky
To the east side
We finally getting a piece of the pie
Yes, the grass really is greener over the fence. And Barry, I challenge you to not use the “edited by Barry” wand. I challenge you not to “shadow ban”. Can you do it Barry? Also, if my Email has not been received by you, please cancel my account.
Best wishes to all (well, not all all).
Yes, I also used the term truthsherpa but it seems your more sensitized to shit.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
Whales of a weather swim together.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
First and last transmision of truthsherpa? Please return in that attribute.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
Wow! I can hardly believe that this conversation is even happening. And then again it doesn't surprise me in the least.
What exactly would be the criteria for a thread to be placed in this new “Engaging with Trumpsters” category vs the “National & International Politics” category? More importantly why would one consider this new category as justification to ban “Trumpsters” from the National and International political discourse category?
Seems to me that the bottom line is that you don't like Cyberanvil's politics. The notion that you can create some polite and fair way of excluding his perspective from particular conversations and fail to notice that this is censorship and discrimination in it's rawest form, in my opinion, is a blatant example of the willfully blind elitism that runs rampant in this county.
Perhaps I've missed the intent of “connecting conscious community”. Albeit, that's a broad brush-stroke tag line but if you've chosen it you might want to consider conducting yourself accordingly. If you want to narrow the membership to fit specific perspectives, political affiliations, social classes, religious beliefs, cultures, economic classes, genders, etc, then I think it only fair to expect that you are transparent with your prejudices and post upfront the required personal profile allowed for unfettered access to discussions.
Tossing this out as an idea that you're running up the flagpole to get a consensus before you officially ban someone from a particular category on your public forum discussion board doesn't make the move any less prejudicial or discriminatory. I would guess that back in the day the overwhelming consensus of people using public transportation were in agreement that blacks should ride in the back of the bus.
Lots of people are annoying, myself included. Some all the time, others only sometimes. At the end of the day it's subjective. All that having been said, am I the only one that has the technical ability to scroll past sections of a discussion in any thread in all categories that annoy &/or irritate me?
The Introduction to waccobb starts out with
"WaccoBB.net is a bulletin board for the progressive community of Sonoma County."
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showt...n-to-this-site
Not surprising.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
If I were Black would you get away with saying, "We don't like your kind around here." ?
I guess "Progressive" must mean progressive xenophobia for ideas not commonly accepted by the herd of sheep?
Wand unused.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by cyberanvil:
Account canceled per request.
Fare Thee Well.
You Can’t Change This Hatred—You Have to Outvote It https://johnpavlovitz.com/wp-content...p-1024x569.jpg
/ John Pavlovitz
There’s an old saying: “When the horse is dead—dismount.”
It’s time to stop beating that horse, America. It’s not going anywhere.
I’ve tried for three years now.
I’ve tried to understand them.
I’ve tried to listen to them.
I’ve tried not to assign motive to them, not to speculate as to why they voted the way they voted, not to believe they consented to every cruel thing their vote birthed and enabled.
I’ve tried not to caricaturize them; not to make them into one-dimensional stereotypes, not to treat them as some fictional other whose presence posed a threat.
I’ve tried appealing to their sense of decency, to their capacity for compassion, to their faith in Jesus.
I’ve quietly endured thousands of their racist outbursts and homophobic rants on Twitter and at neighborhood picnics and across the Thanksgiving dinner table—in the hopes that I could find some vulnerable place beneath their fear to access later.
I’ve tried buoying pep talks and firm tough love and expressions of kindness and straight-talking challenge and attempts at affirmation.
I’ve tried discussing theology, tried sharing stories of oppressed communities, tried to offer facts in the face of a million lies generated by their President, tried to show the lessons History has already taught us about the slope we’re currently sliding precipitously down.
They have all failed to reach fertile ground.
Nothing has worked.
It’s all been fruitless.
I think it’s time to stop saying that we need to understand these people. I think we do understand them:
We understand that they have dug in their heels so deeply, they will not be moved by anything—not facts or data or truth or their own eyes.
We understand that there is no political scandal massive enough, no President’s Tweet reckless enough, no legislation predatory enough to alter their allegiance.
We understand that the past three years of viciousness and ineptitude haven’t tempered their passions but ignited them.
We understand that the image of an angry white, American male God is so burned into their brains, that they see no conflict with a religion devoid of love or a world absent diversity or a theology made of malice.
We understand that infidelity, dishonesty, obscenity, and cruelty are no longer liabilities to those they would have lead them.
We understand that the FoxNews poison has so fully circulated through their systems that truth is no longer necessary.
We understand that white supremacists in the Cabinet and Russian infiltration in our elections and children separated from their parents are acceptable collateral damage to winning.
We understand that their capacity to rationalize away human rights atrocities now borders on complete delusion.
People have warned that we should treat these people with kid gloves; that explicitly expressing anger or pointing out criminality or vocally opposing injustice right now will only drive them deeper into their entrenched positions. That’s a fairly dire assessment.
If adults are that fragile in the face of reality, that willing to deny country and humanity simply because they’re offended, that thin-skinned and prone to mutiny—their dispositions aren’t really a burden the rest of us should or could bear.
We don’t come to this understanding with any joy or self-satisfaction—we come to it with sober despair and the deepest grief, because we know practically speaking that right now they are unreachable.
It’s one thing to have held out hope for them on November 9th, 2016, but at this point, I’m not sure any miraculous moral awakening or conversion of the heart is possible.
If their consciences and compassion and reason have not been accessed and unearthed by now, I’m concerned those things will never be forthcoming.
And since these people will not be moved, the rest of us need to move together.
Democrat, Republican, and Independent,
the deeply devout and the passionately irreligious,
people of every pigmentation and persuasion—we need to move in concert, to affirm our shared regard for one another, and to vote to restore balance in something we all love that is teetering wildly.
This isn’t a battle to change the minds of the few who refuse to be changed. That horse is dead.
It also isn’t a test to see if we can manufacture the same hatred and vitriol for them as they dispense toward us.
This is a golden moment for the vast, sprawling army of good people who believe in the beauty of diversity and in a fully accessible America to speak unequivocally—on our social media profiles, at family gatherings, in our church meetings—and most of all, in the voting booth.
We don’t need to convince or coddle or win over hatred, and we don’t need to outdo it either.
We need to outnumber it.
We need to outlast it.
We need to outlove it.
We need to outvote it.
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/newre...3972&noquote=1
Don't guess, look it up in the dictionary.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
have you had a similar history of oppression? A lot of conservatives seem to think so. To most of us it still looks like "your kind" is using their power over us in harmful ways. So, it's not a punching-down situation. It's at worst a contest among equals. It's nice to keep it civil, sure, but it's not analogous to abusing a power imbalance.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
and, I have yet to see this whole thread. Did someone really say that in so many words? without tongue in cheek? surprises me a little.
well, as someone who 'engaged' with the Trumpsters a lot, I thought I could tell the difference between threads that could stay on the normal political thread vs. the ones that should go off into a dark alley. I also didn't see any mention of a ban, though I guess our few right-leaning posters felt that they were being given one.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:
Too many of the discussions weren't discussions. I and others would challenge one of their statements, or respond to a challenge of our own, and find that the replies started veering off into some form of planting a flag. There was a serious lack of any explanation of Trump's actions - for example, none of his supporters ever tried to make a case where his trade policy would end up benefiting American workers (boy, does that seem a long time ago), or why his responses to the Covid-19 situation do indeed show a man who can effectively marshall the country's resources.
Too often it would turn in a meta-discussion, about the quality of discussion or responsiveness of answers. That's not 'national politics'. Barry had a reasonable solution. It would be interesting to have more representatives of the right, but as the Washington Post has found out, too often you end up with Marc Theissen or Hugh Hewitt - people whose description of reality, or cause and effect, only work if you accept unreasonable premises and don't acknowledge the existence of alternate perspectives.
This is a description that I find only on a single third party site (Go Local). I do not find this language anywhere on Wacco's site. The link that Barry added to your thread, Introduction to this Site, does not seem to be an introduction accessible from anywhere other than the included link, nor is this language included on Wacco's FB page. If I've missed this Introduction Welcome Page I thank you in advance to point me in the right direction.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
With or without the “progressive community” language I don't find any rules or requirements posted on the Wacco site for potential members regarding limitations to discourse based on particular inclinations of any kind. As I suggested, if the desire is to exclude or prevent a specific personal perspective, opinion or persuasion from participating than make that clear at the onset. Clarity is the key. Let's not hide behind rhetorical language of the sixties enabling us to pretend that we're open minded, fair, tolerant and excepting of others.
Without context, descriptors such as conscious and progressive are relatively meaningless as a definition of community. Conscious simply means having self awareness or being capable of thought, will or perception. I think it fair to say that Cyberanvil has adequately demonstrated his ability to meet the criteria of conscious, as have others of right leaning persuasions.
Progressive means to move forward, to advance toward better conditions or new policies, ideas or methods. That's a very subjective concept. For instance, Trump's often criticized unprecedented behavior is in fact the pushing forward of a new method of governance in America. By definition that would be progressive. On the flip side, by definition, centrist/moderate democrats doing nothing to advance new policies, ideas, methods or better conditions would not be included in the concept of progressive. My point is that without a deeper context the language of progressive community is insufficient as a transparent rule, requirement or even guideline for membership &/or participation.
To suggest, as you did in your original post, that perhaps Cyber, Ray and their buds should find another site for their point of view was, in my opinion, the only comment with clarity of thought - your preference is to exclude those with a different point of view.... noted
Rustie, I found the above link by following various links provided on this website. I did not start at any other site and I wasn't on FB.You'll have to figure out the trail yourself.
Your semantic quibbles would be better addressed to Barry since I did not write the Introduction I quoted.
My objection to posters from the right (Ray, cyber, et al) on this forum is that they do not for the most part stay on topic which makes any kind of discussion of that topic impossible. Rather, they almost immediately turn it into a personal attack or go off on a tangent about Obama, Clinton, etc.
You have shown a marked tendency to jump to conclusions about me, Rustie, which suggests to me that you cling to certain stereotypes in your own worldview. While I feel no need to explain or defend myself as a rule, I will say here that several of my contacts/ebuds hold markedly different political views from mine and we are able to disagree and remain open to each other. You might want to take another look at your own entrenched preferences and points of view.
Certainly there are umpty other sites that would be more harmonious to the posters from the right than wacco is. I never got the impression from any of them that they were interested in some sort of mutual rapprochement or understanding between their viewpoint and the the one that predominates on this site. Rather, they just liked to jump in and take potshots at anyone's post they disliked.
And, finally, I will say that you do seem to enjoy splitting hairs, girl. :-)
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:
Barry, you once designated this posting as your "pick".
I urge everyone to watch these two short videos ... they will not insult your intelligence ... and then perhaps we can discuss how we can focus on the real threats to our freedoms in in the world and how we can face them together, without labels and prejudices ...
https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showt...4-Unity-Needed
"Certainly there are umpty other sites that would be more harmonious to the posters from the right than wacco is."
Some of the reasons I use Wacco is because it is local and because it has many features: announcements of public events, items for sale, and discussion of many topics, not only political ones. So, in my opinion, limiting users to a particular place on the political spectrum does not seem very inclusive or friendly for a community site.
I didn't propose banning cyberanvil from this category (and only from this category) because of his politics. There are several other Trumpsters that are welcome (or at least tolerated :wink:) here. It was because of the nature of his posts - they were more like drive-by shootings, rather than seriously engaging.
And this site is for the progressive community, which does not include Trumpsters. I've allowed some thoughtful and respectful Trumpsters here to stir debate, possibly bringing a worthy point to consider. However cyberanvil was neither thoughtful nor respectful. We'll see if there is still a need for the new category without him.
FYI, my take on Conscious is here.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Rustie:
PS Rustie, if you can find your way to "wacco.bb FAQs," scroll down to the bottom of the list of FAQs to "Introduction to this site." Bingo!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
What?? Is Cyberanvil being shoehorned out of Waccobb?! If so, I protest! The more right-leaning posters--Cyber apparently being the only one still posting--added a welcome and interesting spice to this liberal echo chamber (I being among them).
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Alas, another sad day in wacco land. Losing another true believer to the heavy handed site stealer/editor berry. He has no shame.
ClearlyQuote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
:burningmad:
How kind of you, you open-minded progressive, you.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Is 'thoughtful and respectful Trumpsters' sort of like
well behaved minorities'?
You wouldn't dare say that about someone Black or of Muslim heritage, would you?
The only thing progressive is the progressive erosion of personal choice and liberty, and the progressive silencing of anybody who isn't echoing the pre-sanctioned thoughts of the "Hive"
And thank you for your graciousness in "allowing" us sub-human "Trumpsters" to dine on the crumbs from your cake at the virtual table...
Asta la vista, Snowflakes.
Enjoy your echo chamber.
What I experienced from "Cyb....anv.." was nothing but ad hominem attacks. Much like the name calling in this post from "ray5-sfo" So snarky. Attempting to insult Barry when indeed he was being open-minded by allowing some comments from Trumpsters. Calling us "snowflakes." Such a projection.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
Star Man
God, how the right-wingers love to equate themselves with persecuted minorities while denying that racism exists in this country!
Anyway, how many websites require people to accept their Terms and Conditions before allowing access to those sites? Lots of them in my experience. Barry has every right to define and uphold the parameters of a website he created. That he doesn't require a formal acceptance (a click) of those parameters before allowing access speaks to his expectation of mature participation and mutual respect from all of the waccos--or at least I think it does.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
Agreed, Star Man. Unfortunately, that seemed to be the highest level of discourse of which they were capable.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Star Man:
Sure, Barry has a right to do anything he wants with his website creation. For me, the question is: what do we Waccos really prefer this site to be? I am as passionate a progressive as any of you, but I relish the rare opportunity to hear from people of a more right-wing persuasion, because I really want to understand them. Hearing from no one but lefties provides limited illumination. I already pretty much know what you think. What I understand much less is why righties think and feel the way they do. And for me this forum was becoming much more interesting when people of a different point of view began to post.
I even reached out to Ray, who I think was the first rightie to post here, on his website and we almost met in person. He actually seemed like a nice and intelligent guy. I'm still open, Ray! Ray was snarky when others were snarky to him, but he wasn't snarky with me. I think most people harbor inner feelings of anger and defensiveness, and if you poke at them they will poke back at you. This can be fun, but it doesn't lead to deeper understanding.
I think there is an urgent need for lefties and righties and everyone between to try to respect and come to a deeper and more sympathetic understanding with each other. If some of these people are angry and feel screwed (and don't we all to some degree?) they should be encouraged to express themselves, for their own good and so that we can all see where they're coming from.
I commend Cyberanvil and some earlier posters for their courage in expressing themselves in this basically progressive forum, and opening themselves up to considerable mass disapproval. And Cyber has not always been so hostile as the posts people are focusing on now. He has often made a real effort to communicate, and has submitted some interesting cartoons. If he sometimes behaves in ways that seem over the line to some people, let him express and reveal those sides of himself! Don't kick him out of the family and make him feel even more like a rejected victim. Let's all open up and get to know each other at a deeper level.
This is my vision for Wacco.
Not so strange to make a grand statement without reviewing the particulars, or the post sequences this issue arose from, broad brush broadcasters not good at focusing on specifics.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by ray50sfo:
When I accused him of being a bot, he returned in a comment that he was truthsherpa, I gave him a gratitude on that, I liked the name.
As things developed other people were having problems with cyberanvil, like maybe they didn't want their words smashed against a piece of iron.
like some people introduce ideas they would like to work with here and then get an I'm so smart and your so stupid kind of response.
But, I wished he would stay but more as a truthsherpa than as a cyberanvil.
Maybe someday you can get the balls to apologize to my mad brother miles.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
Berry did not create wacco, he stole the name from a true community site for his own personal gain despite numerous protests. I don't self define as a progressive either, just like truthanvil. I'm an anarchist, should I be banned?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."
No one has been banned from wacco TMK. Barry just proposed a separate category for the far right's perspective. He got a lot of "gratitude" when he put forth the idea.Those who have withdrawn from wacco CHOSE to do so. My impression was that they were pissed because they wouldn't be allowed to take any more potshots at posters on the Politics thread. They certainly never offered much in the way of rational discussion, which is not surprising to me because so many of their views are based on fake news and alternative facts from the internet and Trump. The best they could come up with were personal insults and misdirection, not unlike their fearless leader.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Thanks for spelling that out Barry. You can delete my account too if you want to bother,,, I will not be back regardless.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Barry:
I had hopes that this site could engage in debate... but you are making it clear this is no better than Fox, WND, Infowars. MSNBC.
A safe place for one pint of view. Contrary views be damned.
Someday...maybe,,, you'll realize that a single view is not right. That this is a complicated and very diverse nation- and the only way forward is to work together. That even when you are right- you have to work to pull others along. And that sometimes- you have to realize that what is right in your reality diesel;t apply everywhere else.
Good luck....
I'm sorry to hear that, SPC. I've always valued your input. There have been several Trumpsters we have welcomed as guests. If they are thoughtful and respectful they are welcome as guests. I ask our progressive community to be thoughtful and respectful as well. Many Trumpsters devolve into rather banal misinformation, and often hijack discussions with their taunts.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
If they engage thoughtfully, they are welcome. They was one trumpster, cyberanvil, that I had tolerated long enough and I felt he was having an unhealthy effect this cyber community. I just wanted to provide a way to protect conversations from his "remarks" that would hijack them.
I hope you will re-consider, SPC. :waccosun:
I don't think you investigated the issue per posts this is about, excuse me, if I post a thing it already presupposes a matter of importance that I would go to the effort to post it, If I get responded to in mockery how is that good?
You can do that stuff on yahoo.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
Yes people have been banned from wacco! Against their will and expressed desire! What site are you on woman fool? Berry has called me a troll, limited my access, and threated banishment! He banned by biological brother, and refused him access to his own writing, which was once a valued contribution. And yes mad miles is an avowed progressive. Why do you want to be a hammer in an echo chamber? One progressive value I appreciate is welcoming diversity. Without it the world is boring, stupid, and destructive.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
Now you have pissed me off. Diversity does NOT give you the right to call Wisewomn a fool. Calling her a name perfectly illustrates the virulent emptiness of the so-called conservatives. You are all merely oppositional defiant adolescents no matter what your age. You haven't grown up. What you call diversity is really just name calling. The truth of my words is revealed in the data. Barry started a special thread for you and last I looked only 25 comments had been posted. What a feckless movement! Star ManQuote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Diversity has a quotient. As in the US the presumption is that there is a body of citizens who operate in the knowledge and reverence of the advanced hope of what the Constitution was designed for. In that number is the quotient where incoming never overwhelms the existing. It's intended as flavoring, not for changing the course.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
I was referring to the people in question on this thread: cyber and ray.
Your diatribe is yet another example of the Right's inability to stay on topic and to project their own flaws onto others.
Sit down and take a few deep breaths, Rossmen.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
However it happened, I am very glad to see all three of these people leave!
A few years ago a guy using the handle of Ms. Terry was making problems. The observation was made that this forum is basically a party and Barry is the host. As a good host, it is his job to create a pleasant environment where a good time can be had by all. If someone is being a bad guest, Barry has every right to move them out to the back yard or ask them to leave if it really gets out of hand. It's his party, and he can ban if he wants to.
The problem was not necessarily the political views or support of Trump and right-wing notions. It was the snide, sneering, snarky and generally obnoxious nature of the commentary. Another observation: most of their commentary, especially on the part of Cyberanvil, was just plain ignorant and/or wrong around 90% of the time!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by SonomaPatientsCoop:
Back on Wacco after a 5 day vacation from the computer. Wow!
As I read so many of you putting down the threatened-with-banishment-from-Wacco non-lefties for snarkyness, I just urge you to look over all the posts putting down Ray and Cyber and notice how much disrespect and hostility is exhibited there. We liberals aren't always so sweet and lovely either! Even to each other!
I had always thought one of the finest and most defining aspect of liberals was respect for others with a different point of view and an interest in understanding them as human beings. It doesn't mean having to agree with them. Aren't you curious about how even intelligent people can sometimes see things in such a different way than you and your friends? And whatever your complaints about Ray and Cyber, they are clearly intelligent. And in my email contacts with Ray I found him to be quite kind and even self-effacing in his attitude about his opinions.
Ray and Cyber dared to venture into lefty Wacco land with an obvious desire to communicate, and got whacked! Is this your vision of liberalism? Whack and ye shall get whacked! Reach out your arms and you just might get communication.
Glia here says that most of their commentary was "just plain ignorant and/or wrong around 90% of the time." Well that's your opinion, Glia, and a blanket rejection that seems to leave no more room for discussion. What would happen if you and the rest of us Wacko liberals--instead of saying "you're wrong!"--said instead, "why do you see it that way?"
To resolve the issue by establishing a separate category for right-leaning posters on Wacco would be like saying "Go to your room and shut the door and scream all you like, little guy!" That would be so pseudo-liberal I am stunned.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Glia:
This post is another example of wholesale put-down of the "Right." It may be true in some cases, but it may also be true for the "Left." Whackamo!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
well, I don't see it that way. I'm sorry they took their toys and went home, and maybe am part of the reason why, but I think it's more a case where they didn't like to reap what they sowed.Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:
There were often cases where a real position was being put forth, but it was rarely defended if 'attacked' (rebutted) -- that's where everything else flows from. That's why there was another category proposed, it seems to me, one where squabbling could take place without overwhelming threads where the OnT stuff would be a real discussion. Squabbling can be fun, but why expose everyone to it?
and I way don't agree with your characterizations of liberals as respectful, or, really (though you didn't say it) of being rational and analytical. Both sides of many arguments show a lot of symmetry there. For every pro-gun nut on the right, there's an anti-vaxxer on the left. Liberals may be more interested in why someone wants their guns, but really aren't going to accept their rationale as legitimate. That's fine, it's just how we all are. Personally, I think Jonathan Haidt had the right idea -- you're liberal because of the things you intrinsically value, or conservative. Do you respect authority more than you care about fairness? Evangelicals are conservative for that reason, for example. That's as simple and fairly accurate dividing line as any I know of.
Glad to have finally pissed you off man star. A label is just a label. On wacco I chose my label to be a short version of my given name. I also label myself anarchist, animist, ect. You call me adolescent and conservative. I am extremely proud of my increasingly childlike mind. The truth is the cyberanvil of sherpas amused me, and im sorry to see him banned.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Star Man:
Always, I love to breath and still smell and taste too. So what part of my reply was so off topic? The info that yes berry threatens and bans people who he no longer wants to be part of the party? Despite their progressive politics? Look, I'm walking the edge. Not only do i deliberatly misspell his name, he finally stopped correcting this, i call him out every chance i get on his own hypocracy. So when he starts a thread looking for community support to ban a poster and you trumpet it why not play with your name? Yeah left of you.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:
Diversity has a quotient? And that quotient is determined by the constitution? Because the constitution does not allow change? The constitution allows a little bit of dissent, just for fun? Am I getting any of your intended meaning right?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Thad:
Birds of a feather fly together
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Would you go into someones house and start moving their furniture round and wonder why they got upset?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Intentional obfuscation, not even a question on what might the rate of diversity be compared to capacity to assimilate and stay on course?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:
Point taken about "liberals," Maybe I should have said "liberalism." Although it is my impression that in general liberals do tend to support kinder positions than conservatives. Otherwise they should not be regarded as "liberals."
If you didn't like how a poster failed to defend a rebuttal, all you had to do is ignore their post and move on. Maybe someone else thought their post was interesting. To simply expunge them because Barry or you found their responses unsatisfactory would simply amount to censorship--an extremely unliberal position. If you don't like to be exposed to "squabbling," don't join the squabbling. Frankly, there's plenty of squabbling already among leftists on this site--just as we are doing right now!
And I have to tell you all once again that when I avoided taking a battle stance with Ray and showed a genuine interest in understanding his point of view, he turned out to be a nice guy who expressed humility about his opinions and sent me some videos that showed me more where he was coming from. They seemed quite odd to me, and they certainly didn't sway me to his point of view, but I feel richer from being exposed to a point of view that is so different from mine and the basically liberal people in my daily life.
I think that the more we can avoid putting each other down and instead evince a basic respect and even actual interest in the world view of others--even views that seem alien or even repugnant to us--the better the world will be. At the very least our understanding will get deeper.
I also think that we will be better off if we can look more deeply into our own anger and defensiveness, the feelings that often get provoked even in basically "liberal" discussion groups such as this!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
Bless your heart, but "Lefty" WACCO is nowhere near homogeneous, it's got a large cadre of anti-science Energizer bunnies spewing buttloads of conspiratorial nonsense about the corona virus, vaccines, Bill Gates, Fauci, WHO, etc., etc. Thanks to Barry for putting these bozos in their own "special" playpen where they can rant and share deranged & deluded YouTube videos to their heart's content. Consensus reality is one hell of a drug, try it, you'll like it!
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by occihoff:
Ok so our discussion is relegated off digest. This is how censorship works. I'll be bach.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Thad:
I love consensus reality, and I will debate it with you any day. Stay on topic. While you might dispute recently banned contributors, don't spew for berry.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by geomancer:
Are you berry?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Thad:
Thanks for comparing me to starman, I love him.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Thad:
Am I one of the three? Should I be banned? A good host of a public, social media forum who stole the name should recognise social responsibility and ban me. No, I am not asking for for it! And if you chose to keep me, I hope you know I will not always be pleasant.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by Glia:
Let's be clear, berry is a neoliberal, not a progressive. You can divide people up all you want. But more interesting is what they really think. So If I dispute you about vaccine efficacy, citing the the legal structure which absolves manufacturers of responsibility and surpressesses accurate reporting, who is right? We both are. Is this the kind of squabbling you want to save others from? Go ahead, support autocratic power who just wants the views for the money.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by podfish:
that seems to me to be OnT, so not likely to be called pointless squabbling. Now, I would say it's a bit of a non sequitur, but you can dispute that bit too. I don't see as strong a connection between the scientific question of the vaccine's effectiveness, and the political one of the legal structure that surrounds it it as you do, but of course I do see it exists. And I certainly agree that the systems are biased in favor of the powerful. You're more an absolutist than I am - I would never say they're only in it for the money. (that's an old Zappa album, isn't it?) but I know they're no altruists either!Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rossmen: