Banning cbyeranvil from the Inter/National Politics category

[Barry]

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?

[Barry]

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.

[sealwatcher]

I've thought about closing down any thread cyberanvil responds to. I find him a complete prick.

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?

[cyberanvil]

I've thought about closing down any thread cyberanvil responds to. I find him a complete prick.

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.
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.

[Valley Oak]

Jeff, you can start by looking in the mirror when it comes to having your flaws pointed out.

The problem with you and others ...

[Thad]

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.

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?

[Thad]

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.

[ray50sfo]

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?

In another time period you could just burn him at the stake.

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...

[phredo]

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.

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

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.

[wisewomn]

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.

[SonomaPatientsCoop]

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.

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.

[podfish]

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.

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.

[cyberanvil]

Jeff, you can start by looking in the mirror when it comes to having your flaws pointed out.

I don't believe I'll take any advice from you. Hope that doesn't hurt your feelings too much.

[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.

Shit? Did you actually use the term shit?

[cyberanvil]

... 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.

I've posted more documentation than most on this BB.

[cyberanvil]

I'm not sure C_A is a "Trumpie" so much. They may indeed be one of there better trolls. ....

You are entitled to your opinion, but I resent your use of the term Troll.

[cyberanvil]

debate would be interesting, and probably wouldn't get bounced from this thread. "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.

Yea, sure of fountain of wisdom.

[cyberanvil]

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.

You and the Pod make a great couple.

[cyberanvil]

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).

[Thad]

Yes, I also used the term truthsherpa but it seems your more sensitized to shit.

Shit? Did you actually use the term shit?

[Thad]

Whales of a weather swim together.

You and the Pod make a great couple.

[Thad]

First and last transmision of truthsherpa? Please return in that attribute.

Last transmission from the Truth Sherpa...

[Rustie]

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?

[wisewomn]

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

[ray50sfo]

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.

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?

[Barry]

... 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).

Wand unused.

Account canceled per request.

Fare Thee Well.

[wisewomn]

A friend sent this to me today.

You Can’t Change This Hatred—You Have to Outvote It

August 7, 2018 / 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

[Thad]

Don't guess, look it up in the dictionary.

...I guess "Progressive" must mean progressive xenophobia for ideas not commonly accepted by the herd of sheep?

[podfish]

If I were Black would you get away with saying, "We don't like your kind around here." ?

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.

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.