Posted on 08/03/2002 10:16:57 AM PDT by justshe
(Regarding the answer to stopping the 'in-house wars')
The answer is for everyone to just stop doing it.
I know that is hard for some, because things have gotten to the point where now things are personal. There are wounds in some cases, and in others there is anger. Makes it really hard for people to stand down. Unfortunately, I am pretty sure it has been planned this way.
Earlier tonight thanks to a tip from someone who I wish I had listened to earlier, we discovered someone who had at least 8 different accounts. One bashed Horowitz, Swaggert, and Art Bell. Another bashed Keyes. Another posted as a rabid Keyester. Another posted as a Klayman basher. Several seemed to have a thing for mocking Registered.
What was the guy's game? Here is a graphic and caption off of the profile of one of them:
Yes, he wanted to get people fighting to where they would walk away.
One of this guy's incarnations posted a piece or two from anarchist website strike-the-root, which to me hints to what his ideology is. It would also explain why he had a knack for going after the DC chapter folks. I recall nrkybill (anarchy Bill) had some issues with you all. They are not the same people, I don't think, but if their ideology is the same and their main targets are the same, then it is possible that there is some connection.
Obviously, the goal is to drive people away. This is not happening on just one side, it is happening on all sides. It is a form of disruption that relies on the cover of good people engaging in flame wars with them so that the disruptors seem part of the mass rather than the agent provocatuers that they are.
There are two options, really. People can help us out in finding them by refusing to take part in the flame wars and being understanding when a person gets sent to the cooler, so that eventually the real problem children are rooted out.
And the other option is to let them win by letting them drive you away- with you being people from every single conservative faction we have. Rest assured though, if that one happens, if you make another home and it starts being successful, they will come there and do it to you there.
I've asked this before. I'll ask it again. (And this is not aimed at you, ... but at the forum). Please stop it with the personal attacks. One can have a rip-roaring take-it-to-the-mat political debate with someone without getting personal, without resorting to childish taunts, and still not have it be bland.
And the best thing that one can do otherwise is to use a little self-enforcement. A Bushie telling a Bushie to knock off the insults is going to probably work better than a Keyester telling a Bushie to knock off the insults, and vice versa.
My flame suits are back on, so everyone have at it again. But please at least think about it. Thanks, AM
You may know more than I do about this particular poster. My impression was that the flame wars were caused by, and were in fact about, those who wish to divide and conquer the conservative movement.
But I don't want to start another one here.
Thanks Gramps !!..........Stay Safe !
Way to go! ^5
I've never posted a thread in my life, so I'm a tad bit jealous.;o)
Thank you for posting this thread. It has been very interesting to read.
I, personally, don't get involved in flame wars. I like reading the threads, though. Once you get past the flames, you can find some very thoughtful and thought provoking posts. However, it would be nicer if there were no flames and it would take much less time to read!;o)
Also, I hope the disrupters are exposed, ASAP.
New tools for communication are certainly a good thing, but there has to be a willingness to communicate to begin with. Awhile back, there was a crevo thread (I don't remember which one, partly because my comment file is only going back about three pages for some reason. Any idea what's up with that?) where a poster named Esoteric Lucidity was banned with every comment of his on the thread flushed along with him. This made several posters very angry and bitter, as he had apparently written a post which they considered a very well-written critique of the other side (Unfortunately, I didn't have the pleasure of seeing it by the time I got on the thread). At several points throughout the thread, the moderator was pinged asking for an explanation, which never appeared. This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. Any off-color remark he may have made to another poster would have long been forgotten about; but his removal, and the pulling of every single one of his posts, offensive or not, really left a bad taste in people's mouths for a long time to come, and in my opinion, created a major disincentive for any Lurkers who might have been contemplating signing up and sharing their insights.
I'm afraid I don't quite. You might want to go back and re-read that Chesterton essay. He specifically indicates to us two things: 1). That it's perfectly natural to laugh at something unfamiliar and wacky-sounding, and 2). That the fact that it's wacky-sounding doesn't mean that it's wrong, and we shouldn't sneer at something just because it breaks us out of our comfortable surroundings.
But either way, I wasn't saying in my earlier posts that anybody needed to treat people seriously when they post something that anybody can see is ridiculous. If I started a thread by seriously alleging that the Pentagon was built as a conduit to the Realm of the Dark Lord and all government everywhere is a conspiracy to keep it guarded for the Day of Reckoning, I should fully expect to be ridiculed up, down, left, and right. I'm only saying that such posts don't do any real harm to FR's PR, especially once someone clicks on the thread and sees that no one's buying into it. So there's no need to stifle ideas.
One place I can see where people might be crossing the line, though, is when they advocate violence against government and other insitutions. That, I agree, needs to have a lid kept on it.
If this is the thread you're referring to (I don't really know for sure, but I followed a lot of them and it seems as though this might be it), you can see in post #3 that he/she found the article at the Declaration Foundation website. I am concerned that any FReeper could see something like that on any other site - even a conservative site, like that one - and be suspected of having unusual political views by the staff here. I don't think I would conclude from this thread that the poster in question was an anarchist, but then, I'm not an AM - you are. :)
Also, I remember seeing the Horowitz/Bell/Swaggart profile page - and I feel absolutely certain it was a joke, and not "bashing".
I honestly don't know much about this person - I talked to him/her on FR very little, and I'm not typically one to second-guess your decisions about banning (I understand that this is not my site, and internal decisions are really none of my business) - but the only thing I can see that this individual did wrong was possibly hold multiple screen names. He/she didn't seem to me to cause much trouble.
Personally, I'm more concerned about those who search the Internet to dig up information on other conservatives with the intent to use it against them, and then post that information with not a shred of regard for that individual's personal safety. To me, that's a far more serious offense - but one that apparently does not merit the death penalty that multiple screen names does.
Thanks for taking all the heat you do -
Daughter
1. First of all, do you think there needs to be more reporting of FRetiquette violations, or are you guys overloaded?
2. Are there any particular types of violations that you all find most disruptive or that you are especially interested in weeding out? For example, are personal insults between FReepers the biggest problem?
3. What do you think about giving a measure of authority to the FReeper who posts a thread? Perhaps the authority to ban a poster from further participation on that thread. It has abuse potential, but peer pressure might restrain the worst of that.
<4> How about whenever a poster is reprimanded by an AM, a dunce cap icon is automatically attached to all their posts? This could be for a period lasting anywhere from minutes to days, depending on the degree of offense. Another potential use of peer pressure and good old fashioned public shaming!
LOL.... Didn't slow down A+Bert one iota.... gave him more recognition, I think.
He was over the top a good deal of the time, but he was funny as hell! I miss him.
My guess is he got drunk and shot out his computer screen.
He's too ornery to be dead.
It's only human nature to take sides. This goes on from the oval office to the corporate office, all the way down to the play ground. Human nature. Everyone takes sides, so the moderators...
It's a fine line..I say thin skinned people should grow a thicker hide. Roll with the punches or just ignore something you don't like. This is a free country, and a Free Republic web site.
It's my opinion that we don't need a bunch of homeowner association types running around dictating what is correct..
Just Joe's opinion.....
Just Joe's opinion.....
Can I rephrase that?:
we don't need a bunch of homeowner association types running around dictating what is correct, Just Joe's opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.