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 are so absolutely right. There are so many other reasons that FR is great. My reply was hasty and I was still a little red-eyed, having to deal with that gleeking bat-fowling malt-worm, maxwell. (.30C says it's a guy thing. She is undoubtedly right.)
I have one.
See the word in bold? It's called past tense. It means it's not current.
Still stalking me Sirgwain?
You pinged me to #26 in reply #30, genius. I still refuse to believe you're as mentally handicapped as you portray yourself. Of course you do it just to bait people. Big surprise.
I don't think I will bring up yours to save you embrassment.
I only have one account. John can verify for you.
He was banned, and immediately defected to the Dark Side.
(What's that? What? Oh. Yes Dear! I knew that.)
Well, gotta go.
Hey dude, I sense you got a lil incensed about that, so for the record, my foolishness was inappropriate and I apologize to everyone on this board, especially you and .30. Y'all are good folks and shouldn't pay any attention to my soused a$$. ;)
Silly.
Hey, where is Silly?
LOLuv !.30
Get a life.
Sigh. I'll speak in smaller sentences. You claimed I was stalking. I was replying to your ping. That's still the method on FR, right? Someone pings you, then you reply? That's what I was trying to explain to you.
It has taken you this long to reply to my post #30
Yes, sorry I have a life outside of FR. I can't be here 24/7. I'll try harder in the future.
which was made to make you two aware of the success of your efforts?
I'm not sure what you're talking about there, so I can't answer that.
there's that visual again ;)
*tickle, tickle*
I see now. :)
Yes, I think you did, too. This individual - "ned"- was hardly a liberal disruptor, in my opinion. Someone who may have enjoyed having a little fun with people, maybe, but not a "liberal disruptor".
The only thing he/she did wrong was have multiple accounts, that I can see. If the penalty for that is banning and we all understand that, then no one can argue that he/she should still be here - but I was on a lot of Keyes and Klayman threads, and I never saw any evidence that he/she was doing anything out of the ordinary.
I looked at his/her profile pages, and knew right away that they were intended to be humorous.
He/She posted an article that was being discussed on the Declaration Foundation message boards that happened to originate from an oddball website, but that's not evidence of anything, in my opinion (except that he/she read the DF message boards).
I think a lot of unfortunate conclusions were jumped to in this case (and instigated by someone who had a big problem with "ned"). Now, that doesn't mean he/she shouldn't have been banned, but I think it's quite a leap to label someone a "liberal disruptor" or "anarchist" based on the information available.
Just my 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.