In-House Wars: For at least one, the goal was to drive people away.

Admin Moderator | 8-2-02 | Admin Moderator

[RedBloodedAmerican]

People on here who say "Bushbots" or "loyalists" etc do so because they wont use the term "conservative" because they believe Bush is liberal, hence his "loyalists" are too. I get tired of the sucking up on FR.

FYI The person who outted the fr member with "8 screen names" has SEVERAL of his own. I hope they do a check of that as well.

[AmishDude]

OK, it's not the phrase "Bush Loyalists", per se, but the context. Let me explain via my "Israeli Lobby" example: You'll have one of those rollicking Israel threads and one particularly rational soul will get out-argued and start talking about his opponents as the "Israeli Lobby". The goal is to take a strident position and then to position the opposition as being monolithic and incapable of independent thought.

This then changes the discussion as the target feels the need to defend himself or herself as an independent thinker.

[freesia2]

We need to be finding common ground among the different groups on FR, joining together where we find that common ground, and going out and kicking liberal a**es in the political arena.

Exactly!

[inquest]

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.

That part about being understanding can be made a lot easier if the mods would be more forthcoming as to why a particular corrective action was taken against a poster, rather than just deleting his comments and banning him out of the blue. That really is much more of a problem, IMHO, than flamers. Flamers for me have been mostly little more than a minor annoyance, but overactive moderators, or perceived overactive moderators, can really cast a pall over a thread at times.

[justshe]

I personally don't mind Bushie......UNTIL it is linked with "flying monkeys" ( which he already apologized for), or Little Dumbya, or King George, or King Jorge, etc. But I don't claim to speak for all.

It is just a button pusher for me as I also cringe at Dimocrats, Republicrats, and most other bastardizations of words that are meant to infer a derogatory rather than simply STATING the objection to the issue. For me it is dishonest. It is the use of broad brush generalizations that insinuate rather than speak to the issue, which I think is lazy. Example: All Liberals are the spawn of the Devil. LOL.

[AmishDude]

As I said, I don't like the terminology in the context of being used as a perjorative, but Sabertooth is a FReeper in good standing and deserves quite a bit of slack.

Second, multiple screen names don't necessarily mean anything. I, for one, have a second one that has been long-dormant that I used as a joke. BTW, how do you know that the whistleblower had multiple screen names???

Finally, I don't think it's necessary to constantly call in the Admin Moderator for such minor things. We aren't in preschool here.

[Mo1]

Saber, the fact you refer to them as "Bushie's" outs you. Give it a rest.

RBA ... in all fairness to Sabor and even though Sabor and I have had many disagreements .. I have to say he has tried to keep an open mind on many of other issues concerning the Bush Administration

His big beef which I think we all know is the immigration issue and if you really think about it ... it is a problem for our country

The problem I see is we don't all agree on the solution and maybe if their was a good debate we all could find a common ground and help to fix the problem instead of attacking each other

[dirtboy]

Finally, I don't think it's necessary to constantly call in the Admin Moderator for such minor things. We aren't in preschool here.

Agreed. It's good for Admin Moderator to occasionally step in and demonstrate that no personal attacks means just that. But otherwise, the posters on both sides of a given thread should take someone to task if they come barging into the thread wanting to start a food fight.

[inquest]

Most disruptors have a clear agenda and act by posting provocative articles.

What's wrong with posting provocative articles? Please, I hope no Freeper would ever be afraid to do that.

[dirtboy]

Yeah, conservatives should realize we need to band together with people where we have common interests. As it is, it's already hard enough to defeat a political party that includes graveyards among their voting blocks...

[dirtboy]

What's wrong with posting provocative articles? Please, I hope no Freeper would ever be afraid to do that.

Agreed, to an extent. Half the fun here is the skeet matches that ensue when an article from the NY Times is posted. But some folks try to post stuff that claims the aircraft used in 9/11 were remoted controlled, or that Bush knew about the attacks beforehand, stuff like that.

[Mo1]

We need to be finding common ground among the different groups on FR, joining together where we find that common ground, and going out and kicking liberal a**es in the political arena

A very good point .. we all won't agree on everything .. and I'm not saying we should .. but if we all could find a common ground .. I'm all for that

[Mo1]

I personally don't mind Bushie......UNTIL it is linked with "flying monkeys" ( which he already apologized for), or Little Dumbya, or King George, or King Jorge, etc. But I don't claim to speak for all.

I agree I don't have a problem with the Bushie name but the other names I find annoying and not called for

Just because I like the guy doesn't mean I don't have a brain cell in my head and can't think for myself

[justshe]

Do you suppose, and I ask because I don't know, that IF the reason for a suspension were given to all, FR could be opened up to a lawsuit from the person suspended? For 'humiliation' etc? Perhaps it is a 'liability' issue that keeps the 'reasons' private, between the poster and FR?

[AmishDude]

Disruptors post provocative articles. Those who post provocative articles are not necessarily disruptors. I could draw a Venn diagram if you like.

[justshe]

Agreed...and therein lies the problem. The broad brush implies that a person can't think for themselves and evaluate issues....That there is a blind lock-step mentality.

And based on the moderator's comments, this happens on BOTH SIDES. Which I find interesting.

[inquest]

But some folks try to post stuff that claims the aircraft used in 9/11 were remoted controlled, or that Bush knew about the attacks beforehand, stuff like that.

I still don't see what's wrong with that. The moment we say that we won't even consider the possibility that government would do X, then we're providing government with the perfect cover to do X.

And even if somebody is posting something truly ludicrous, there's nothing harmful in that, unless he starts making nasty personal comments to those posters who might disagree with them. Attitudes towards other posters should be curtailed, but not ideas for discussion.

[Mo1]

Well maybe with this thread we all .. BOTH sides can find a common ground

But for now I need to rescue the hubby at the pool .. a storm in gonna roll in soon

[dirtboy]

I still don't see what's wrong with that. The moment we say that we won't even consider the possibility that government would do X, then we're providing government with the perfect cover to do X.

The posts in question are completely ludicrous. We have radio and cell-phone communications from the planes that detail what was going on. But some folks claim the aircraft were under remote control. Any tinfoil stuff that is so blatantly against the facts does not belong here, because our opponents will use it against us as we pursue stuff with far more credibility, such as the Vince Foster matter or TWA 800. I've seen, on too many occasions, that the conservative anti-Clinton movement was derailed because we were too eager to lap up a conspiracy without sufficient evidence - the Danny Ferguson case is the classic example of that.

[Amelia]

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....Several seemed to have a thing for mocking Registered.

Just to be clear, I ping AM here because it was AM's post to begin with.

As someone who was part of many of the "flame wars" the poster in question was involved with, I'm very aware that the "flame wars" in question were going on well before the arrival of this poster. Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought they actually calmed a bit after the arrival of the poster in question.

As to the mocking of Registered, it appeared to me to be a reaction to Registered mocking the poster in question and others--up to and including the behavior that earned Registered his recent suspension.

My opinion, for what it's worth.