There is a marked and painfully obvious difference between a "difference in opinion" (which doesn't even come within a seven league stride of the repulsively swinish and disruptive behavior engaged in by the Rudybots these past few weeks, in particular) and flagrantly disrespecting the host and actively, aggressively disobeying his stated rules of conduct.
The first one is defensible; the second... not so much.
Some may deserve to be banned but I don’t think many did.
... and, without any undue kindness meant: were you actually the host in question, that opinion would count for something.
Again: none of this is in any way "new," or "sudden," or "unexpected." Jim's rules for conduct on this site (HIS site!) -- e.g., "Free Republic does not support pro-abortion politicians"; "Free Republic does not support pro-gay 'marriage' politicians"; etc., etc. -- have been posted on the main page for (literally) YEARS. The commonly accepted internet term for someone (ANYone) who goes onto a site and willfully and repeatedly violate its rules for discussion, after multiple warnings not to do so, is: TROLL.
They trolled. The fact that they had managed to post here previously without trolling does not in any intellectually honest way, shape or form mitigate the plain and unvarnished fact that they willingly trolled now, again and again and again.
I have no patience for trolls, and cannot be bothered wasting either precious time or energy working up sympathy for them.
Bump! Another great post.