Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: Andrew on May 24, 2003, 05:34:22 PM

Title: Checks and balances
Post by: Andrew on May 24, 2003, 05:34:22 PM
I just dropped Johnny Blister's ISP into the deny pool for the bbs.  He seems to like to insult people and that is definitely not why the message board is here.  To make certain that I am not going overboard, please let me know any thoughts.

Mainly it was today, when he started posting as "Johnny F**cking Blister" (I censored those, and he stopped doing it before I even got the email done).

Then he tells Scott that the only person who thinks westerns are cool is his "wheezing dad."

Next, we get this in the thread about cannibal films (people started discussing the animals killed during the filming):
"Well screw you,Greenpeace a***oles!"

I had given him some warnings, including an email telling him that flaming or trolling was not good to go.

Anyway, thoughts?

Title: Thank You!!!!
Post by: Ash on May 24, 2003, 05:50:20 PM
Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!

That guy always made sure to put his negative 2 cents into almost each and every thread no matter what the subject happened to be.

I thought that I was a little on the negative side 'till I read some of the stuff that guy wrote.

Wasn't he from Argentina? (not to say that people from there are bad)

I for one am glad he's gone.

He won't be missed.

Now the threads can return to normal.

Thanks again for ridding us of that ass!

By the way....what's trolling??



Post Edited (05-24-03 17:56)
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Fearless Freep on May 24, 2003, 06:29:01 PM
There are a lot of people here whom I don't always care for, but when the posts stick within the genre of bad movies, I'm okay with them.  I may disagree with their opinions, but those are their opinions and I have mine.  So I ignore the politics, etc..and read about someone's latest  b movie find

Mr Blister was an exception.  His constant nastiness within the talk of movies, especially towards other's opinions and his constant posts about his own web site were really irritating me.  It started when he was slamming Matrix Reloaded because Neo lost to a Bunny when all he was really refrring to was his own fictional website match netween Neo and Buggs Bunny.  That was pretty inane. (no, I haven't seen the movie so I don't care if someone likes it or not)

Anyway, he wasn't really adding anything of merit within his posts, and seemed to be trying to incite people. so if you think he stepped over the line, Andrew,they  I have no problems with your actions.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Cullen on May 24, 2003, 06:40:12 PM
No problems here, either.  I don't think Johnny Blister "got" to me like some of the others here.  I prefer the threaded view to the flat, and, as a rule, ignored his posts (the exception being to the topics I started; I make it a point to read any and all posts there, no matter how short and rude).  What I read from him seemed more aggressive posturing more than a desire to discuss things.

All the same, I feel a tad guilty badmouthing Blister now that he's gone.
________________________________

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: spikesangel on May 24, 2003, 06:42:08 PM
i am relatively new, so i have nothing of any value to add.
but in light of other posts i have read, i'd say it was probably a good decision.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: raj on May 24, 2003, 08:29:13 PM
You done right.  I just logged on to check the sports scores (damn, Yanks lost again), and figured I check to see if he was gone.  You're more patient that I would have been.  Disagreements are fine, as long as they get backed up by something, saying "X sucks" adds nothing.  And then to curse at & insult others, is way off the scale.

Trolling refers to someone who joins a list/bbs in order to start flame wars.  They're usually kids (not to slam kids in general) or pathetic adults who still live in the parents' basement.

Now time to pop in The Terror.
And pour another vodka martini.
And start sanding my new bokken.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: JohnL on May 24, 2003, 11:07:57 PM
I can't say I'll miss him.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: jmc on May 24, 2003, 11:48:16 PM
I've never e-mailed Andrew about anything, but I came really close to asking him to please get rid of Mr. Blister.   It was obvious to me that the guy didn't bring anything to the board but a desire to cause trouble and waste the time of others. Hearing he is gone causes me to breathe a sigh of relief--this is really the only horror/cult movie board I spend time with any more because it's the only one that's really about movies and less about "attitude."  Now I can enjoy this place again.

However, I understand the desire to give the guy a chance--I doubt I would have been as patient, but then again, I've never ran a board before either.   Anyway, you have my support.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Andrew on May 25, 2003, 12:08:52 AM
I've been told before that I give too much leeway before blocking on here.  Guess that I am doing so on the side of caution, to make sure that I am not just throwing authority around.  I am the S-6, and sometimes range OIC or RSO, all day at the unit.  I come here to discuss movies with my peers and equals.

And I am a big Freedom of Speech supporter anyway.  While that does not mean you can walk into a supermarket and start yelling "meat is murder" over and over,  (you can, but they will make you leave) the board is a little more open than completely private property.

And Mr. Blister's rudeness was more than the working up I can always see when we do have arguments on here.  Usually over politics... ...funny thing.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Fearless Freep on May 25, 2003, 12:16:00 AM
Like jmc, I was vary close to emailing Andrew my...frustration with Blister; but mostly I just didn't respond to him.

Every public meeting place has it's own personailty.  I've been on baords were someone will come in being obnoxious and realize it's not appropriate and settle down and everything's ok.  So I can understand Andrew's hesitation in taking action.  I think Andrew gave ample warning and opportunity

Title: I was curious
Post by: Ash on May 25, 2003, 12:23:31 AM
I was curious......

Now that Johnny Blister is banned....what exactly will he see when he tries to come back to the board?

It's a good bet that he has already tried.

Is he banned from the entire site or just the message board?
Title: Re: I was curious
Post by: Andrew on May 25, 2003, 12:27:02 AM
He is only banned from the message board right now.  If he tries to open it he gets a "You are not authorized to view this page." message.  I am sure he knows what happened.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: simmongray on May 25, 2003, 01:23:20 PM
Hi there. I think that you did the right thing. The first internet search I ever did was “Bad Movies” and I was lucky enough to end up at this wonderful site. I’ve been lurking around these boards almost daily for the past 3 years now, and I have to say that Johnny Blister’s posts were both rude and offensive. Heck, they were just plain weird. Well, that’s my 2 cents. Keep up the outstanding work!

V/R

simmongray

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: onionhead on May 25, 2003, 01:43:09 PM
I wonder if Chadzilla is mourning??  I for one will not.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: mr. henry on May 25, 2003, 02:01:18 PM
Andrew,

my two cents is that the site should remain relatively "objectionable"-language free. it seems like 99% of the net is already crowded with obscenity as it is. it's nice, almost refreshing even, to enjoy bad movie discussion without inane and useless swearing. yes, i do swear in "real life"...just not around people that might not appreciate it. i kinda think of the message board as a virtual classroom...last time i checked, swearing was something that got you booted from class. hey, you're the professor after all...

you deserve kudos for keeping in mind that many of the fans that visit this site are youngsters...it's not just us oldsters. sure they've seen the nudity in these movies already, but nudity isn't the selling point of these flicks so why waste space on it. i'd rather see pics of monsters.

i remember when my workplace randomly banned me from viewing badmovies.org during my freetime. (the title probably stuck in the filter software.) anyway, i was glad to get viewing priviledges back since your site didn't contain any content that fit my company's "objectionable" standards.

keep up the good work...

Title: Andrew...
Post by: Chris K. on May 25, 2003, 03:10:23 PM
All I have to say is you are the webmaster here, so you do what you think is best as long as it's in good intentions. And, apparently from Blister's posts (I refrain from calling him 'Mr.'), it seems like your decision will be done in good intentions.

Let us not forget about the fool who wrote on this board and claimed he had AIDS as well as threaten Andrew with hate e-mail...What was his name again? And Andrew took care of the problem as well.

Personally, I don't think I really had a problem with Johnny. Sure we disagreed, but I don't think we got into an insulting argument. Still, that does not mean I'm standing up for him. I have read some of his other posts and while the possibilities of him showing a hint of intelligence is not very limited, nonetheless he chose to act with rude and insulting attitude towards others. And as much as Andrew give him the fair warning, I really don't see a problem with our webmaster making the right decision. Do what's best, Andrew.
Title: Re: THANKS A MILLION!
Post by: Feathertop on May 25, 2003, 04:54:27 PM
I thought I was alone in thinking he got out of line a lot of times. Your efforts at keeping this board courteous is appreciated, Andrew.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Brother Ragnarok on May 25, 2003, 09:24:39 PM
What can I say, dude was a dick.  I'm glad he's gone.
A bit about the swearing.  As many have said of themselves, my daily vocabulary is pretty well peppered with curse words.  Don't know why, each person is different I guess, and that's just the way I talk.  I don't go out of my way to say "f**k," and I actually do go out of my way to edit myself somewhat here out of respect because I really dig this board and all the people it brings together.  But about editing, if you're gonna type the word, why bother cutting one letter out with an asterisk?  That draws more attention to what it says than the word itself.  
That said, I'm sorry if I've ever p**sed off anyone on here.  If I CAPITALIZE SOMETHING it's to add emphasis.  I realize the standard connotation of that is that you're yelling at the person, but that's not what I try to put across.

Brother R

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Rob Phillips on May 25, 2003, 09:43:00 PM
Hey, it works for me.

By the way, I guess his dad and I are the only ones who like westerns! Much as I love AOD or a really good and funny splatter film . . . John Wayne or Clint in a western will always get my first attention, besides I can always record the 4 hour version of Dune IF SCI FI CHANNEL EVER RUNS IT AGAIN, while watching Rooster Cogburn!

I think he got more than his three strikes!

Rob
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Bubba on May 25, 2003, 10:18:03 PM
I too am glad he's gone. That whole "Hey Chadzilla" thread was downright wrong, and some of his nasty threads were barely even related to movies.
That "Steven Soderbergh Sucks" thread was downright vicious!
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Paquita on May 26, 2003, 01:17:44 AM
Okay, maybe I'm the only person who kinda liked him.  Its good that hes gone though he was a complete butt! He was too stupid to offend me! It was kinda funny how all his posts were completely backward and negative, but it was really mean and I can totally see how it could annoy other people.

love colleen
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: TC on May 26, 2003, 01:46:30 AM
Hey, sometimes, for the good of the team, you have to cut off the dead wood.  

One thing I will give Johnny Blister though, is that his "erotic fantasy" thread gave me disturbing insight into certain individuals on here than I ever wanted to know.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: AndyC on May 26, 2003, 08:46:23 AM
Good Decision. He went beyond simply stirring up arguments, and overtly attacked. He singled people out for abuse, and he responded to polite warnings by being even more of a smartass. Glad he's gone.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Dolph Lundgren on May 26, 2003, 12:19:01 PM
I haven't been posting very long either (been lurking for about three years, though) so I'll quickly add some .02 to the discussion.  The weird thing about Blister was that some of his posts were normal and reasonable, while others were vicious and negative.  It's almost like a Jeckyll/Hyde sort of thing.  I have nothing against the guy, but if a lot of people had a problem with him, especially Andrew, then the decision was correct.

Nick
Title: A Question
Post by: Bubba on May 26, 2003, 04:39:53 PM
Is it possibly that Johnny Blister can still post messages, only using a different name?
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Andrew on May 26, 2003, 07:58:52 PM
Glad that it looks like I am not power hungry, just doing the right thing.  That is the problem with being able to do something - knowing when.

Bubba asked:
Is it possibly that Johnny Blister can still post messages, only using a different name?

No.  His host is blocked.  The server will deny his computer a connection to the message board.

I am always keeping an eye on the board.  Stupid messages pop up every few days.  It just takes me one click to delete them (or a quick entry to delete all posts from a certain person).

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Evan3 on May 27, 2003, 12:00:05 AM
Hmmm, I personally did not take any offense to Johnny, just found him a nuisance and every now and then he was very agreeable. Is he really affiliated with grudgematch? I used to go there all the time before it got stupid and I never saw a post there that matched one of his posts.

Andrew, Cant Johnny just use another computer?

In any case, he got his fair warnings Andrew and I respect your rules. Being on this board to me is like being in your home, so if someone is breaking your rules, and you have given him warning, then you have every right to throw him out.  and then, throw a flower pot at him too (works in old cartoons)

If he promises him to behave will you allow him back on?

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Ash on May 27, 2003, 01:25:09 AM
No!

I don't care what promises Blister makes.....please do not let him back on!

He'll quickly resume his old ways.

They always do.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: AndyC on May 27, 2003, 11:53:12 AM
Hopefully it won't be a repeat of Josh Patrick, who required the involvement of the police after he was banned. Of course, he was a bit of a nut.

Then again, Blister's in South America, isn't he? Be hard to get at him if he wanted to be a nuisance.

Title: Re: Me mourn?
Post by: Chadzilla on May 27, 2003, 12:30:43 PM
The kid (and he was most certainly a kid) had more than a few issues (with empowered women, for one thing), that is for sure, and probably just needed some positive peer attention.  After I raised his ire over saying that I was less than impressed with E.T. and that 28 Days Later was indeed a horror film, I just decided to ignore him, thinking it was for the best.  I did contact Andrew and ask him what the heck it was he thought I did that got JB so riled up that he felt he had to post the To Chadzilla thread (I swallowed the urge to post a nifty little still of Dirty Harry as a response to his asking me if I had a problem with him, which I didn't).  None of my posts were particularly antagonistic or anything (the still idea, while funny, would have been, which is why I didn't do it.  I'm hear to talk movies, not pick fights.)  I also found that he took personal insult at posts I made that were responses to others, not him, that was pretty funny if you think about it (i.e. the James Herbert thing).  I'm sorry to see him go (we have all behaved poorly at one point or another), but there is a certain level of behavior that needs to be maintained on a public forum.  Agreed?

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Dave: Blackeye15 on May 27, 2003, 02:22:15 PM
He didn't bother me THAT much, but it sounds like he treated a bunch of other people badly, so I guess i'm glad he's gone if he was really that rude.

-the first rule of fat club-
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Brother Ragnarok on May 27, 2003, 03:11:01 PM
Required the police?  What happened?  I'm afraid that was before my time.

Brother R

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Funk, E. on May 27, 2003, 05:05:44 PM
I have to agree with you. I don't think you're out of line and I was seriously considering writing you an e-mail to do that very thing. I whole heartedly support youd decission. He was a very immature poster and was really an eyesore on the BBS. Thank you
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: Conrad on May 29, 2003, 06:40:00 AM
Well, it's Andrew's board and website, so he calls the rules.  Not that he seems to impose a rigid discipline.  As to not having swear words on the boards, that's a good thing for me - we have software here at work that prevents access to pages with any profanity.

Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: JohnL on May 29, 2003, 11:03:35 PM
>Required the police? What happened? I'm afraid that was before my time.

Josh Patrick started out as a normal poster, then one day he posted a message saying that he had just been informed that he'd contracted AIDS from the dentist. A few days later, he posted that his little brother had used his computer to post the AIDS message and that he was fine. Then he started getting abusive and admitted that there was no little brother, he did it himself as a joke. He was banned and then started sending Andrew abusive email. Andrew got the police involved, he was tracked down and apparently given a good talking too. Check out these threads;

 Thread 1  (http://www.badmovies.org/bbs/read.php?f=2&i=22817&t=22537)

 Thread 2  (http://www.badmovies.org/bbs/read.php?f=2&i=26608&t=26583)

If you want to review the whole Josh Patrick incident, click the search link and type in his name.
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on May 31, 2003, 02:41:39 PM
I have had my own little run in with Master Blister, and right then I knew he was . . . Nevermind, what I knew. I do wish him well, and hope he comes back, if he promises to behave and promises to cease the senseless need to insult those of us who might disagree with him. I would like to see him back, if only, unlike the other people who post to this board, I disagreed with almost everything he posted. For example: "Jack Nicholson was great in 'Wolf.'"Indded?!  Compared to who?
Title: Re: Checks and balances
Post by: ahab on May 31, 2003, 03:17:42 PM
I think we are all in agreement with your decision to ban him. I never had any run-ins with him but his posts changed the tone of the board I thought. One of the reasons this is one of my favorite boards is that pretty much everyone who posts here can disagree intelligently without resorting to swearing every other word which adds dare i say a little more class to the internet where anybody with a keyboard can swear and insult  and become nasty with a few keystrokes.