Re: To Wyre Wizard

[Menard]

From Rev. Powell

RC, I love you man... but why?  Question

Like Jack says... WW's easy to ignore if you don't like what he has to say.

He's  been posting on this site for years. His posts aren't popular but he doesn't break any board rules. If he did he would have been banned.

I'm afraid you're obsessed with him. There's no reason to start a thread attacking another poster. WW doesn't do this.

I don't think this kind of personal attack post belongs here. Andrew may overrule me but I'm temporarily locking the thread.

What RC posted is simply the truth. WyreDick is an a$$hole and purely a liar who posts for no other reason than than to get reactions from people and this feeds her little sickness, whatever this may be.

RC posted his thoughts about a troll, and perhaps it may not be containing himself, but...so what? WyreDick doesn't contain himself or he wouldn't do what he does. That sounds like a double standard to me.

To label telling someone the truth as a personal attack....so the a$$holes and liars and flamers are free to do as they please but telling them what they are is a personal attack?

I don't disagree that WyreDick hasn't, technically, violated the forum rules, and to in any way restrict him would be unfair to him and unfair to the others of the board...but, again, to restrict another from speaking the truth, to bind their freedom of expression, well...I've already said it...it's a double standard which favors one expression over another.

[Newt]

Menard: when you are good you are very, very good.   

[Rev. Powell]

RC literally said "f**k you" to another poster and called him an a***ole. That's not simply speaking "the truth", that's an opinion, and one that's deliberately intended to be inflammatory.

WW posts threads that RC (and many others here) don't like and interpret as trolling, but he never posted a thread simply to attack another poster. If WW posted a thread attacking another poster I think it should be locked. If RC posts a WW-type "trolling" thread it shouldn't be locked. That's not a double standard.

Favoring one form of expression over another is not a double standard. Profanity is masked on this board, but that standard applies to everyone equally. It's only a double standard if the same rules are applied to different people differently.

Andrew is not around and I anticipated that he would not want this thread to blow up. Most forums ban personal attack threads. The rules here state

"Rule #1:  Common Courtesy
Please be polite when posting.  Discussing movies is naturally going to lead to conversations with other people who do not agree with your opinion of a film.  One of the great things about that is that neither opinion is wrong, the film simply hit the right chord for one of you and failed to entertain the other.  You do not have to agree with everyone and a good debate is definitely an asset to the community.  Flame wars are useless, so rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated."

I interpret RC's actions as violating that rule because to me starting a thread solely to call an individual an a***ole and saying "f**k you" qualifies as "rude and insulting."

Rule 1 also says " If one of the moderators (this includes me, Andrew) makes a decision that you disagree with, constructive debate about the issue is welcome.  We all make mistakes or take action without having the best information or forethought, so the forum benefits when everyone contributes to find the best solution to problems."  

Your post, Menard, comes under this heading.

[Menard]

RC literally said "f**k you" to another poster and called him an a***ole. That's not simply speaking "the truth", that's an opinion, and one that's deliberately intended to be inflammatory.

1) WyreDick is an a$$hole, and that's the "truth".
2) WyreDick's threads are "deliberately intended to be inflammatory"

I'm not calling you out on locking the thread, Rev, that was probably a good move, especially in light of not knowing how Andrew would want to handle it. However, I don't think you labeling RC's post as a personal attack and obsession is fair to RC. And, let's face it, all RC's thread really does is feed WyreDick's sickness; WyreDick is just going to gloat over it.

WW posts threads that RC (and many others here) don't like and interpret as trolling, but he never posted a thread simply to attack another poster.

(I'm ignoring your term "attack" and inserting my own, which is "infuriate")

WyreDick knows what people's hot buttons are and uses them to get responses. He has several times taken potshots at alcoholics in his threads, and it is no accident; however, to restrict that, in my opinion, would be unfair as you really can't prove that it is intended toward any specific member or that it is anything other than an opinion...but we do know it is intended to get a response.

Favoring one form of expression over another is not a double standard. Profanity is masked on this board, but that standard applies to everyone equally. It's only a double standard if the same rules are applied to different people differently.

I disagree, but I don't see any point in debating it.

"Rule #1:  Common Courtesy
Please be polite when posting.  Discussing movies is naturally going to lead to conversations with other people who do not agree with your opinion of a film.  One of the great things about that is that neither opinion is wrong, the film simply hit the right chord for one of you and failed to entertain the other.  You do not have to agree with everyone and a good debate is definitely an asset to the community.  Flame wars are useless, so rude and insulting behavior is not tolerated."

I interpret RC's actions as violating that rule because to me starting a thread solely to call an individual an a***ole and saying "f**k you" qualifies as "rude and insulting."

Rule 1 also says " If one of the moderators (this includes me, Andrew) makes a decision that you disagree with, constructive debate about the issue is welcome.  We all make mistakes or take action without having the best information or forethought, so the forum benefits when everyone contributes to find the best solution to problems." 

Your post, Menard, comes under this heading.

We could argue all day and each write a thesis on whether WyreDick's thread constitute "rude and insulting", and in the end we still wouldn't get anywhere.

Like I said, I'm not taking you to task on locking the thread, but it could have been done without calling RC out and calling it a personal attack. If it was in violation of the rules of the board, then what you replied to me should have been replied to him in like manner.

My gripe is that I don't see it as a personal attack so much as expressing an opinion. If there is a classroom filled with children and one of them wants to drag their fingernails across the chalkboard to irritate others, so another child comes up and slaps them and tells them to stop it, it's one child telling another that what they are doing is bothering them in a rather intense way.

WyreDick purely drags his fingernails across a chalkboard in his posts. The major distinction is that nobody is forced to sit in a class with him and can leave or just not enter the classroom.

Since there is the option to "not look" it can definitely be said that RC did not contain himself, and perhaps telling WyreDick "fvck you" might not classify as the "truth", but that is a small distinction in the entire message that WyreDick is an a$$hole and a liar, which is the truth, and to decry his entire message as meaning what one small part of it said...well hell, every one of my posts would not fit those standards.

I'm Stating my opinions, naturally, but I do want to remind everybody, and say to you, Rev, that you are not in an enviable position having to moderate a situation and make decisions whether popular or not. Regardless of disagreements, we should respect that decision, and you for making it. I'm still going to disagree with you...if for no other reason than to be the a$$hole I am.

[Rev. Powell]

I'm not calling you out on locking the thread, Rev, that was probably a good move, especially in light of not knowing how Andrew would want to handle it. However, I don't think you labeling RC's post as a personal attack and obsession is fair to RC.

....


Like I said, I'm not taking you to task on locking the thread, but it could have been done without calling RC out and calling it a personal attack. If it was in violation of the rules of the board, then what you replied to me should have been replied to him in like manner.

I can accept that criticism. I apologize to RC for sounding like I was lecturing him. I'm editing the post lock to remove personal references.

[AndyC]

It's an awkward situation, to be sure. From a standpoint of moderation, the post probably did cross a line, and locking it was the right thing to do. From a purely personal standpoint, RC's post made me smile. I agreed with the sentiment, if perhaps not so intensely, and I enjoyed seeing that sentiment expressed.

Of course, it is probably just going to give WW more perverse satisfaction, since making people angry represents power to a troll. I have lately chosen to avoid threads started by WyreWizard. But I do check the number of views and replies, and just shake my head. It's like feeding the raccoon who knocks over your garbage. It encourages him to hang around and makes him even more of a pest.

[Olivia Bauer]

It's an awkward situation, to be sure. From a standpoint of moderation, the post probably did cross a line, and locking it was the right thing to do. From a purely personal standpoint, RC's post made me smile. I agreed with the sentiment, if perhaps not so intensely, and I enjoyed seeing that sentiment expressed.

Of course, it is probably just going to give WW more perverse satisfaction, since making people angry represents power to a troll. I have lately chosen to avoid threads started by WyreWizard. But I do check the number of views and replies, and just shake my head. It's like feeding the raccoon who knocks over your garbage. It encourages him to hang around and makes him even more of a pest.

I'm just waiting for WyreWeiner to screw up badly enough to get banned.

[Menard]

I'm just waiting for WyreWeiner to screw up badly enough to get banned.

Ah like your nickname for him.


As far as him screwing up, I don't think that's going to happen. He's smarter than he looks (I realize that leaves a whole lot of room), and will only push enough to get what he wants; if he pushed too far, he'd put that in jeopardy, and he knows it.

[Flick James]

Ah, and you guys just continue to feed it's ego. My suggestion is to do one of two things, either make fun of it (personally I think it's fun) or ignore it. Those are the only two options worth considering.

[claws]

His "reality flaw" game got old real quick, and I can understand people getting riled up about it.
Ignoring WW is the best one can do because as they say, don't feed the troll.

[RCMerchant]

Dang. I didnt even know this thread was here-I read my PMs and found all sortsa stuff-after I posted my apology.
And I DO mean my apology.
Not to Wyres**tForBrains.
I still-and always will-think he's an a***ole.
I apolagize for spilling my venom to the world at large.

[Chainsawmidget]

His "reality flaw" game got old real quick, and I can understand people getting riled up about it.
Ignoring WW is the best one can do because as they say, don't feed the troll.

I prefer to think of it less as "feeding" and more "poking with a sharp stick."

[Flick James]

His "reality flaw" game got old real quick, and I can understand people getting riled up about it.
Ignoring WW is the best one can do because as they say, don't feed the troll.

I prefer to think of it less as "feeding" and more "poking with a sharp stick."

Thaaaaat's the way I prefer to look at it. 

[Olivia Bauer]

If a person follows the rules, even if their opinions are impossible to agree with, then we shouldn't be attacking them.  My advice is always to ignore posts if the poster is someone who you disagree with (or whose posts drive you nuts).

Why does this sound familiar?

[Chainsawmidget]

They way I see it is that if somebody says something stupid, you should be allowed to tell them that they're being stupid. 

Starting a topic for the sole purpose of calling somebody stupid is stepping over the lines though. 

... but that's just me.  I'm not a moderator or anything here.