Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

> Boy, you live in a paranoid world. I guess that's part of your
> attraction to all-war-all-the-time. Here's my philosophy in a
> nutshell: you treat people as you wish to be treated. I also
> recommend a sense of humor, which you apparently lack.

What could you possibly be thinking to launch into this personal
attack? I was never uncivil to you.

But yes, being a computer consultant, dealing with extremely
malicious computer security issues, especially in the DoD
environment, has made me extremely cautious about a lot of things.

Also, six years of writing for my web site, and seeing what things
all kinds of people -- from terrorists to investment bankers to real
estate brokers -- are capable of, and how willing they are to screw
and destroy people for their own gain has also made me cautious.

John

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

It was only when the nasty, loathesome little Gen-X twirp, supported by his group of malicious admirers, interfered that you and I began to have serious trouble. It was his overt objective for four years to poison every relationship I had in that thread, and it may be that his poison was the major problem between you and me.

I had no idea I had all of this power. Wow. Maybe I should project my abilities outside of this forum? Perhaps I am the Antichrist. Should I change my screenname to Mabus?

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

We're talking about political discussion on a forum here. This is just banter. For heavens sake.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

But yes, being a computer consultant, dealing with extremely
malicious computer security issues, especially in the DoD
environment, has made me extremely cautious about a lot of things.

Also, six years of writing for my web site, and seeing what things
all kinds of people -- from terrorists to investment bankers to real
estate brokers -- are capable of, and how willing they are to screw
and destroy people for their own gain has also made me cautious.

John

That is helpful to know.

I work in a profession that values intellectual freedom, the sharing of information, and equality of access, so that is my bias, and this is probably why I appear to have a high tolerance level for comments that others see as threatening or offensive.

I also prefer talking through conflict rather than having it cut off arbitrarily.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Good lord, woman, it's not all about you. Or maybe that's the problem.

Haw. I've never posted there, just lurk.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Hah! What a crock of total shit. This woman has admitted to having the longest ignore list on the forum. Her tolerance is only for threatening or offensive comments directed at others whom she doesn't like.

You have no idea who is and who isn't on my ignore list, or why they're there. And I kind of like it that way.

I have always tried to engage these folks either publicly or privately before making the decision to put them on "ignore."

Originally Posted by The Rani

> On the off chance that there is an administrator somewhere reading
> this who actually cares about any of this, which I agree with you
> is not likely, Silifi and I have had a discussion via PM which I
> feel has resolved the issue. I've had similar conversations with
> others, who have been sucked in by the people in the clique and
> later realized that they had gone too far.

That's good to hear, and actually a relief in some ways. Thanks for
posting that information.

John

Originally Posted by The Rani

Since I've been a member of this forum for almost 7 years now (egad!) I would suggest that you look through my old posts before you use the word "never."

OK, almost never. You really did get involved on Global Warming, with numerous on-topic posts in those threads.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Hey did you see the latest on those underwater volcanoes!!!

Hey, tell that to Mike Alexander. He was the volcano sceptic. I never took the time to consider it.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Well, think of it this way. If those particular folks bother you to the point that you are no longer able to tolerate their offensive behavior, can you not understand how someone like John might feel the same way?

As I told John, I figured that was why he wanted to start his own moderated forum here so that he could edit out that kind of stuff. I was fine with him doing that. And I'm sure his "Ignore" button works just fine.

Or perhaps it will take someone writing a post about your own slow, clinical brain death, before you finally get it.

Hey, I saw where KIA wants to metaphorically crush me between a rock and a hard place, and/or maybe ship me off to Europe because I won't get with the program.

::shrug:: Sometimes you just have to consider the source.

Is it useful to bring this stuff up over and over again?

I mean, M&L seems to somehow feel that people on the forum are just avatars, or characters, and not "real" enough that they should be personally offended or affected by anything that is said. Obviously, that's not the case, or we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

I don't think you should say anything online that you wouldn't be willing to say in person.

Originally Posted by The Rani

... M&L seems to somehow feel that people on the forum are just avatars, or characters, and not "real" enough that they should be personally offended or affected by anything that is said. Obviously, that's not the case, or we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

I've met a few folks IRL that I had originally met on the Net. With the notable exception of Jenny Genser, they were very different people than their e-Personas. That may not always be true, but that's my experience.

Taking offense is a personal choice, so do as you wish on that. I don't, since its a waste of time. None of us is that important. I can't see anyone driving across the country to accost you, me or anyone else. All that leaves is invective.

Originally Posted by The Rani

I don't take offense. The point is that some people, like John, and even Wally, clearly do.

That's why I try to treat people as I would prefer them to treat me. I don't always succeed, but that's the goal.

Originally Posted by The Rani

... In my experience, making assumptions like this is never a safe bet. You hear lots of weird stories about Internet arguments turning into actual violence these days. Who's to say when it will happen and when it won't?

I put this in the same category as people who worry their child will be snatched off the street by strangers. It happens, but it's 10 or 20 times more likely they'll be hit by a bus. The bus risk isn't perceived as significant, so no one worries about that. Then why worry about child snatching?

I keep a mental Pareto Chart, and tend to ignore anything to the right of the first five or six bars. Life is complicated enough already.

Originally Posted by The Rani

And if I were like you, I would have replied "standing ovation" to that one.

Do you then agree with him that "liberals" should be forcibly expelled from this country?

Or what, exactly, would you applaud?

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I could exchange those two names and say the same. Suj has never been interested in the theory, history, politics or any of the related disciplines. Her interest is the people that are interested in that stuff. I won't go so far as saying we're lab rats, but we're not intellectual colleagues, either. BTW, that predates Wally's appearance, so its not just a reaction to one person.

The problem with switching those two names is that The Rani didn't pick a fight with Pink Splice. As far as the rest goes, I don't know what to say. Even before becoming friendly with her, I can honestly say that I never felt like a lab rat or anything like that when discussing things with her. I will note that she has made comments about treating people as experiments in response to such claims, but I've always read them as sarcastic jokes.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

That's pretty Machiavellian.

Actually, it's pretty classic "user" behavior. And I don't think that it's Machiavellian, rational, or even conscious on his part.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Personally, I don't have anything against you, and have only disagreed strongly with your take on the Iraq War and its execution. My only problem with Suj is her tendency to test people to get reactions. Xenakis, I ignore. I try to call zilch and HC68 on BS, and may cross the line with them from time to time.

So I'm finding all this to be a tempest in a teapot, though I could certainly be wrong. My skill-set is focused in other areas, as my wife points-out on a regular basis. I try to avoid factional infighting ... even with Marc Lamb. I don't always succeed. Apparently, I'm carrying water right now, at least you seem to think so. I'm trying to pour oil on troubled waters.

It's OK to not like The Rani. She happens to be one of my internet buddies, but I can appreciate the fact that people don't like her or her style of argumentation. That's fine. We don't have to sing Kumbaya together.

At the same time, I think that it's possible to not like her and also acknowledge that posters shouldn't go around firing off death fantasies about other posters without adding a post-script saying, "...but The Rani really deserved it." It's obvious from his posts that Pink Splice imagines himself to be a righteous flame warrior defending his little corner of the internet from the bad guys (people who made fun of him in high school, people who "stole" his roleplaying hobby from him, etc.). Responses like yours serve only to feed his fantasy by excusing his actions and making them more likely in the future.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Wally has been wrong and will probably be again. That doesn't make him a poster-boy for all the ills of this board. We're all adults, and need to act like it. All of us fail at least occasionally. A little introspection won't hurt any of us.

I don't think I said that Pink Splice is a poster boy for the ills of this forum. If I gave you that impression, I apologize. I'm aware that Pink Splice's obsessions are his and his alone. I don't believe that he simply fails to act like an adult from time to time -- his overtly abusive behavior is far too consistent for such an explanation, and points to a larger pattern.

This pattern did not start with The Rani. It didn't even start here.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

She could stop baiting him.

Since when is it baiting to reply to one's critics?

Originally Posted by Semo '75

Since when is it baiting to reply to one's critics?

If she does it in a thoughtful way, it isn't.

But the comment about his dog was mean.

Even if he never saw it, right?

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

What you don't seem to recognize is that you're serving the same role for the Rani.

Not really. What I've been saying is this:

I believe that it is unacceptable to post death fantasies about other people on the forum. Period. It doesn't matter if the person who does so is a "creative", and it doesn't matter whether the target rubs people the wrong way.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Furthermore, there was a lot of history between other posters and her both on and off this forum before you decided to take up her cause last year.

I don't believe that I ever decided to take up her "cause". Pink Splice and I had a rather spectacular and drama-filled disagreement, which The Rani ended up in the middle of, mostly because Pink Splice picked a fight with her. (If I recall correctly, when another poster pointed out that she was a psychiatrist, he used it as a lead-in to attack her.)

To the best of my knowledge, neither Pink Splice nor The Rani had much of a history with each other before that.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

This is not just about Wally.

The subject at the center of my recent posts has been Pink Splice's death fantasy about The Rani. In the time that I've been here, to the best of my knowledge, nobody else has put up such a posting.

So yes, it is just about him. And I pointed out that this death fantasy is just one example in a pattern of abusive behavior on Pink Splice's part which didn't start with The Rani and will not end with her.

It's possible that you'll dig up a post from the past in which someone else posted such a fantasy. If that's the case, then I'll say now that the poster was wrong, and I will offer no explanations or rationalizations for the behavior.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

I will acknowledge that he should change some of his behavior here, and I have engaged him on that subject directly several times, and I will continue to do so. I happen to think that's a more mature and respectful way of handling the situation.

Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by Semo '75

Good luck with that.

I can guaran-damn-tee it will work better than the alternative.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

I can guaran-damn-tee it will work better than the alternative.

It will for a little while. Then Pink Splice will be back to his old tricks. And when he returns to being abusive, people will continue to make excuses for him and rationalize his behavior.

Originally Posted by Semo '75

It will for a little while. Then Pink Splice will be back to his old tricks. And when he returns to being abusive, people will continue to make excuses for him and rationalize his behavior.

You don't know any of that for a fact. People change. Even flame warriors.

Originally Posted by The Rani

I don't think so. It's entirely unhealthy for someone like Wally to have his dysfunctional ways of dealing with his psychological problems not only tolerated, but actually encouraged, by members of this forum. Going cold turkey may be his only shot at recovery. Working the 12 steps, whatever this may mean to him, ain't doing the trick.

And, no, this isn't sarcasm this time. It's my honest assessment.

I can only tell you that I've said things to Wally privately that explicitly DID NOT encourage the behavior. You will have to take my word for it.

He has friends here who are trying to help him.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

If she does it in a thoughtful way, it isn't.

But the comment about his dog was mean.

Even if he never saw it, right?

I can sympathize with what Pink Splice is going through on a bunch of levels. I've lost two pets and a very close friend in the last year and two months. My heart goes out to him, and I mean that sincerely.

However, I can't sympathize with any offense that he might take from The Rani's comment, or with your indignation over it.

See, I've never made it a secret that I'm a war vet who lost friends overseas. So Pink Splice's comment, the one about being killed in combat if I'm lucky or becoming a POW if I'm not, impacted me in a very different way than it would have impacted others. I don't recall people falling all over themselves to point out how "mean" his comment was or that it was a "new low" for him.

The attitude that I remember, more or less, was that I should understand Pink Splice's anger and that I basically deserved what he was dishing out.

On top of that, on the night that Pink Splice posted about his dog's sickness, he was already using his dog as a rhetorical club to beat up the "Ignore List" within the hour. (It was in the context of a discussion about POWs, I think. I'll find it and reference it if necessary.)

In light of all that, my well of sympathy for the offense he (or others) might take from The Rani's comment has pretty much run dry.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

...I work in a profession that values intellectual freedom, the sharing of information, and equality of access, so that is my bias, and this is probably why I appear to have a high tolerance level for comments that others see as threatening or offensive.

I also prefer talking through conflict rather than having it cut off arbitrarily.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

You have no idea who is and who isn't on my ignore list, or why they're there. And I kind of like it that way.

I have always tried to engage these folks either publicly or privately before making the decision to put them on "ignore."

-I wonder if she can read this, or has she put me on "ignore"?

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

...I don't think you should say anything online that you wouldn't be willing to say in person.

-I agree.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

...Suj has never been interested in the theory, history, politics or any of the related disciplines. Her interest is the people that are interested in that stuff...

-She has said that, although I do remember these recent comments:

Originally Posted by The Rani

...I know a WWII vet who fits very well into this category. Maybe a lot of "Civics" do.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Yeah, probably. Civics are more like the sheep.

-Maybe she's just manipulating me?

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

...Personally, I don't have anything against you [Semo], and have only disagreed strongly with your take on the Iraq War and its execution. My only problem with Suj is her tendency to test people to get reactions. Xenakis, I ignore. I try to call zilch and HC68 on BS, and may cross the line with them from time to time.
... even with Marc Lamb...

-I don't even get an dishonorable mention? I must not be trying hard enough...

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

I can't see anyone driving across the country to accost you, me or anyone else...

-He he he he he...

-Now, the main topic of discussion:

Originally Posted by Semo '75

...I don't recall people falling all over themselves to point out how "mean" his comment was or that it was a "new low" for him...

...and:

Originally Posted by The Rani

...But oh my goodness, my search showed me something that I hadn't even completely read before:

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

...Rani drives through every red light in town, as does Arkham, driving an 18 wheeler. Splat! Pate-de-sociopath-shrink results. Arkham chuckes madly, until the next turn, whereupon he rolls and jackknives due to damage to his tires from Rani's vehicle. KABOOOM! as his load of flammables goes up with him to Kingdom Come...

-I clicked back, and yeah, there was a wider context (I guess), but, that is pretty special...

Personally, I've never had a problem with PS (I'll always cut a veteran a break), although he seems to have a problem me (I'm supposedly on his "ignore" list). Even so, I don't think he's never got nasty with me, with the possible exception of this one WTF comment:

Originally Posted by Pink Splice

...Note: If your tour had turned out differently, one IED would have made you a gimp...

Originally Posted by The Rani

Oh I believe you. The problem is that you say things publicly that DO encourage the behavior.



You do him no favors by encouraging him to scapegoat others for his lot in life.

Hey, I tried to be the behavior police for a while. Around here it's about as successful as herding cats. One person can't keep up with it; I tried.

All I can suggest is that you report questionable content to the site admin. I've done it, with satisfactory results.

Good luck. I'm off for the weekend.

Originally Posted by The Rani

I've had similar conversations with others, who have been sucked in by the people in the clique and later realized that they had gone too far.

This sounds like high school

Originally Posted by The Rani

Well obviously. I use the terms "clique" and "bullying" on purpose, as well as the school shootings analogy.

Hey Mike, whaddya think about them underwater volcanoes they found, pretty cool, eh?

Can you provide a link?