OT: Hey, let's play survivor. Who votes to have briansd1 banned from this forum ?

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 25, 2010 - 9:44pm
Submitted by sdduuuude on May 25, 2010 - 9:47pm.

I don't know aobut you, but I think it is time to vote briansd1 off the island. He offers nothing to this forum and continuously spews circular arguments in the midst of otherwise reasonable threads. I find myself coming here less and less, but every time I do, there is a host of bullshit posts of his just making a mess of this otherwise awesome place.

This is a serious question, not a joke.

I think only Marion and powayseller have had the honor. Lets make it three and encourage briansd1 to take his political drivel to his own forum. It worked for powayseller and it can work for him, too.

Submitted by KSMountain on May 25, 2010 - 10:25pm.

I actually kind of miss Marion. I was viewing regularly back then but was just an unnamed lurker. She definitely spiced this place up.

One bad habit Marion had was that she would quickly get threatened and devolve into namecalling. As I recall, I haven't seen briansd1 do that much.

Just think, if even a little sense from the Wise on this site seeps into his head by osmosis, he may take it back to his colony and disseminate it unwittingly to the others.

So this is an opportunity, sduuuude!

Looking at it from the other side, I think it's good to be exposed to points of view that differ from your own, even though it can be annoying. Personally I don't do it enough.

It would be boring if everyone on this site agreed with each other 100%. Not sure if briansd1's ever been right yet, but there's a chance he might be one day. At a minimum he gives us food for thought.

I remember during the discussion of waterboarding (which I don't think he was on) there were *widely* divergent opinions among the folks on this site. That's great in my opinion.

Now if you're arguing that he doesn't argue "correctly" I suppose that could be a problem. Is it a bannable offense though? It's easy enough to just ignore posts once they become circular I guess.

Remember the guy that was upset about Jeff Bridges and Hyundai? Whatever happened to THAT guy?...

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 25, 2010 - 10:35pm.

It isn't really about agreement, it is about being on-topic, which is economics and housing, not politics and not the same political nonsense over and over again without any real "argument" or tangible point.

Plus, it just drags others into the same nonsense. He is nothing more than a long-term troll.

Submitted by briansd1 on May 25, 2010 - 11:00pm.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).

Submitted by outtamojo on May 26, 2010 - 8:20am.

Sure his style of argument is annoying to some but he's not running around calling folks names like morons and such, nor is he stooping to posting fake charts to try to prove his pov. If his posts bother you just skip over them and let him be is my opinion.

Submitted by 8bitnintendo on May 26, 2010 - 8:32am.

sdduuuude wrote:
It isn't really about agreement, it is about being on-topic, which is economics and housing

I'm confused, if we have to be on topic all the time, what's the OT forum for...?

I'm with the folks who think you should just ignore him if you don't like him. Granted, it would be easier if the forum had a block/ignore user function.

Submitted by bearishgurl on May 26, 2010 - 8:44am.

I haven't been active that long but I'm all for freedom of speech here. Everyone has their own experiences by which their opinions are formed.

I myself would not respond to threads which I am unqualified to render an intelligent opinion on.

If you don't agree with a post or just think someone is trying to be annoying, you can just ignore it :)

Submitted by NotCranky on May 26, 2010 - 9:01am.

How about let's play, "Lynch the Liberal"?

Submitted by Allan from Fallbrook on May 26, 2010 - 9:31am.

“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Voltaire

While I'd be the first to agree that Brian can be annoying, I'd also be the first to say that quite a few posters here find me equally as annoying. And there's the problem, for who becomes the arbiter of who gets to stay or go?

Submitted by bearishgurl on May 26, 2010 - 9:49am.

russell wrote:
How about let's play, "Lynch the Liberal"?

I guess one could make assumptions about me due to the yard signs I'm currently displaying - LOL!

Submitted by sd_matt on May 26, 2010 - 10:01am.

I rarely agree with Brian but sdduuuuude you are just being catty.

Submitted by UCGal on May 26, 2010 - 10:39am.

Allan from Fallbrook wrote:
“I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Voltaire

While I'd be the first to agree that Brian can be annoying, I'd also be the first to say that quite a few posters here find me equally as annoying. And there's the problem, for who becomes the arbiter of who gets to stay or go?

ITA.

And besides... if this is survivor, isn't it a good strategy to take an annoying person with you to the finals - because they won't get the votes for the $1M.

(Just ask Russell (survivor Russel, not piggington Russell... he never figured out that getting to the finals wasn't enough... you had to be the best liked at the end to win..)

Submitted by scaredyclassic on May 26, 2010 - 11:44am.

personally, I vote to kick me off.

Submitted by afx114 on May 26, 2010 - 11:53am.

I don't believe that Brian should be banned but I do believe that threadjacks in general should be, with the exception of threadjacks about beer, hockey, and Mexican food. Of course a "threadjack" is an abstract concept that can't be banned except for by our own internal devices. So nevermind.

Submitted by NotCranky on May 26, 2010 - 11:58am.

scaredycat wrote:
personally, I vote to kick me off.

Please, Please,Please ban my ass. I'll buy you some beer, Mexican food...and what else was it?...Yeah, wtf is hockey?

Submitted by Rich Toscano on May 26, 2010 - 11:59am.

briansd1 wrote:
If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).

Well, you didn't do much to defend your debating skills there.

Submitted by Rich Toscano on May 26, 2010 - 12:07pm.

afx114 wrote:
I don't believe that Brian should be banned but I do believe that threadjacks in general should be, with the exception of threadjacks about beer, hockey, and Mexican food. Of course a "threadjack" is an abstract concept that can't be banned except for by our own internal devices. So nevermind.

Yes, exactly. There is an OT forum and that's what it is for. If you don't like it, don't read those threads. (I ask that people prepend "OT" to the thread title, and iirc Brian does this).

What is completely unacceptable is taking an on-topic (or even off-topic but not political) thread and steering into the typical, useless, unbelievably boring republican vs. democrat slapfighting. Brian has done this on multiple occasions, including after I warned him not to.

Nobody is going to get banned based on lack of popularity, poor debating skills, or frequency of OT posts (sorry sdduuuude). But threadjacking is bannable, and Brian, you've been on thin ice for a while on that front. So since it's come up, let this serve as a last warning to steer clear of anything that even resembles a political threadjack.

Submitted by briansd1 on May 26, 2010 - 12:25pm.

Rich Toscano wrote:
.

What is completely unacceptable is taking an on-topic (or even off-topic but not political) thread and steering into the typical, useless, unbelievably boring republican vs. democrat slapfighting. Brian has done this on multiple occasions, including after I warned him not to.

In the past, it used to be that I would browse the posts and not respond, until I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

In the future, when I respond in a political vein, I'll so do by referencing a previous post where someone brought up a political issue of interest, or I'll post on a separate, specifically marked OT political thread.

Submitted by Zeitgeist on May 26, 2010 - 12:32pm.

My main objection to you Brian is that you misquote me and basically interpret in your own style what you think I said. I object to that vociferously! I also notice that you rarely answer questions you are asked by other posters. Allan comes to mind. So if you are going to rat me out like a little girl, then back at you. If Rich wants me off, he will let me know. Most of my stuff is clearly on the political side of things and usually in response to your blatant liberal talking points. Try and be honest with what the people who did not vote you off are saying and quit being such a baby!

P.S. I voted to boot you off.

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 26, 2010 - 12:44pm.

briansd1 wrote:
Rich Toscano wrote:
.

What is completely unacceptable is taking an on-topic (or even off-topic but not political) thread and steering into the typical, useless, unbelievably boring republican vs. democrat slapfighting. Brian has done this on multiple occasions, including after I warned him not to.

In the past, it used to be that I would browse the posts and not respond, until I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

In the future, when I respond in a political vein, I'll so do by referencing a previous post where someone brought up a political issue of interest, or I'll post on a separate, specifically marked OT political thread.

Exactly, Rich.

Really, brian, it is the threadjacking within on-topic post that degrades the site so thanks for making the effort to avoid that.

Looks like the tribe has spoken by voting to keep you. More importantly, so did the 1 voter that matters in this tribe, which I can only describe as a benevolent dictatorship.

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 26, 2010 - 12:51pm.

Zeitgeist wrote:
My main objection to you Brian is that you misquote me and basically interpret in your own style what you think I said. I object to that vociferously! I also notice that you rarely answer questions you are asked by other posters. Allan comes to mind. So if you are going to rat me out like a little girl, then back at you. If Rich wants me off, he will let me know. Most of my stuff is clearly on the political side of things and usually in response to your blatant liberal talking points. Try and be honest with what the people who did not vote you off are saying and quit being such a baby!

P.S. I voted to boot you off.

Z - Don't forget, trolls only stick around when fed.

To All - less troll feeding, in general, when it comes to Democrat vs. Republican comments, could help brian moderate his threadjacking habits as well.

Submitted by Zeitgeist on May 26, 2010 - 1:05pm.

You are correct. I did take the bait. I will do better next time.

Submitted by bob2007 on May 26, 2010 - 1:11pm.

Brian, if you agree to create your own OT threads I vote stay. I really is unpleasant to try and read through a thread I am genuinely interested in, and have to sort out OT posts from you and those you incite. I have given up on a few occasions, and I think if enough people do that it will hurt the outstanding forum that Rich has put together. Please honor his guidelines, which are completely fair.

Submitted by briansd1 on May 26, 2010 - 1:21pm.

Zeitgeist wrote:
My main objection to you Brian is that you misquote me and basically interpret in your own style what you think I said. I object to that vociferously!

I try not in interpret what other people, I normally quote what people say word for word and respond.

I don't say thing such as "You think all evil comes from the U.S", "you hate America", etc.

Zeitgeist wrote:

I also notice that you rarely answer questions you are asked by other posters. Allan comes to mind.

I don't feel to need to answer personal questions. When we talk about intellectual matters, it's best to keep them at an intellectual level instead of dragging in personal issues.

Zeitgeist wrote:

So if you are going to rat me out like a little girl, then back at you. If Rich wants me off, he will let me know. Most of my stuff is clearly on the political side of things and usually in response to your blatant liberal talking points. Try and be honest with what the people who did not vote you off are saying and quit being such a baby!

P.S. I voted to boot you off.

Zeit, I wasn't focusing on you in particular. I just recall your name the most.

My well reasoned points are generally in stark contrast to the right-wing rants.

For example on taxes, SK and I have demonstrated that taxes did not go up under Obama for the vast majority of American. The right-wing kept on ranting otherwise without proving it.

Submitted by Allan from Fallbrook on May 26, 2010 - 1:24pm.

bob2007 wrote:
Brian, if you agree to create your own OT threads I vote stay. I really is unpleasant to try and read through a thread I am genuinely interested in, and have to sort out OT posts from you and those you incite. I have given up on a few occasions, and I think if enough people do that it will hurt the outstanding forum that Rich has put together. Please honor his guidelines, which are completely fair.

Bob: Well said, and spot on.

Submitted by Allan from Fallbrook on May 26, 2010 - 1:31pm.

briansd1 wrote:
I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Brian: "Hair-brained"? Dude. Its "hare-brained" and means the flighty nature associated with rabbits.

And, as to your "I'm keeping this on an intellectual level" hooey: Please. You DON'T answer pointed questions and your "well reasoned" responses tend to fall apart under skillful questioning, whereby you fall back on "I'm morally flexible", or "I'm really an incrementalist".

If you were serious about your arguments, you'd have the chops and ability to back them up. You don't. Liberal posters like SK and afx do and are very good about not only advancing well reasoned arguments, but responding in adult fashion when challenged. I've crossed swords with one of my favorite posters, Arraya, numerous times and maintain an active PM with him over books, articles, etc.

Submitted by DataAgent on May 26, 2010 - 1:33pm.

briansd1 wrote:
Rich Toscano wrote:
.

What is completely unacceptable is taking an on-topic (or even off-topic but not political) thread and steering into the typical, useless, unbelievably boring republican vs. democrat slapfighting. Brian has done this on multiple occasions, including after I warned him not to.

In the past, it used to be that I would browse the posts and not respond, until I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

In the future, when I respond in a political vein, I'll so do by referencing a previous post where someone brought up a political issue of interest, or I'll post on a separate, specifically marked OT political thread.

I changed my vote... get a rope.

Submitted by Coronita on May 26, 2010 - 1:39pm.

Duuuuuuude.

I'm normally in pretty much lock step with your thoughts.

However, I think as I would have to respectfully disagree on the idea of banning him/her. But that's just my opinion...

Plus banning, all it does, is really just force someone to switch loginid's (assuming everyone's ISP is usually DHCP) anyway.

So, just ignore so choose.

Sincerely, your humbled servant.

Submitted by Casca on May 26, 2010 - 1:41pm.

He must have created thirty accounts to vote for himself. Always count on a democrat to stuff the ballot box.

Submitted by briansd1 on May 26, 2010 - 1:43pm.

Allan from Fallbrook wrote:
"I'm morally flexible", or "I'm really an incrementalist".

Allan, you are morally flexible too as you've said war is about resource extraction. Then you switch to wanting to to do what is morally right.

I'm for what works and for gradual improvements in living standards and social equity. You can't have everything all at once.

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 26, 2010 - 1:44pm.

And here we go ...

Submitted by Coronita on May 26, 2010 - 1:45pm.

briansd1 wrote:

In the past, it used to be that I would browse the posts and not respond, until I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Actually, Brian, that isn't the case. I think if you search for "jficquette", he's been given a warning too in the past for his conservative/overly political posts too.

I hope you aren't falling into a trap about screaming bloody murder discrimination because of your political viewpoints, similar to how a minority would scream bloody racism for not getting his/her way either.

Personally, I really don't want to see you getting banned, but I think you're really treading on a thin ice here arguing with the blog owner, imho. Also, as much as you want to think you are in the right, it is Rich's blog. It's his house, and his rules.

Anyway, happy blogging.

Submitted by briansd1 on May 26, 2010 - 1:47pm.

Allan from Fallbrook wrote:
[

Brian: "Hair-brained"? Dude. Its "hare-brained" and means the flighty nature associated with rabbits.

Sorry for not proofing... but if you want to correct spelling and grammar on this site.. you have lots of work to do.

Submitted by 8bitnintendo on May 26, 2010 - 1:48pm.

I for one find it pretty amusing that this thread on forum moderation/banning has already turned into a political/personality slapfight of the exact type the complaints were initially about...

Submitted by Coronita on May 26, 2010 - 1:50pm.

KSMountain wrote:

Remember the guy that was upset about Jeff Bridges and Hyundai? Whatever happened to THAT guy?...

He bought a Hyundai....after making tons of money selling pig iron parts (wink wink wink Allan)

Submitted by briansd1 on May 26, 2010 - 1:50pm.

flu wrote:
briansd1 wrote:

In the past, it used to be that I would browse the posts and not respond, until I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.

Actually, Brian, that isn't the case. I think if you search for "jficquette", he's been given a warning too in the past for his conservative/overly political posts too.

I hope you aren't falling into a trap about screaming bloody murder discrimination because of your political viewpoints, similar to how a minority would scream bloody racism for not getting his/her way either.

Personally, I really don't want to see you getting banned, but I think you're really treading on a thin ice here arguing with the blog owner, imho. Also, as much as you want to think you are in the right, it is Rich's blog. It's his house, and his rules.

Anyway, happy blogging.

Why would I claim discrimination? Rich has never told me not to post.

I was saying that I felt like I should respond in kind to some of posts I read.

Submitted by Rich Toscano on May 26, 2010 - 1:53pm.

briansd1 wrote:

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

What complete nonsense. I haven't noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.

Actually I haven't really noticed anyone doing it period -- I'm sure I've missed some things because I don't have time to read all the threads. You are the only one I've noticed who posts to a non-political (or at least non-left-vs-right) thread and makes purposely inflammatory comments with the intent to start an argument.

The threadjack rule applies to everyone -- if anyone sees political threadjacks please let me know.

BTW it's symptomatic of your annoyingly overarching left-vs-right paradigm that your response to me was to accuse me of favoring right wingers. It's also fairly ironic in that you've now managed to turn even this thread into a political thread. But I guess since you are the topic of the thread, it was bound to happen.

update In rereading your line above, it looks like you are saying that I am also tolerant of right wing threadjacks. The way I read it at first I thought you meant that I was ignoring them and singling you out. Sorry for the misunderstanding if that's what you meant -- but my point still remains; I dislike when anyone does it and I just haven't seen other people doing it to the extent you do, if at all.

Submitted by Aecetia on May 26, 2010 - 1:59pm.

The real hare brain

Submitted by sdduuuude on May 26, 2010 - 2:00pm.

Technically, brian can't threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it'll be right on-topic.

Submitted by Allan from Fallbrook on May 26, 2010 - 2:00pm.

Rich Toscano wrote:
briansd1 wrote:

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

What complete nonsense. I haven't noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.

Actually I haven't really noticed anyone doing it period -- I'm sure I've missed some things because I don't have time to read all the threads. You are the only one I've noticed who posts to a non-political (or at least non-left-vs-right) thread and makes purposely inflammatory comments with the intent to start an argument.

The threadjack rule applies to everyone -- if anyone sees political threadjacks please let me know.

BTW it's symptomatic of your annoyingly overarching left-vs-right paradigm that your response to me was to accuse me of favoring right wingers. It's also fairly ironic in that you've now managed to turn even this thread into a political thread. But I guess since you are the topic of the thread, it was bound to happen.

Where's Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again!

Submitted by Rich Toscano on May 26, 2010 - 2:01pm.

sdduuuude wrote:
Technically, brian can't threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it'll be right on-topic.

Ha! Hilarious.... :-)

Submitted by danielwis on May 26, 2010 - 2:39pm.

8bitnintendo wrote:
I for one find it pretty amusing that this thread on forum moderation/banning has already turned into a political/personality slapfight of the exact type the complaints were initially about...

Exactly!!!

Submitted by XBoxBoy on May 26, 2010 - 2:53pm.

I voted for Brian to go, but I don't really want him (or anyone for that matter) to be banned. But there was no "He can stay, but I just wish he'd STFU" button.

Bottom line to this, I welcome all discussions, and all view points. But I dislike it when people post too much and always the same viewpoint. If you haven't got something interesting and constructive to add to the debate, or something funny to say, then sit down and be quiet.

XBoxBoy,

k, I'll go sit down and be quiet now...

Submitted by ucodegen on May 26, 2010 - 3:14pm.

Plus banning, all it does, is really just force someone to switch loginid's (assuming everyone's ISP is usually DHCP) anyway.

Umm.. yes and no.. there is a 'token' that you can capture from a web browser that can id one fairly uniquely. You do it through an SSL connection - because the initial public key setup has to be unique and use a unique public/private key pair per browser. It is also possible to push cookies onto the browser - and then do a cookie check, ie "are you the one formerly known as..??"

I have noticed that most of the ISPs these days have fairly 'static' IPs even though they are running DHCP. Both Cox and TimeWarner tend to have IPs allocated to a particular modem for fairly long times - even through modem power cycles etc.

.. sorry for the OT above..

Rich Toscano wrote:

briansd1 wrote:

Rich, you've been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you've been with mine.

What complete nonsense. I haven't noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.

'brainsd1' - are you trying to play chicken with a train??

Submitted by sd_matt on May 26, 2010 - 3:25pm.

Rich

How 'bout a "mute" button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?

Submitted by sd_matt on May 26, 2010 - 3:29pm.

sd_matt wrote:
Rich

How 'bout a "mute" button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?


Besides...how else will he have a chance of learning to interact with other homosapians in a non Darth Vader v Luke Skywalker kind of way?

Yes...I have been guilty of taking the bait.

Submitted by UCGal on May 26, 2010 - 3:30pm.

Allan from Fallbrook wrote:
Where's Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again!

Or perhaps we should talk about the best way to kill zombies... Now that was a COOL threadjack.

Submitted by Arraya on May 26, 2010 - 3:54pm.

Or even better...
.

Or

..

Submitted by desmond on May 26, 2010 - 3:54pm.

I'll give B-Ri credit, he does not give up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SswamS7kQ...

Submitted by SD Realtor on May 26, 2010 - 4:25pm.

Personally I don't think a ban is good for anyone. On the same note though, my personal participation in the blog has decreased substantially due to the way things have become with Brian. It is pretty challenging to read any posts anymore for me. Pretty much every thread becomes his sounding board. Besides the political overtones, Brian boasts knowledge of real estate in China and making recommendations for cash flowing properties in Philadephia. We know about his thoughts on American women, on cars, on public radio, on pretty much everything and anything. Talk about to much information.

As much as I like to hear recommendations of people who actually own investment properties like Surveyor and others, it equally concerns me when others make recommendations based on their thoughts rather then real life experiences.