I don’t know aobut you, but I 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.
KSMountain
May 25, 2010 @
10:25 PM
I actually kind of miss 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?…
sdduuuude
May 25, 2010 @
10:35 PM
It isn’t really about 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.
briansd1
May 25, 2010 @
11:00 PM
If you can’t stand the heat, If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).
Rich Toscano
May 26, 2010 @
11:59 AM
briansd1 wrote:If you can’t [quote=briansd1]If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).[/quote]
Well, you didn’t do much to defend your debating skills there.
outtamojo
May 26, 2010 @
8:20 AM
Sure his style of argument is 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.
8bitnintendo
May 26, 2010 @
8:32 AM
sdduuuude wrote:It isn’t [quote=sdduuuude]It isn’t really about agreement, it is about being on-topic, which is economics and housing[/quote]
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.
Coronita
May 26, 2010 @
1:50 PM
KSMountain wrote:
Remember [quote=KSMountain]
Remember the guy that was upset about Jeff Bridges and Hyundai? Whatever happened to THAT guy?…[/quote]
He bought a Hyundai….after making tons of money selling pig iron parts (wink wink wink Allan)
bearishgurl
May 26, 2010 @
8:44 AM
I haven’t been active that 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 🙂
NotCranky
May 26, 2010 @
9:01 AM
How about let’s play, “Lynch How about let’s play, “Lynch the Liberal”?
Allan from Fallbrook
May 26, 2010 @
9:31 AM
“I may not agree with what “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?
UCGal
May 26, 2010 @
10:39 AM
Allan from Fallbrook wrote:“I [quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
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..)
scaredyclassic
May 26, 2010 @
11:44 AM
personally, I vote to kick me personally, I vote to kick me off.
afx114
May 26, 2010 @
11:53 AM
I don’t believe that Brian 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.
Rich Toscano
May 26, 2010 @
12:07 PM
afx114 wrote:I don’t believe [quote=afx114]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.[/quote]
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.
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
12:25 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:.
What is [quote=Rich Toscano].
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. [/quote]
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.
Zeitgeist
May 26, 2010 @
12:32 PM
My main objection to you 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.
sdduuuude
May 26, 2010 @
12:51 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:My main [quote=Zeitgeist]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.[/quote]
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.
Zeitgeist
May 26, 2010 @
1:05 PM
You are correct. I did take You are correct. I did take the bait. I will do better next time.
Shadowfax
June 11, 2010 @
10:54 PM
sdduuuude wrote:
To All – [quote=sdduuuude]
To All – less troll feeding, in general, when it comes to Democrat vs. Republican comments, could help brian moderate his threadjacking habits as well.[/quote]
Is this like having women wear burkas because men can’t control themselves around women if they’re not wearing full body sheets for clothing?
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
1:21 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:My main [quote=Zeitgeist]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!
[/quote]
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.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
I also notice that you rarely answer questions you are asked by other posters. Allan comes to mind.
[/quote]
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.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
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.[/quote]
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.
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. [/quote]
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.[/quote]
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.
Allan from Fallbrook
May 26, 2010 @
1:31 PM
briansd1 wrote: I saw the [quote=briansd1] I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.
[/quote]
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.
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
1:43 PM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook]”I’m morally flexible”, or “I’m really an incrementalist”.[/quote]
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.
sdduuuude
May 26, 2010 @
1:44 PM
And here we go … And here we go …
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
1:47 PM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Brian: “Hair-brained”? Dude. Its “hare-brained” and means the flighty nature associated with rabbits.[/quote]
Sorry for not proofing… but if you want to correct spelling and grammar on this site.. you have lots of work to do.
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. [/quote]
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.[/quote]
I changed my vote… get a rope.
Coronita
May 26, 2010 @
1:45 PM
briansd1 wrote:
In the past, [quote=briansd1]
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.
[/quote]
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.
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
1:50 PM
flu wrote:briansd1 wrote:
In [quote=flu][quote=briansd1]
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.
[/quote]
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.[/quote]
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.
Rich Toscano
May 26, 2010 @
1:53 PM
briansd1 wrote:
Rich, you’ve [quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
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.
Aecetia
May 26, 2010 @
1:59 PM
The real hare brain [img_assist|nid=13351|title=The real hare brain|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=90|height=127]
sdduuuude
May 26, 2010 @
2:00 PM
Technically, brian can’t Technically, brian can’t threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it’ll be right on-topic.
Rich Toscano
May 26, 2010 @
2:01 PM
sdduuuude wrote:Technically, [quote=sdduuuude]Technically, brian can’t threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it’ll be right on-topic.[/quote]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
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.[/quote]
Where’s Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again!
UCGal
May 26, 2010 @
3:30 PM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Where’s Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again![/quote]
Or perhaps we should talk about the best way to kill zombies… Now that was a COOL threadjack.
Arraya
May 26, 2010 @
3:54 PM
Or even better…
.
Or
.. Or even better…
[img_assist|nid=13353|title=.|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=350|height=241]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
What complete nonsense. I haven’t noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.
…
— 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.[/quote]
Dude, Brian, Rich really doesn’t like you.
Rich Toscano
May 28, 2010 @
8:13 AM
Weberlin, all I said in the
Weberlin, all I said in the quote above was that Brian seems to be at the bottom of most if not all of that subset of threadjacks I have observed myself. It’s not personal or a matter of like/dislike. Let’s try to keep this thread civil, thanks…
Rich
sdduuuude
June 11, 2010 @
9:06 AM
Rich Toscano wrote: … But [quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
sdduuuude wrote:Rich Toscano [quote=sdduuuude][quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
I’d like to see NewToSanDiego and Brian in a pissing match, frankly. I think it would be pretty entertaining….It seems like they are the mirror equivalent in parallel universes.
Gotta love the entertainment factor in a blog. ok, I’m done for today…
UCGal
June 11, 2010 @
9:46 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Rich Toscano [quote=sdduuuude][quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
I’m the one that brought up estate taxes. Did I hijack… I don’t think so since the OP was about increased taxes – and my comment was that people should always be looking forward with tax implications in mind when making investments, making financial moves… except the estate tax can’t be planned for… because people die when they die.
Brian commented on my estate tax thing – Zeitgeist called him a dumbass – and it went from there.
So… do I get kicked off? I brought up the estate tax thing.
Rich Toscano
June 11, 2010 @
9:50 AM
No UCgal, I was typing my No UCgal, I was typing my response as you replied. You did nothing wrong. It is the nature of a forum to jump from topic to topic, that’s what makes it interesting. The “threadjack” part was A) trying to polarize the discussion along right-vs-left lines and B) trying to start an argument about a peripheral topic.
scaredyclassic
June 11, 2010 @
9:53 AM
intent matters intent matters
Ricechex
June 11, 2010 @
7:13 PM
There is no reason to ban There is no reason to ban Brian. He is not offensive and is never nasty. Whether we agree or disagree with him, there is nothing that he says that would “ban” him. He means well…I really believe that.
briansd1
June 11, 2010 @
9:59 PM
Since the topic of this Since the topic of this thread is about me, I should have the opportunity to respond.
sdr: He can’t. And, no, that’s not meant as a putdown or an insult. He can’t. I don’t respond to Brian anymore and not just because its pointless. As ucodegen pointed out on another post, its nearly pathological now.
I agree with the other posters that said Brian isn’t mean spirited. I don’t think he is, either. But its now become almost sad, the way he responds to any sort of bait at all. Which is why I don’t bother responding. At some point, you find yourself right down there with him. So, you don’t feed the negativity, and instead respond to those posters that want an intelligent debate and an open discourse and to contribute positively.
KIBU
June 12, 2010 @
12:31 AM
I didn’t think that all this I didn’t think that all this time Brian has been talking to himself ???
I believe he has been talking to a bunch of guys who also responded in kind, no matter how “intelligent” a language and contents they think they could distract with.
If one can’t stop responding and attacking (ie to the point of categorizing him as “pathological”), why ask him to stop responding and attacking?
And being here for years reading posts, one has to wonder: who came first, the chicken or the egg?
I disagree with many things Brian said but I would not ban him from saying it. All I need to do is to ignore it like I ignore so many others.
If it’s from the standpoint of this website’s sake, beside the faults of starting a flame throwing topic, it is also the failure to ignore and the hot desire to attack back that keep the flame going and more.
Blaming everything on Brian from a few here is another act of bullying.
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.
briansd1
June 12, 2010 @
7:40 AM
KIBU wrote:
One exception [quote=KIBU]
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.[/quote]
That I agree with. You may have noticed that I did not start off-topic threads in several weeks.
NotCranky
June 12, 2010 @
9:06 AM
KIBU wrote:I didn’t think [quote=KIBU]I didn’t think that all this time Brian has been talking to himself ???
I believe he has been talking to a bunch of guys who also responded in kind, no matter how “intelligent” a language and contents they think they could distract with.
If one can’t stop responding and attacking (ie to the point of categorizing him as “pathological”), why ask him to stop responding and attacking?
And being here for years reading posts, one has to wonder: who came first, the chicken or the egg?
I disagree with many things Brian said but I would not ban him from saying it. All I need to do is to ignore it like I ignore so many others.
If it’s from the standpoint of this website’s sake, beside the faults of starting a flame throwing topic, it is also the failure to ignore and the hot desire to attack back that keep the flame going and more.
Blaming everything on Brian from a few here is another act of bullying.
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.[/quote]
Well said, KIBU.
Aecetia
June 12, 2010 @
7:35 PM
I agree with KIBU. It is good I agree with KIBU. It is good to keep it civil. As for going to the OT posts that are clearly political, anyone that does not like politics or is not a political junky and you all know who you are, might think about steering clear. Obviously, some of us thrive on negative attention. Thanks Rich for not booting me off for my opinions.
NotCranky
June 12, 2010 @
8:08 AM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdrealtor]Stop It![/quote]
sdr: He can’t. And, no, that’s not meant as a putdown or an insult. He can’t. I don’t respond to Brian anymore and not just because its pointless. As ucodegen pointed out on another post, its nearly pathological now.
I agree with the other posters that said Brian isn’t mean spirited. I don’t think he is, either. But its now become almost sad, the way he responds to any sort of bait at all. Which is why I don’t bother responding. At some point, you find yourself right down there with him. So, you don’t feed the negativity, and instead respond to those posters that want an intelligent debate and an open discourse and to contribute positively.[/quote]
When did you quit, like 5 minutes before that last post? That’s a very self serving post, Allan.
NotCranky
June 14, 2010 @
12:37 PM
Ricechex wrote:There is no [quote=Ricechex]There is no reason to ban Brian. He is not offensive and is never nasty. Whether we agree or disagree with him, there is nothing that he says that would “ban” him. He means well…I really believe that.[/quote]
Since I have defended not banning Brian and against bullying( as opposed to the regular mutual fighting that occurs here), I gave some thought to this post, Ricechex. While he does not load up and drop four letter laden pejoratives, he heaps moral praise on democrats and compares anyone one else to greedy monkeys. Other than people who don’t believe in a human soul, no one likes being accused of not having one. So my conclusion is that policy arguments have less to do with the return barrage on naming calling than his dismissal of people’s value based on their opinion of policy and policy makers.
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
This is not to say he should be banned, but he is not innocent of insulting others. I have claimed previously that he is the example of civility when he is not.
briansd1
June 14, 2010 @
1:31 PM
Russell wrote:
Take, for [quote=Russell]
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
[/quote]
Russell, I apologize if you took offense to my description of Kansas.
In the context of my use of the word Kansas, it is not a real place but an imaginary nirvana for people who despise, and I quote, the “liberal elite”, the “hate America first” crowd, “the granola munching”, “Prius driving”, “tree hugging” environmentalists, the “San Francisco radical”, etc…
My use of hyperbole is far from carpet bombing. I will be more mindful of using words that offend.
scaredyclassic
June 14, 2010 @
1:40 PM
wait a minute there; i don’t wait a minute there; i don’t believe that anyone has a soul, but I still don’t like to be accused of not having a soul, if the accuser believes in the existence of souls. If we both agree on the non-existence of the soul, i take no issue with your accusing me of not having a soul. I do not like to be called a “greedy monkey’ though, whether or not you believe in the existence of greed among monkeys.
jpinpb
June 14, 2010 @
1:49 PM
walter aka scaredy – you are walter aka scaredy – you are cracking me up today.
briansd1
June 14, 2010 @
1:55 PM
walterwhite wrote: i don’t [quote=walterwhite] i don’t believe that anyone has a soul, but I still don’t like to be accused of not having a soul, if the accuser believes in the existence of souls.[/quote]
I really dig your posts. I anoint you the Piggington Philosopher.
NotCranky
June 14, 2010 @
3:14 PM
briansd1 wrote:Russell [quote=briansd1][quote=Russell]
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
[/quote]
Russell, I apologize if you took offense to my description of Kansas.
In the context of my use of the word Kansas, it is not a real place but an imaginary nirvana for people who despise, and I quote, the “liberal elite”, the “hate America first” crowd, “the granola munching”, “Prius driving”, “tree hugging” environmentalists, the “San Francisco radical”, etc…
My use of hyperbole is far from carpet bombing. I will be more mindful of using words that offend.[/quote]
Kansas of course is not really the point …but I agree with flu, enough points. Also agree that the soon to be “Bad Ass” used to be “Scaredy cat” is the stuff.
Rich Toscano
June 11, 2010 @
9:48 AM
That is pretty annoying, but That is pretty annoying, but upon some thought, it wouldn’t be fair to ban him on that.
This is what I said earlier in this post: “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.”
Well, the thread in question is a political thread to begin with; the OP is about tax policy. So Brian’s post doesn’t fit the letter of the definition.
But this is a threadjack in spirit. While Brian wasn’t the first to bring up the estate tax as a topic, the prior poster brought it up to illustrate a point. Brian brought it up with the obvious intent (successful, sadly) to start a left-vs-right debate, and one that wasn’t even relevant to the original topic.
So in fairness, here is the more refined definition of a threadjack:
Do not try to turn any discussion, even if already political in nature, into a left-vs-right slapfest. And do not try to turn a discussion, even if political in nature, into a debate about a contentious and politicized issue that is only peripherally related to the original discussion.
Threadjacks will be deleted and repeated threadjackers banned.
(And remember, when I delete a comment, the system automatically deletes all replies to that comment).
Rich
NotCranky
May 26, 2010 @
11:58 AM
scaredycat wrote:personally, [quote=scaredycat]personally, I vote to kick me off.[/quote]
Please, Please,Please ban my ass. I’ll buy you some beer, Mexican food…and what else was it?…Yeah, wtf is hockey?
CDMA ENG
May 27, 2010 @
9:15 PM
Allan from Fallbrook wrote:“I [quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
Actually Allan the Anonnance Equation Stands at…
Allan << Brian
😛
CE
CDMA ENG
May 27, 2010 @
9:34 PM
Lastly…
I am surprised to Lastly…
I am surprised to see you leading this little insurrecton SDDuuuude…
I know how you feel about particular people on this thread but I always thought you were a little more chill about people flapping your chops. But then again, I know that things can push your button very quickly as well… Like getting sucked out on the river card!
Remind me never to take you to Nicaragua on a bad weekend with a 100 dollars in your pocket. I don’t think that country could take another revolution.
See you at World Cup…
😛
CE
Allan from Fallbrook
May 27, 2010 @
9:57 PM
CDMA ENG wrote:Allan from [quote=CDMA ENG][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
Actually Allan the Anonnance Equation Stands at…
Allan << Brian
😛
CE[/quote]
CE: Well, I guess I'll just have to work harder, right?
jimmyle
May 28, 2010 @
6:17 AM
he is not spamming, so he he is not spamming, so he should stay.
bearishgurl
May 26, 2010 @
9:49 AM
russell wrote:How about let’s [quote=russell]How about let’s play, “Lynch the Liberal”?[/quote]
I guess one could make assumptions about me due to the yard signs I’m currently displaying – LOL!
sd_matt
May 26, 2010 @
10:01 AM
I rarely agree with Brian but I rarely agree with Brian but sdduuuuude you are just being catty.
bob2007
May 26, 2010 @
1:11 PM
Brian, if you agree to create 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.
Allan from Fallbrook
May 26, 2010 @
1:24 PM
bob2007 wrote:Brian, if you [quote=bob2007]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.[/quote]
Bob: Well said, and spot on.
Coronita
May 26, 2010 @
1:39 PM
Duuuuuuude.
I’m normally in 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.
8bitnintendo
May 26, 2010 @
1:48 PM
I for one find it pretty 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…
danielwis
May 26, 2010 @
2:39 PM
8bitnintendo wrote:I for one [quote=8bitnintendo]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…[/quote]
Exactly!!!
ucodegen
May 26, 2010 @
3:14 PM
Plus banning, all it does, is
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..
[quote=Rich Toscano]
[quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
What complete nonsense. I haven’t noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.
[/quote]
‘brainsd1‘ – are you trying to play chicken with a train??
Casca
May 26, 2010 @
1:41 PM
He must have created thirty He must have created thirty accounts to vote for himself. Always count on a democrat to stuff the ballot box.
XBoxBoy
May 26, 2010 @
2:53 PM
I voted for Brian to go, but 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…
sd_matt
May 26, 2010 @
3:25 PM
Rich
How ’bout a “mute” Rich
How ’bout a “mute” button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?
sd_matt
May 26, 2010 @
3:29 PM
sd_matt wrote:Rich
How ’bout [quote=sd_matt]Rich
How ’bout a “mute” button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?[/quote]
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.
desmond
May 26, 2010 @
3:54 PM
I’ll give B-Ri credit, he I’ll give B-Ri credit, he does not give up.
Personally I don’t think a 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.
(former)FormerSanDiegan
May 26, 2010 @
4:36 PM
Who is briansd1 ? Who is briansd1 ?
afx114
May 26, 2010 @
4:51 PM
This thread is so meta. This thread is so meta.
briansd1
May 26, 2010 @
8:50 PM
SD Realtor wrote:it equally [quote=SD Realtor]it equally concerns me when others make recommendations based on their thoughts rather then real life experiences.[/quote]
What makes you think I don’t have real life experience?
If you must know, I’ve been to Philadelphia once a month to buy a warehouse. They are opening a new casino on the waterfront and the opportunities are like the East Village 25 years ago.
I said that I recommended that my friend who got transferred to Philly buy a house. The prices are good and there is a 10-year property tax abatement. Go check it out.
On China, I was challenging the notion that absentee Asian buyers moving their money from China would stabilize California real estate.
On Public Radio, and other subjects you don’t have to read the OT treads, many of them I didn’t even start.
bob2007
May 26, 2010 @
7:47 PM
Ok, after reading the last Ok, after reading the last few posts from two very reasonable people, Rich and SD Realtor, I am changing my vote to he goes. SDR describes the same problem reading the threads that I do, and it has reduced my reading and participation here as well.
Brian, you posts in this thread alone discredit you, and I honestly can’t tell if your laughing when you are writing them or are actually trying to be sincere.
People have to be motivated to actively post in a forum like this, and I see indications the most insightful posters don’t enjoy coming here as much due to the off-topic posts, which isn’t acceptable.
Allan from Fallbrook
May 26, 2010 @
10:12 PM
bob2007 wrote:Ok, after [quote=bob2007]Ok, after reading the last few posts from two very reasonable people, Rich and SD Realtor, I am changing my vote to he goes. SDR describes the same problem reading the threads that I do, and it has reduced my reading and participation here as well.
Brian, you posts in this thread alone discredit you, and I honestly can’t tell if your laughing when you are writing them or are actually trying to be sincere.
People have to be motivated to actively post in a forum like this, and I see indications the most insightful posters don’t enjoy coming here as much due to the off-topic posts, which isn’t acceptable.[/quote]
Agreed. Guys like SDR and TG have made this site a very enjoyable destination and not just for their real estate insights, but for the very humorous posts (especially TG, who should really get into the blogging business himself). There was a lot of banter and good natured back and forth before.
Lately, though, the dialogue has coarsened and split along Left/Right fault lines and it isn’t quite so fun. I’m as guilty as the next guy, but some of this nonsense makes my blood boil and I feel compelled to respond. Not an excuse, just the reality. Combined with the fact that everything now seems to get twisted or skewed along political lines, regardless of topic or content, well, its making this a far less enjoyable venue.
sdduuuude
May 26, 2010 @
11:04 PM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Lately, though, the dialogue has coarsened and split along Left/Right fault lines and it isn’t quite so fun. I’m as guilty as the next guy, but some of this nonsense makes my blood boil and I feel compelled to respond. Not an excuse, just the reality. Combined with the fact that everything now seems to get twisted or skewed along political lines, regardless of topic or content, well, its making this a far less enjoyable venue.[/quote]
Well put, Allan. Lets get it back to housing and econ and analysis and food. Twisting each other’s words gains nothing.
When your blood boils, maybe just request that it be deleted (dare I say “nuked”) instead of responding.
Rich Toscano
May 27, 2010 @
8:05 AM
sdduuuude wrote:
When your [quote=sdduuuude]
When your blood boils, maybe just request that it be deleted (dare I say “nuked”) instead of responding.[/quote]
Yes, this is a good idea.
If people email rich@piggington.com with the link to a political threadjack comment (regardless of authorship) I will delete it. Please send direct link to the comment itself, so I don’t have to hunt around.
Warning: when I delete a comment, it deletes all replies to that comment. So directly reply to a nuke-worthy comment at your own risk!
Rich
Aecetia
May 27, 2010 @
7:54 PM
FYI from Rich re. nuke worthy FYI from Rich re. nuke worthy comments, etc. Consider this a bump.
Portlock
May 26, 2010 @
10:27 PM
Off topic: As long as the Off topic: As long as the record seems to be setting straight…Hey Flu, I’m sorry I exposed Fiquette by posting his photo, but I did it because I thought his ‘typical, useless, and unbelievably boring political slapfighting’ was…. typical and useless as Rich mentioned. And it made me angry. But it was wrong for me to do that. And I apologize.
On topic, I oppose the thread jack, especially political, but recognize the OT designation as my choice to view or for others to post through.
Coronita
May 27, 2010 @
5:47 AM
Portlock wrote:Off topic: As [quote=Portlock]Off topic: As long as the record seems to be setting straight…Hey Flu, I’m sorry I exposed Fiquette by posting his photo, but I did it because I thought his ‘typical, useless, and unbelievably boring political slapfighting’ was…. typical and useless as Rich mentioned. And it made me angry. But it was wrong for me to do that. And I apologize.
On topic, I oppose the thread jack, especially political, but recognize the OT designation as my choice to view or for others to post through.[/quote]
Off topic response.
Hi Portlock,
First off. There is no need to apologize to me, because fquette isn’t me :). Second, you took down your post on your own after my comment (which I wasn’t asking you to do anyway). Third, the only reason why I brought fquette was counterexample to Brian’s post that suggested Rich was giving favortism to “conservative” viewpoints, since I recall fquette use to post a lot too and recall Rich giving him a warning.
My only point back last time was to suggest that perhaps (a) some people want to remain anonymous and (b) some people aren’t as careful to do so. In hindsight, I should have just PM’ed you privately about my opinion.
Anyway, seems like according to this poll, more people favor freedom of speech. So, again, as a counter example, I don’t think folks here in the majority are backward conservative southern hicks as briansd1 might have envisoned. Perhaps there is such a thing as socially liberal/fiscally conservative :)?
Coronita
June 14, 2010 @
2:09 PM
Can we let this topic die, Can we let this topic die, please…It’s more attention that needs to be directed on one person, or issue really….
Aecetia
June 14, 2010 @
2:43 PM
flu,
Maybe he wants a flu,
Maybe he wants a recount. There could have been a hanging chad…
jpinpb
June 14, 2010 @
2:50 PM
Aecetia wrote:flu,
Maybe he [quote=Aecetia]flu,
Maybe he wants a recount. There could have been a hanging chad…[/quote]
HA, HA. Good one.
The unintentionally funny part is that Jack Kemp was a former NFL QB (as well as being a noted Republican). Football guys are notoriously anti-soccer, so I think its less a function of Kemp being a Republican and more him being a football guy. Of course, Brian seizes on anything that will aid in his own little personal intifada against the evil, perfidious GOP.
briansd1
June 22, 2010 @
10:34 AM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
The unintentionally funny part is that Jack Kemp was a former NFL QB (as well as being a noted Republican). Football guys are notoriously anti-soccer, so I think its less a function of Kemp being a Republican and more him being a football guy. Of course, Brian seizes on anything that will aid in his own little personal intifada against the evil, perfidious GOP.[/quote]
You’re reading too much into what wasn’t said.
Who’s talking Republicans vs. Democrat?
Many American-football guys think that football is a socialist un-American sport. So?
KSMountain
June 22, 2010 @
10:59 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Really? In a [quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
I disagree sdduuuude. If you look at that thread closely you’ll see that IForget started down the political path in a very inflammatory way and others followed, before briansd1 even got there.
I thought briansd1’s quote by Jack Kemp was interesting actually, and somewhat funny coming from him. It brings to mind the whole debate of whether they should keep score in young kids sports. If not, why not? If so, why? At what age? Is the answer country-specific? Why?
Is this a threadjack? I’m now talking about the virtues/perils of childhood competitiveness on a thread that’s supposed to be about kicking out a member…
NotCranky
June 22, 2010 @
11:59 AM
KSMountain wrote:sdduuuude [quote=KSMountain][quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
I disagree sdduuuude. If you look at that thread closely you’ll see that IForget started down the political path in a very inflammatory way and others followed, before briansd1 even got there.
I thought briansd1’s quote by Jack Kemp was interesting actually, and somewhat funny coming from him. It brings to mind the whole debate of whether they should keep score in young kids sports. If not, why not? If so, why? At what age? Is the answer country-specific? Why?
Is this a threadjack? I’m now talking about the virtues/perils of childhood competitiveness on a thread that’s supposed to be about kicking out a member…[/quote]
sdduuuude
June 22, 2010 @
2:25 PM
You know, actually, reading You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.
Allan from Fallbrook
June 22, 2010 @
2:37 PM
sdduuuude wrote:You know, [quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.
Arraya
June 22, 2010 @
2:40 PM
Allan from Fallbrook [quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.[/quote]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.
briansd1
June 22, 2010 @
3:11 PM
Arraya wrote:
lol.. My dad [quote=Arraya]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.[/quote]
haha.. And your dad brought up your sister and you…
As I said before, it’s only a matter of time until everyone is co-opted by un-real American ideas.
Allan from Fallbrook
June 22, 2010 @
3:33 PM
Arraya wrote:Allan from [quote=Arraya][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.[/quote]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.[/quote]
Arraya: That is funny. My dad was a former Marine DI and we had a running joke whereby everyone we didn’t like or agree with was a “Godless dope-smoking Commie fiend”. This list encapsulated everyone from Linda Ronstadt to Roger Staubach to Bill Clinton.
And the term “friggin’ Communist” was used to describe anything non-functioning, irritating, or just generally bothersome. This term was also interchangeable with “chingadera” as well.
CardiffBaseball
June 22, 2010 @
3:46 PM
I cancel out Arraya as the I cancel out Arraya as the vegetarian free eater!! We are in harmonic balance.
Rich Toscano
June 22, 2010 @
7:07 PM
Upon reviewing the thread in Upon reviewing the thread in question, here are my findings:
1. The nature of Brian’s post was sufficiently vague that it’s too hard to determine whether or not it was it purposeful political threadjack (as defined in the official threadjack policy here).
2. The same can’t be said for IForget’s completely out-of-the-blue commentary on “right-wing Christian nutjobs” in a thread about World Cup soccer. He or she will no longer be joining us.
Rich
mike92104
September 7, 2012 @
9:02 PM
I think it may be time to I think it may be time to rethink this. lately I’ve several non-political threads get turned int the afore mentioned “political slapfest” by Brian. The ones that come to mind were a thread about Eyeglasses that Brian tried to turn into an Obamacare debate, and more recently was a thread about Scaredy calling the top of the stock market where Brian’s first post was deliberately political. I never voted on this thread before because, while I thought his behavior was annoying, I thought it would be extreme to ban him. Now, however, I have voted to ban him because it’s become clear that he won’t or can’t stop doing it. Personally, I’d like to be able to discuss things over than political BS on every single thread.
urbanrealtor
September 7, 2012 @
9:30 PM
mike92104 wrote:I think it [quote=mike92104]I think it may be time to rethink this. lately I’ve several non-political threads get turned int the afore mentioned “political slapfest” by Brian. The ones that come to mind were a thread about Eyeglasses that Brian tried to turn into an Obamacare debate, and more recently was a thread about Scaredy calling the top of the stock market where Brian’s first post was deliberately political. I never voted on this thread before because, while I thought his behavior was annoying, I thought it would be extreme to ban him. Now, however, I have voted to ban him because it’s become clear that he won’t or can’t stop doing it. Personally, I’d like to be able to discuss things over than political BS on every single thread.[/quote]
I just read that thread and I don’t think it was particularly off-topic.
I suppose the cumulative irritation might make a difference but I can’t agree with you about that particular perceived transgression.
urbanrealtor
September 7, 2012 @
9:31 PM
Fucking liberal sharks. Fucking liberal sharks.
NotCranky
September 7, 2012 @
9:35 PM
Nobody will see this post Nobody will see this post but, if they did, I would remind them that we do have an ignore function now.
That said, I changed my vote.
desmond
September 8, 2012 @
9:10 AM
In truth B-ri needs help, and In truth B-ri needs help, and I am not making a joke about this, and btw there is nothing wrong in seeking help, I have. To many “hates” and “put downs”, (people to fat,etc) along with “it’s his way or the highway” (political, USA, etc). I am no saint, but I admit it, B-ri is in total denial.
Coronita
September 8, 2012 @
10:22 AM
Who the fvck cares?
Just let Who the fvck cares?
Just let him be…..One of the best things about this forum unlike others, is there’s very little cybernanny cops going around…
Don’t like something? Just ignore it, and don’t respond. If you don’t like something getting out of hand, don’t contribute to it. (Easier said than done, especially if someone says something meant as bait)…But you know, just take the higher road and STFU… If there is no dialog, there is no out of spiral thread. It’s a simple as that.
briansd1
September 8, 2012 @
12:12 PM
Thanks for the defense,flu. Thanks for the defense,flu. You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. The funny thing is that when people say WTF, they don’t stop to think WTF.
I’m biased, I admit. For example, when I defend the Fed and government intervention, I give good reasons for the actions, which have worked. Other people simple rail and say WTF, but that’s all.
My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.
Fearful
September 8, 2012 @
1:51 PM
briansd1 wrote:My posts are [quote=briansd1]My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Man, I miss Marion. She was really weird.
mike92104
September 8, 2012 @
3:39 PM
briansd1 wrote:You post quite [quote=briansd1]You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. [/quote]
That’s true, but usually in response to a thread that has already become political.
[quote=briansd1]I’m biased, I admit.[/quote]
….and I don’t mind that. Your opinions are yours to have.
[quote=briansd1]My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Unfortunately, your posts are quite often one-liner headlines deliberately meant as bait to incite another Right vs Left BS argument. Now, don’t get me wrong, if some Tea Party Jack-hole pulls the same kind of BS, then go get ’em, but I would hope that you could refrain from doing it yourself every once in a while. I don’t want to ban anyone, and I don’t want to “ignore” anyone. I like a good political argument as much as you, I’m just asking you to try not to turn non-political threads into them.
Coronita
September 8, 2012 @
4:24 PM
briansd1 wrote:Thanks for the [quote=briansd1]Thanks for the defense,flu. You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. The funny thing is that when people say WTF, they don’t stop to think WTF.
I’m biased, I admit. For example, when I defend the Fed and government intervention, I give good reasons for the actions, which have worked. Other people simple rail and say WTF, but that’s all.
My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Brian, the reason why I answer a lot of time with 1 line is because not even that is worth my time.
But let me break character for this 1 time and respond to your loaded question…I’ll get on the high horse you usually get on…Let me say something that hopefully will sink into your thick head…The irony is that they way you talk the way you’re refined and better than everyone else. Despite you saying how progressive you really are, you’re the most stubborn narrow-minded geo-phobic person on the face of the earth. The only thing worse, is on top of that you’re a hypocrite because you “think” you’re refined.
Being open-minded has absolutely NOTHING to do with pandering or paying lip service to minorities or “colored” people or foreigners and thinking every other foreigner is “refined”… Being open-minded has everything to do with mutual respect for all humans, including (1) obese people (which you have a problem with) (2) red-neck people (which you have a problem with) (3) religious/religion people (which you have a problem with) (4) people with different political beliefs (which you have a problem with) (5) people of different gender and to some extend (5) even people who aren’t refined..
It’s called human decency. It means that even though personally I would never bang a woman that is 200lbs+, I definitely would not discriminate against them because they are obese when it comes things like renting to them, or working with them, or sitting with them, working with them, hiring them..It means that if you some a bible humper, you would step back sand say, as different and “I can’t relate” as possible to some of those people are, you respect their beliefs and what they believe in, and you don’t snicker snear, or thumb your elitist nose thinking their fvcking morons…so long as don’t cross the line as long as they don’t cross yours.. And in some cases, when you do run into an occasional idiot or do, you don’t let that cloud your judgement in thinking every person of “that kind” is a frickin idiot…
And frankly, it is exactly why, I’m not particular supportive the idea of you getting banned frankly…
Which is exactly the opposite of what you would do… See the difference is that while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement. respect, and human decency. You, however, (well, at least your internet persona, don’t know about you in person…) have demonstrated time and time again that you would….And that’s not even the bad part. The irony is you *say* you’re actually open-minded and “progressive”
… I know a lot more Rush Limbaugh fans (which you probably would think are redneck “meatheads”) who have demonstrated much more open-minded thinking than you ever will in your lifetime…
That is the irony.. The sad part is, from your other posts, you do strike me as a fair intelligent person…But seriously, your thinking is so far off that, no offense, is so blantantly contradictory to what comes out of your mouth in terms of being “liberal” and “open-minded”, that any sane person would question your integrity, and imho would be an instant turnoff if I were a woman.. So frankly, I can’t tell if this is really you or just your internet persona, not that I particularly care nor is it my business..
So there. That’s more than a one line sentence for you… And that’s the last time. Feel free to respond, if you don’t mind wasting your time responding, because frankly, I won’t anyway… I’m too busy putting duct tape on my falling apart car, as any self respecting redneck would do…And frankly a roll of duct tape has a lot more educational value for me than a lot of things these days.
briansd1
September 8, 2012 @
5:35 PM
Flu, some people are meant to Flu, some people are meant to be put down. But I certainly don’t discriminate against anyone. Far from that. I have friends of all races and different culture. I have friends who are fat also.
You post topics like: wow the ECB or the Fed did such. WTF. Then you go away without expanding. You really don’t think they don’t know WTF they are doing? You sound like Rush Limbaugh to me. He deserves to be put down, not respected. Nothing to do with human decency.
mike92104
September 8, 2012 @
9:52 PM
briansd1 wrote:Flu, some [quote=briansd1]Flu, some people are meant to be put down. But I certainly don’t discriminate against anyone. Far from that. I have friends of all races and different culture. I have friends who are fat also.
You post topics like: wow the ECB or the Fed did such. WTF. Then you go away without expanding. You really don’t think they don’t know WTF they are doing? You sound like Rush Limbaugh to me. He deserves to be put down, not respected. Nothing to do with human decency.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone could have proved Flu’s point better than you just did.
briansd1
September 8, 2012 @
11:15 PM
We don’t need to respect Rush We don’t need to respect Rush Limbaugh to have human decency.
Rush makes drive-by comments like: “look at that, WTF, how stupid, how irresponsible, WTF.” He adds nothing to the conversation.
We need to treat him like he treats everybody else. Like a fat-ass idiot that he is. People who follow him are even bigger imbeciles.
(former)FormerSanDiegan
September 10, 2012 @
11:39 AM
briansd1 wrote:We don’t need [quote=briansd1]We don’t need to respect Rush Limbaugh to have human decency.
Rush makes drive-by comments like: “look at that, WTF, how stupid, how irresponsible, WTF.” He adds nothing to the conversation.
We need to treat him like he treats everybody else. Like a fat-ass idiot that he is. People who follow him are even bigger imbeciles.[/quote]
I don’t think briansd1 should be banned.
It’s pretty easy to scan through his posts (or any post for that matter )and when you spot inflammatory words/phrases, such as … fat-ass, embecile, idiot, WTF, etc.
When you spot any of these words stop reading and move on to another post/thread.
Of course, for those who are (or have loved ones who are) embeciles, fat-asses, or idiots, you have the right to get angry and be offended by those remarks.
P.S. – My apologies to all the embeciles, fat-asses , and idiots out there.
P.S.S. – If you got this far, WTF, you are an idiot because you ignored my suggestion above.
Jazzman
September 9, 2012 @
10:58 AM
flu wrote: while some people [quote=flu] while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement.[/quote]
Not sure that statement is entirely true, but seriously folks, get a life. Far too many of you spend far too long wasting your lives away on forums. Put down the lap top, and go outside into the fresh air and get a hobby. Drink wine, get drunk, get in bar brawl, go help starving people around the world, write a book, have sex with an insect …anything that puts you in touch with living.
Brian, I’m not here enough to know whether these claims are justified, but from what I have read it seems many of your views offer a healthy counter to what seems (on the surface at least) to be a strong conservative undercurrent on this forum …IMHO.
The problem is that for a view to heard above the modern cacophony of special interests and egocentricity of the media culture, nuance and impartiality need to be exchanged for the megaphone of bias. You become that which you most ardently oppose. Petty but easy to get drawn in.
Talking of bannings, I used to see a picture of a cat when trying to access piggs URL. Not quite sure why that was, but I overcame it by removing the offending cookie. I like to think that was an innocent aberration.
mike92104
September 9, 2012 @
3:25 PM
Jazzman wrote:flu wrote: [quote=Jazzman][quote=flu] while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement.[/quote]
Brian, I’m not here enough to know whether these claims are justified, but from what I have read it seems many of your views offer a healthy counter to what seems (on the surface at least) to be a strong conservative undercurrent on this forum …IMHO.
[/quote]
I’ll just clarify that my issues are not with Brian’s positions, but with his tendency to add posts to non-political threads that are deliberately meant to incite an argument or as Rich called it a “right vs left political slapfest”.
patb
September 9, 2012 @
8:21 PM
i rarely participate in the i rarely participate in the politcal nonsense,
especially when JFMarquette and the other right wing trolls
start going all AM Radio
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
1:25 PM
Jazzman wrote:
The problem is [quote=Jazzman]
The problem is that for a view to heard above the modern cacophony of special interests and egocentricity of the media culture, nuance and impartiality need to be exchanged for the megaphone of bias. You become that which you most ardently oppose. Petty but easy to get drawn in.
[/quote]
That’s unfortunate, but you have to speak the language that people understand.
I admit that some of my posts poke at people.
I don’t particularly like the comments of the other side. But I don’t start a campaign to ban posters through online community pressure… then turn around and say that I want the webmaster to unilaterally enforce the ban I desire.
Rich Toscano
September 11, 2012 @
9:30 AM
First this:
briansd1 wrote:
I First this:
[quote=briansd1]
I don’t particularly like the comments of the other side. But I don’t start a campaign to ban posters through online community pressure… then turn around and say that I want the webmaster to unilaterally enforce the ban I desire.[/quote]
and now this:
[quote=Brutus]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
No. Wrong.
You two are patting yourselves on the back because you don’t wish to ban posters who disagree with you. But nobody is suggesting that. That’s what conversation is about, and it never was.
It’s about POLITICAL THREADJACKING. As already explained above, several times, it is about:
– taking a non-political thread and turning it political OR
– taking a thoughtful thread on a political topic and turning it into a partisan slapfest (or starting a thread that’s guaranteed to turn into one)
It’s got nothing to do with the quality of anyone’s posts not with their political leanings. It’s got to do with threadjacking. It’s not that complicated.
Please stop trying to reframe the debate as something that it’s not. Please don’t make me explain this very obvious distinction yet again.
And, don’t threadjack. Again — it’s not complicated.
Aecetia
September 9, 2012 @
1:09 PM
I always find flu’s posts I always find flu’s posts informative and usually entertaining. I cannot say the same for Brian’s posts, but I do not block him, so that is on me. Now where did I put that roll of duct tape?
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
11:37 AM
flu wrote:Who the fvck [quote=flu]Who the fvck cares?
Just let him be…..One of the best things about this forum unlike others, is there’s very little cybernanny cops going around…
Don’t like something? Just ignore it, and don’t respond. If you don’t like something getting out of hand, don’t contribute to it. (Easier said than done, especially if someone says something meant as bait)…But you know, just take the higher road and STFU… If there is no dialog, there is no out of spiral thread. It’s a simple as that.[/quote]
While I agree with your view that this site thrives due to the lack of cybernanny-type activity, I have heard more than one person say they have started to avoid Piggington due to the spats between briansd, specifically, and others.
Yes, some people like his posts and yes, diversity is good. But brian’s posts don’t necessarily represent diversity. There will always be a host of liberals to defend the side. The annoying thing is he always claims those who want him banned are just doing so because of his views. As if he is some genius martyr or something. His cry for retaining diversity and his expectation that no action will be taken against him is really his excuse for being an instigator and argumentative ass.
The bottom line is that helpful, long-term, thoughtful, on-topic posters are avoiding the site because of him and the useuless debates that follow him. I think it is time to take action.
Hey brian – can you guess what this means:
GYOFF
flyer
September 8, 2012 @
4:12 PM
Personally, I enjoy reading Personally, I enjoy reading the posts on this board–with, (I should add)–the exception of those that are discriminatory in nature.
I may not necessarily agree with every post, but most are interesting, and, sometimes I learn something. That’s why I’d never “ignore” anyone–I’d miss out on too much of the fun.
In the end, hopefully everyone realizes these posts are all just opinions–nothing more. We all still have to go out in the “real” world and live our “real” lives.
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
11:49 AM
I thought this one was I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
12:23 PM
This is not a democracy so This is not a democracy so you start a thread asking for votes in your favor. Why didn’t you email The Man directly?
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
12:28 PM
briansd1 wrote:This is not a [quote=briansd1]This is not a democracy so you start a thread asking for votes in your favor. Why didn’t you email The Man directly?[/quote]
I had an epiphany after posting.
And I wasn’t seeking votes in my favor.
I was seeking votes against you.
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
12:28 PM
Hamstring in the central bank Hamstring in the central bank and making threats to its independence, advocating for budget cuts in the middle of economic difficulties. Those are Republican ideas and what has happened in Europe. Not partisanship, but reality on the ground.
zk
September 10, 2012 @
12:30 PM
sdduuuude wrote:I thought [quote=sdduuuude]I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.[/quote]
How is brian’s quote any different from this?:
[quote=Brutus]Jeremiah Wright and Frank Marshall made Barry tick.[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Paul0373]Obama has had direct contact with and been influenced by more committed communists than anyone i’ve ever heard of. (Barack Sr, his own mother, his grandparents, Frank Marshall Davis, Said, Unger, Ayers, Bernadine Doern, Jeremiah Wright,et al….)How many communists do you know or hang with? Funny, don’t think I’ve ever met one. Yeah, I’d probably lean to the left with that much help.[/quote]
A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.
I can’t imagine avoiding this website because of Brutus or Paul or their numerous ilk. And I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
12:34 PM
zk wrote:… I can’t see why [quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.
zk
September 10, 2012 @
12:39 PM
sdduuuude wrote:zk wrote:… [quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Very cryptic.
In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
1:16 PM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:zk [quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Very cryptic.
In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?[/quote]
Not really, no. But you are welcome to start your own thread on those two if you like.
zk
September 10, 2012 @
1:27 PM
zk wrote:In any case, what [quote=zk]In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?[/quote]
[quote=sdduuuuude]Not really, no. But you are welcome to start your own thread on those two if you like.[/quote]
Clearly I don’t want to ban any of them. But I am curious why you would ban brian but not Brutus and Paul.
Rich Toscano
September 10, 2012 @
1:56 PM
Brutus came real close in Brutus came real close in another thread, but has been ok since then that I’ve seen. Not familiar with Paul outside this thread (I consider this one “ruined” already so threadjacking is not really possible).
I thought Brian has been ok since this thread was originated… he’d really cleaned up his act at least til recently. His “are we better off than 4 years ago” in a stock market thread was VERY borderline but it was ambiguous and I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.
I’m too lazy to police the forums, but don’t mistake that for reluctance to send people on a cruise to Ban Island.
And Brian, don’t try to slip in political threadjack comments and pretend they aren’t political. I gave you the stock market one, but that’s all you’re going to get. Keep in mind your checkered history here, and understand that people are sensitive to that kind of stuff coming from you… so you should be extra careful that your posts cannot be interpreted as threadjacks, whether you meant it or not.
I don’t have time to keep up with all content and often skip the political stuff. If someone — anyone — is political threadjacking or otherwise violating the afore-linked rule, please feel free to let me know. But if you are going to do this, don’t make me hunt through an entire thread… please send a direct link to the comment and some context to justify that it is a bannable offense (per the above), and I will take the appropriate action. (Tip: you can use the “report spam” link to send a direct link to a thread… just remember to provide some context por favor).
Rich Toscano wrote:And Brian, [quote=Rich Toscano]And Brian, don’t try to slip in political threadjack comments and pretend they aren’t political.[/quote]
Gee, you noticed ? I thought he was being soooo sly.
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
8:54 PM
zk wrote:Very cryptic.
This a [quote=zk]Very cryptic.[/quote]
This a little less cryptic for you, zk ?
[quote=flu]That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
[/quote]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.
[quote=flu]That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
[/quote]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Dude, I sent you an invite…Did you not get it?
briansd1
September 11, 2012 @
8:20 AM
sdduuuude wrote:
Let me [quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.
NotCranky
September 11, 2012 @
9:00 AM
briansd1 wrote:sdduuuude [quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.[/quote]
I think we should just be honest and start the “Attention Whores” forum.
Coronita
September 11, 2012 @
9:03 AM
briansd1 wrote:sdduuuude [quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.[/quote]
No, just trying to get real discussions going, obviously not here anymore. Later.
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.
zk
September 11, 2012 @
9:52 AM
flu wrote:
But I’ll continue [quote=flu]
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.[/quote]
sdduuuude, after some consideration, I’m coming around to your point of view.
When the “ot” section was first added, I was strongly for it. But the idea then was that if we wanted to find a good dentist (which I do, if anybody knows one) or tell others about a great bike path or about old Jews telling jokes, this would be a place where we could share these things with others. Occasionally politics would be discussed, but it wouldn’t dominate. It’s strayed away from that. I put my two cents into the political discussions as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is brian). So maybe I shouldn’t be complaining. Perhaps after this thread has exposed the depth of the divisiveness and distraction that political discussions are bringing here, the political discussions will regain their rightful place as an occasional topic. If not, I was thinking that perhaps a ban on political discussions would be appropriate. But that seems unnecessary and overly restrictive to reasonable discussion. The other option, and here I’m starting to agree with you, would be to ban those who bring everything around to politics (brian) or who post overly numerous political topics (markmax). A trickier question is what to do with occasional posters whose posts are almost all strident, wildly-partisan posts (Brutus).
Just my 2 cents.
briansd1
September 11, 2012 @
9:59 AM
zk, if you were the judge, zk, if you were the judge, and if I were the only poster for my side, can I compensate for multiple posters on the other side?
Rich Toscano
September 11, 2012 @
10:34 AM
briansd1 wrote:zk, if you [quote=briansd1]zk, if you were the judge, and if I were the only poster for my side, can I compensate for multiple posters on the other side?[/quote]
No. What do you not get about this? It’s not about “sides.” It’s about threadjacking, ie, being obnoxious. I don’t care whose “side” anyone is on. Don’t threadjack.
Rich Toscano
September 11, 2012 @
10:56 AM
zk wrote:flu wrote:
But I’ll [quote=zk][quote=flu]
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.[/quote]
sdduuuude, after some consideration, I’m coming around to your point of view.
When the “ot” section was first added, I was strongly for it. But the idea then was that if we wanted to find a good dentist (which I do, if anybody knows one) or tell others about a great bike path or about old Jews telling jokes, this would be a place where we could share these things with others. Occasionally politics would be discussed, but it wouldn’t dominate. It’s strayed away from that. I put my two cents into the political discussions as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is brian). So maybe I shouldn’t be complaining. Perhaps after this thread has exposed the depth of the divisiveness and distraction that political discussions are bringing here, the political discussions will regain their rightful place as an occasional topic. If not, I was thinking that perhaps a ban on political discussions would be appropriate. But that seems unnecessary and overly restrictive to reasonable discussion. The other option, and here I’m starting to agree with you, would be to ban those who bring everything around to politics (brian) or who post overly numerous political topics (markmax). A trickier question is what to do with occasional posters whose posts are almost all strident, wildly-partisan posts (Brutus).
Just my 2 cents.[/quote]
I wouldn’t want to ban political stuff outright. I want people to talk about what they want to talk about, as long as it doesn’t disrupt the “function” of the forum.
Also, there’s value in it. You, zk, are actually a great example of this. When there is a political discussion, you respond by addressing the issues in a logical, insightful, and polite manner. But you don’t threadjack, and when you are in a political debate, you stick to the issues rather than name calling, changing subjects to more controversial issues, or thoughtlessly aligning with a “side.” I enjoy and benefit from reading your posts, and I can say the same about many others (who have varying political leanings).
The problem isn’t politics, it’s behavior of certain people who act obnoxious. That will not be tolerated. To address the three examples you noted above:
– Markmax — He was banned for constant threadjacking.
– Brian — He used to be terrible about it, but after this thread he cleaned up his act. I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that he has reverted to his evil ways. If he does so, he will be banned.
– Brutus — I warned him recently when he started with the name calling. Haven’t seen anything since then. (Again, I don’t keep up with everything). But that kind of behavior is definitely bannable.
I do have to say that if the only thing someone brings to the table is strident partisanship, that is harmful to the function of the forum, even if they aren’t strictly threadjacking by the definition above. Maybe I need to be more subjective about it, and rather than defining certain behavior, just ban people who are harmful to the function and spirit of the forum. I’ve tried to avoid that because I want people to know what the ground rules are, and I want to keep a light touch, but certain people really make it difficult.
One last thought. I think too much is being blamed on political talk. The fact is that the bubble is over, so the real estate market is not as interesting any more. I think that goes a long way towards explaining why the forum is a less vibrant place than it used to be. It’s too bad, but it’s the cycle of life.
That said, while political discussion can be great, political partisanship is lame and boring (as well as being immensely harmful to the country). There are plenty of places for that on the web — this isn’t one of them. So everyone please intelligently discuss political topics to your hearts’ content — but take the partisan tribalism elsewhere.
Rich Toscano
September 11, 2012 @
11:25 AM
OK, after all that, I am
OK, after all that, I am changing my mind on Brian based on new evidence from poking around the threads some more. I just saw this, which I had missed before.
It’s now clear that you have returned to your threadjacking ways and have blatantly disregarded the rules that I’ve made clear so often. This is after you were warned many, many times, and after I gave you a huge amount of slack. You’ve abused my forgiving nature and wasted my time, as well as lots of other peoples’ too. You are no longer welcome here.
If you could reply, I strongly suspect it would be to play the victim card and try to slant this as you being singled out for which “side” you are on. This would be pretty comical given the conversation that has gone on above. Still, I want the record to show that even after this, I have still banned a lot more right wing people than left wing.
As I’ve said many times, it’s not about your political philosophy, it’s how you comport yourself. Brutus and others, take heed.
SK in CV
September 11, 2012 @
2:09 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:OK, after [quote=Rich Toscano]OK, after all that, I am changing my mind on Brian based on new evidence from poking around the threads some more. I just saw this, which I had missed before.
It’s now clear that you have returned to your threadjacking ways and have blatantly disregarded the rules that I’ve made clear so often. This is after you were warned many, many times, and after I gave you a huge amount of slack. You’ve abused my forgiving nature and wasted my time, as well as lots of other peoples’ too. You are no longer welcome here.
If you could reply, I strongly suspect it would be to play the victim card and try to slant this as you being singled out for which “side” you are on. This would be pretty comical given the conversation that has gone on above. Still, I want the record to show that even after this, I have still banned a lot more right wing people than left wing.
As I’ve said many times, it’s not about your political philosophy, it’s how you comport yourself. Brutus and others, take heed.[/quote]
I think you’re wrong on the first linked comment. You can’t really talk about bailouts comprehensively without addressing their political ramifications, whether it’s fiscal bailouts or monetary bailouts by central banks. They will always be influenced by politics, and even if they weren’t, they have political ramifications. Global economic policy and political policy are inextricably linked.
Was it threadjacking solely because he mentioned and compared the policies of a US political party in a post about the ECB? I don’t think so. His comment was both accurate and a political reality.
The second one, yeah, he brought politics into it. Pretty benign though. It could have easily been ignored.
Rich Toscano
September 11, 2012 @
2:59 PM
No, I’m not wrong.
The
No, I’m not wrong.
The question was about a very specific monetary policy action by the ECB, and what effect it might have. Brian’s response didn’t address that question at all… he made a dismissive remark about Europe (“The Europeans have nobody but themselves to blame”) and then started editorializing about Republican policy in the US.
It doesn’t matter that there was a segue. It doesn’t matter that the topics are somewhat related (though not the same topic). It doesn’t matter whether his comment was accurate or a political reality.
What matters is that the OP posted about a certain topic, and Brian tried to turn from that topic it into a left-vs-right flamewar. This is PRECISELY, like to the word, in violation of the anti-threadjacking rules that I created and have laid out over and over, including several times within this thread. So no, I’m not wrong.
It also doesn’t matter that you think his other violation was benign, or easily ignored. Apparently some people are having trouble ignoring it. And more to the point, I’ve made just a couple simple rules for forum behavior, and Brian has repeatedly violated them. I’ve been unbelievably patient with him over the years (including even contacting him offline and trying to “guide” him, as if I have time for that kind of babysitting). He’s rewarded me by continuing to flout those perfectly reasonable rules. I guess I don’t see this pattern of behavior as so benign.
sdduuuude
September 11, 2012 @
4:20 PM
I feel like I should go make I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …
zk
September 11, 2012 @
4:48 PM
sdduuuude wrote:I feel like I [quote=sdduuuude]I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …[/quote]
I feel like I should threadjack this threadjack thread.
sdduuuude
September 11, 2012 @
4:49 PM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:I [quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude]I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …[/quote]
I feel like I should threadjack this threadjack thread.[/quote]
LIBERAL !
desmond
September 11, 2012 @
5:01 PM
Brian knew what he was doing Brian knew what he was doing he just could not stop himself. Rich made the decision, it’s over. Nobody dislikes Brian, maybe everyone can treat each other with more respect, myself very much included.
CardiffBaseball
September 11, 2012 @
5:08 PM
desmond wrote:Brian knew what [quote=desmond]Brian knew what he was doing he just could not stop himself. Rich made the decision, it’s over. Nobody dislikes Brian, maybe everyone can treat each other with more respect, myself very much included.[/quote]
Yep I won’t be crying a river for him, but sometimes I felt dragged into the muck and could easily have been doing the same thing.
zk
September 11, 2012 @
6:11 PM
sdduuuude wrote:
LIBERAL [quote=sdduuuude]
LIBERAL ![/quote]
CONSERVATIVE!
Hey, that was easy. And it felt good, too. Screw that thinking stuff. I’m just gonna type in caps from now on.
Zeitgeist
September 12, 2012 @
11:27 AM
I cannot say that I will not I cannot say that I will not miss some of Brian’s posts. I found him entertaining and infuriating. I know Rich warned him repeatedly. In the past, I too was warned and I am trying to behave appropriately here. That being said, I do wish Brian well. I think he was self- employed, so perhaps he will start his own blog.
Allan from Fallbrook
September 12, 2012 @
1:08 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:I cannot say [quote=Zeitgeist]I cannot say that I will not miss some of Brian’s posts. I found him entertaining and infuriating. I know Rich warned him repeatedly. In the past, I too was warned and I am trying to behave appropriately here. That being said, I do wish Brian well. I think he was self- employed, so perhaps he will start his own blog.[/quote]
+1
In spite of often wanting to hit Brian in the head with a shovel, he always behaved like a gentleman and never stooped to nasty, overly personal attacks like certain other odious little posters on this board.
It is a shame it came to this, but Rich did exercise tremendous patience. This election cycle has proven to be exceptionally vicious and civil discourse seems to unfortunately be a thing of the past. I was as guilty as the next person of getting drawn into pointlessly nonsensical arguments that added nothing to the debate. Kudos to FLU for whacking me upside the head and telling me to STFU.
KSMountain
September 12, 2012 @
2:24 PM
I’ll miss him.
He brought a I’ll miss him.
He brought a unique, and as said above, infuriating perspective.
He was kind of like Frank Burns in M*A*S*H…
CA renter
September 12, 2012 @
4:23 PM
KSMountain wrote:I’ll miss [quote=KSMountain]I’ll miss him.
He brought a unique, and as said above, infuriating perspective.
He was kind of like Frank Burns in M*A*S*H…[/quote]
Frank Burns — that’s a good one! Some people can be terribly annoying…and likable.
While brian and I might both be considered “left-leaning,” we agree on very little, especially when it comes to public employment, illegal immigration, family, and other personal issues. Still, I’m very sad to see him go because it’s always good to hear from a variety of people who have different experiences, knowledge, and beliefs. I wish him the very best and hope that he can come back after the elections(?).
scaredyclassic
September 12, 2012 @
11:12 PM
was there a briansd prior to was there a briansd prior to briansd1?
what will briansd2 be like?
are all iterations of brian sd banned?
why is the punishment ramped up from gentle admonitions all the way to complete and utter banishment in such a swift and merciless manner?
maybe an errant poster could get a type of probation where they are limited to 3 posts a week. a sort of hobbling, like having to sit in the village stocks for a spell and have people toss rotten food and feces at you for amusement…imagine what banishment was like in the middle ages, when they tossed you outside the village walls, at the mercy of highwaymen, no food, wolves at the edge of town….
must have been terrifying, just like being banished from piggington
just amazing. we literally got sickened during the exhibit. like, i felt like i was going to throw up vomit.
makes ya think…
would make an excellent first date spot…
something about seeing actual items that were actually used to torture…(although some are reproductions or heavily refurbished…)
I’m NOT saying torture is a particularly republican or democratic issue. it seems to be a longstanding problem of all humanity…however, i did find viewing bits of both political conventions to be an extremely mild form of torture.
ok, that’s not funny, esp. if you’ve recently seen the torture exhibit…
this site was more exciting when there was a big giant real estate bubble.
scaredyclassic
September 12, 2012 @
11:15 PM
were there two frank burns? were there two frank burns? or was it hawkeye’s sidekick that there were two of?
there was only one houlihan, right?
man that show would not fly nowadays, would it?
so burnt out on war,M*A*S*H”
scaredyclassic
September 12, 2012 @
11:17 PM
the theme song is so clear in the theme song is so clear in my head. even more clear than my current reality.
i can hear the incoming choppers even…still seem slike it wouldve been cool to be hawkeye pierce. so competent. drinking gin in the little cool bar. the coolest frat brothers on the base. probably made a fortune after the war. had great stories. filled with righteous indignation.
scaredyclassic
September 12, 2012 @
11:28 PM
i would like the piggington i would like the piggington record to reflect that it is coming up on one year in which i have not had one drop of alcohol. i will cease and desist from deviating from the topic of this thread which is, i think, why banning people from piggington is tantamount to torture.hawkeye always had a hot nurse, right? why didnt i go into surgery.
Allan from Fallbrook
September 12, 2012 @
11:38 PM
squat250 wrote:i would like [quote=squat250]i would like the piggington record to reflect that it is coming up on one year in which i have not had one drop of alcohol. i will cease and desist from deviating from the topic of this thread which is, i think, why banning people from piggington is tantamount to torture.hawkeye always had a hot nurse, right? why didnt i go into surgery.[/quote]
Scaredy: One might gently suggest that your return to alcohol isn’t such a bad thing…
CA renter
September 13, 2012 @
2:36 AM
Wow, scaredy, not a drop? I Wow, scaredy, not a drop? I thought you gave up after a few weeks.
How does it feel? Are you planning on continuing down the teetotalling path, or was this just a temporary thing to see if you could do it?
CA renter
September 13, 2012 @
2:52 AM
squat250 wrote:were there two [quote=squat250]were there two frank burns? or was it hawkeye’s sidekick that there were two of?
there was only one houlihan, right?
man that show would not fly nowadays, would it?
so burnt out on war,M*A*S*H”[/quote]
Two sidekicks: B.J. Hunnicutt and Trapper John.
There were two characters who were relative antagonists: Frank Burns and Charles Winchester.
Yep, it was all about being disillusioned with war, and lamenting the destruction that always results from war.
I wish we still had TV shows like that.
scaredyclassic
September 13, 2012 @
6:52 AM
i would be drinking but in a i would be drinking but in a moment of bold strength, i said i would not drink till i squatted 300 lbs. and ive recently had some setbacks. so it may be a while.
in fact, we could be ina new housing bubble by the time i need to shop for some more tonic water.
scaredyclassic
September 13, 2012 @
6:52 AM
i remember being slightly i remember being slightly disturbed as a kid when the characters switched on mash
NotCranky
September 13, 2012 @
7:23 AM
I thought about the I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
Blogstar wrote:I thought [quote=Blogstar]I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
I didn’t get the theme song as a teenager watching mash. Did you guys? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO7uemm6Yo%5B/quote%5D
The theme song was from the movie that predated the tv show… which was much darker.
The song was performed by the military dentist – who was depressed and going to commit suicide (if I remember correctly.)
NotCranky
September 13, 2012 @
7:35 AM
UCGal wrote:Blogstar wrote:I [quote=UCGal][quote=Blogstar]I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
I didn’t get the theme song as a teenager watching mash. Did you guys? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO7uemm6Yo%5B/quote%5D
The theme song was from the movie that predated the tv show… which was much darker.
The song was performed by the military dentist – who was depressed and going to commit suicide (if I remember correctly.)[/quote]
Maybe I did comprehend some of the lyrics but thought is was a joke…I’ll look for that original movie. Thanks, Ucgal.
desmond
September 13, 2012 @
3:55 PM
Blogstar wrote:
Maybe I did [quote=Blogstar]
Maybe I did comprehend some of the lyrics but thought is was a joke…I’ll look for that original movie. Thanks, Ucgal.[/quote]
What happened after this a hot nurse was shown the Docs member, she gasps and stays with him while the others leave………
Allan from Fallbrook
September 13, 2012 @
8:27 AM
squat250 wrote:i would be [quote=squat250]i would be drinking but in a moment of bold strength, i said i would not drink till i squatted 300 lbs. and ive recently had some setbacks. so it may be a while.
in fact, we could be ina new housing bubble by the time i need to shop for some more tonic water.[/quote]
Scaredy: You should consider combining booze and powerlifting. The Russians do it and boast some of the world’s best powerlifters.
Plus, since you insist on not bracing those knees, you won’t feel it if you toss a patella during a set.
Rich Toscano
September 13, 2012 @
8:16 AM
squat250 wrote:
why is the [quote=squat250]
why is the punishment ramped up from gentle admonitions all the way to complete and utter banishment in such a swift and merciless manner?
[/quote]
If a person continues to political-threadjack after being “admonished” (gently or otherwise), then it’s clear that they just aren’t willing to abide by the rules, so banning is justified. This is especially so if they were admonished multiple times, as in Brian’s case.
Sorry about your squat setbacks. What are you up to now?
sdduuuude
September 13, 2012 @
10:03 AM
Rich Toscano wrote:Sorry [quote=Rich Toscano]Sorry about your squat setbacks. What are you up to now?[/quote]
Please provide historical weekly data on your squats so Rich can put a chart up.
NotCranky
September 13, 2012 @
11:31 AM
Just on the scale of Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.
Allan from Fallbrook
September 13, 2012 @
11:55 AM
Blogstar wrote:Just on the [quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
Blogstar: You have just (possibly inadvertently) created one of the best phrases ever! “Shared Group Hubris”!
I’m going to introduce this one to my Pop Warner players before this Saturday’s game. Whip ’em into a frenzy and when the PC parents want to know what I’m doing, I’ll let them know it’s a perfectly acceptable team normative experience, called “building Shared Group Hubris”. I’ll probably have to throw some blather in there about appropriately channeling one’s primal aggressions into a manner acceptable to society or something, but still…
NotCranky
September 13, 2012 @
11:59 AM
I bet you will win your game. I bet you will win your game.
desmond
September 13, 2012 @
3:43 PM
Blogstar wrote:I bet you will [quote=Blogstar]I bet you will win your game.[/quote]
Only if they can snap the ball to the punter without skidding it on the ground.. over and over…….
Allan from Fallbrook
September 13, 2012 @
6:26 PM
desmond wrote:Blogstar [quote=desmond][quote=Blogstar]I bet you will win your game.[/quote]
Only if they can snap the ball to the punter without skidding it on the ground.. over and over…….[/quote]
Desmond: Ah, dude, that’s just wrong. You know the Raiders pulled a guy in that hadn’t long snapped since high school, right?
Gawd, that was just awful. Shane Lechler looked about ready to have an embolism. Well, that’s the Raiduhs for ya.
scaredyclassic
September 13, 2012 @
6:34 PM
Through early morning fog I Through early morning fog I see
Visions of the things to be
The pains that are withheld for me
I realize and I can see
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
I try to find a way to make
All our little joys relate
Without that ever-present hate
But now I know that it’s too late, and
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The game of life is hard to play
I’m gonna lose it anyway
The losing card I’ll someday lay
So this is all I have to say
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The only way to win is cheat
And lay it down before I’m beat
And to another give my seat
For that’s the only painless feat
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The sword of time will pierce our skins
It doesn’t hurt when it begins
But as it works its way on in
The pain grows stronger watch it grin, but
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
A brave man once requested me
To answer questions that are key
Is it to be or not to be
And I replied ‘Oh, why ask me?’
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
‘Cause suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
scaredyclassic
September 13, 2012 @
6:51 PM
the squatting thing is the squatting thing is embarrassing. I don’t want anyone to mention it any further until I can pull myself together.
On the good side, my legs and knees feel fine. I was just overcome by lethargy.
alternative sentence:
“the shrew’s fiddle”, a kind of portable wooden stockade that holds your hands in a fiddle position, and also binds your neck. see photo below. it abrades the wrists raw, causing infections. and that was a light torture.
for women who speak out too much. at balboa park exhibit of torture. wear the shrew’s fiddle a few days and that’ll take the fight out of her.
was briansd1 given the choice of banishment or 1 day in the shrew’s fiddle?
Blogstar wrote:Just on the [quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
I don’t understand this post. The issue isn’t flawed character or “shared group hubris” (I don’t really know what that means). The issue is a repeated unwillingness to follow the few simple and entirely reasonable rules for forum behavior.
NotCranky
September 13, 2012 @
12:52 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:Blogstar [quote=Rich Toscano][quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
I don’t understand this post. The issue isn’t flawed character or “shared group hubris” (I don’t really know what that means). The issue is a repeated unwillingness to follow the few simple and entirely reasonable rules for forum behavior.[/quote]
That’s just the way I see it, Rich. My post looks like a straight forward opinion to me. Besides I am not really in a position to argue publically with any dictator.
Aecetia
September 13, 2012 @
1:32 PM
I think it is clear that Rich I think it is clear that Rich made a decision and I respect that. I think he probably debated it for a long time. I remember when Zeit and Brian were in some kind of right-left slap fest and Zeit almost got kicked, so Brian knows how that works. Also, Brian is not the first to go. Brian was good for a laugh (for me) because no matter what the topic, he could skew it for his own political leanings. He was very talented that way and pretty well read. I do not think Rich wants Zombie Brian back. I am sure Brian will find another outlet for his creative energy.
Coronita
September 10, 2012 @
3:41 PM
sdduuuude wrote:zk wrote:… [quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Well, for me the 100% off topics don’t bother me that much, because they are off topics.
The threads that bother me are the ones for which there is a discussion about RE on a thread and those unravel into either slapfests, or “my area is better than yours” or “I don’t know why anyone in their right mind would want to live in rat infested xyz areas”. We rarely here from the Pigg realtors anymore, and I’m guessing for those that want the information just take it off line, and to avoid a flamewar, I figured out that’s it’s probably better to do that anyway.
Or threads asking about where are better schools, and immediately devoid into a discussion about how school is not that important and that “I don’t know any idiot that would want spend $$$$$ to send their kids to private/Ivy schools”…
then there’s a few thread started that talking about stocks and what folks are doing (not necessarily because any of us knows what we are doing) but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
But the other things is I figured out a the folks here who have been really helpful to me personal on my journey to the RE/finance maze, and I love staying in contact with them to see what is going on and to enjoy exchanging ideas, even if it’s not necessarily on the public section.
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
Anyway, someone just tell me to STFU and go back being a productive member of society… Personally, sometimes, I wish I could self-ban myself. If at all, just have a limit on the number of times I can post and/or open a browser to this site. But you know, when I look at the ticker each morning or late at night, it’s always google.finance + piggington…
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
3:54 PM
I’m flattered that some I’m flattered that some people sensitive to things I write. I’ll have to return the compliment and be equally sensitive. They that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
4:02 PM
I shouldn’t be surprised that I shouldn’t be surprised that you are flattered by a revived thread about you being asked to leave the room, but I am.
UCGal
September 10, 2012 @
4:21 PM
There are a lot of people I There are a lot of people I regularly just give a quick scan to see if it’s another political rant or whether there’s some content worth reading.
Brian fits in that group.
So do quite a few folks on the right.
I try to stay out of the politics because I assume most people disagree with me… especially since I find I disagree with most of the political rants (on both sides.)
It’s funny how people on the right seem to think this message board leans left, and people on the left seem to thing this message board leans right. I see a whole lot of fact-free posting representing both sides. From my vantage it’s got plenty of representatives from all sides of the political spectrum. (Including some that defy easy categorization like Arraya.)
(edited to add- this isn’t to imply Arraya is fact free. He usually backs what he says. I was just trying to say that he doesn’t fit neatly into the right/left categories.)
I always read Walter/Scaredy/Squat’s posts. They make me laugh. Same with TG when he comes around.
No need to ban anyone. We’re all grownups and can ignore/skip posts we don’t want to read without taking it personally.
ucodegen
September 10, 2012 @
6:06 PM
briansd1 wrote:I’m flattered [quote=briansd1]I’m flattered that some people sensitive to things I write. I’ll have to return the compliment and be equally sensitive. They that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.[/quote]It is not ‘sensitive’ in the way you think, or are portraying. It is sensitive in the sense of being chafed raw with almost the same thing over and over again. First one.. no problem, second.. no problem.. but after a while.. “not again!”.
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
4:19 PM
flu wrote:
As far as the [quote=flu]
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
[/quote]
You don’t care, but you really do. Or it is the other way around? Perhaps you cared before you stopped caring?
Sorry, flu, but your posts are not policy specific that examine the effects of legislation. Your posts are ideological rants.
[quote=flu] but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
[/quote]
Nobody said that capital gains should be taxed more. But why not taxed the same?
Take your own advice, flu. If you don’t like the direction of the thread, don’t argue that capital gains should be taxed less.
Coronita
September 10, 2012 @
5:13 PM
briansd1 wrote:flu wrote:
As [quote=briansd1][quote=flu]
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
[/quote]
You don’t care, but you really do. Or it is the other way around? Perhaps you cared before you stopped caring?
Sorry, flu, but your posts are not policy specific that examine the effects of legislation. Your posts are ideological rants.
[quote=flu] but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
[/quote]
Nobody said that capital gains should be taxed more. But why not taxed the same?
Take your own advice, flu. If you don’t like the direction of the thread, don’t argue that capital gains should be taxed less.[/quote]
I do take my own advice. I do care about what certain people think. You’re not one of them.
That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
And if there’s any indication. Take a look at the tops 6 topics. Most of the old Realtors and RE folks are gone now…No more monthly data updates, no more north county updates….Nothing. Absolutely nothing now…
Me? I like talking to the folks who are in the know. So really, I’m bummed about out they aren’t here anymore. But I guess all user-forums kinda end the same way, and it’s this one we’re probably close to the bottom too.
Anyway, enjoy… Later
briansd1
September 10, 2012 @
8:44 PM
flu wrote:
And if there’s any [quote=flu]
And if there’s any indication. Take a look at the tops 6 topics. Most of the old Realtors and RE folks are gone now…No more monthly data updates, no more north county updates….Nothing. Absolutely nothing now…
Me? I like talking to the folks who are in the know. So really, I’m bummed about out they aren’t here anymore. But I guess all user-forums kinda end the same way, and it’s this one we’re probably close to the bottom too.
Anyway, enjoy… Later[/quote]
Give me a break, flu. Real estate moves at glaciers’ pace. There is little inventory now and prices are up. Buy elsewhere if you need investment cash flow. If you need a residence, then rent or select from the available inventory. Not a lot can be said.
If you don’t like non-real estate topics, don’t post them and don’t participate. Did you start an informative RE thread lately?
As far as politics and voting your pocketbook, you want to lower your taxes and maximize your benefits. Good for you. You should be on my side when I suggest that lower-income Republicans are irrational.
On people in the know…. Did george chamberlain know?
There’s one realtor who predicted high inflation. Was he right? Eventually he will be, but when?
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
12:37 PM
zk wrote:A lot of people on [quote=zk]A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.[/quote]
Again – not your decision. Here are the rules.
[quote=The MAN]Do not try to turn any discussion, even if already political in nature, into a left-vs-right slapfest. And do not try to turn a discussion, even if already political in nature, into a debate about a contentious and politicized issue that is only peripherally related to the original discussion (especially if the debate is polarized along left-vs-right lines).
Come to think of it, don’t even bother starting such a discussion.[/quote]
Anonymous
September 11, 2012 @
5:37 AM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:I [quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude]I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.[/quote]
How is brian’s quote any different from this?:
[quote=Brutus]Jeremiah Wright and Frank Marshall made Barry tick.[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Paul0373]Obama has had direct contact with and been influenced by more committed communists than anyone i’ve ever heard of. (Barack Sr, his own mother, his grandparents, Frank Marshall Davis, Said, Unger, Ayers, Bernadine Doern, Jeremiah Wright,et al….)How many communists do you know or hang with? Funny, don’t think I’ve ever met one. Yeah, I’d probably lean to the left with that much help.[/quote]
A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.
I can’t imagine avoiding this website because of Brutus or Paul or their numerous ilk. And I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.
zk
September 11, 2012 @
6:15 AM
Brutus wrote:
Brutus [quote=Brutus]
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
Hmm. Then what was the “leftists in the USSA” comment about?
sdduuuude
September 11, 2012 @
9:18 AM
Brutus wrote:The point I was [quote=Brutus]The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
This suggests that the ban is a result of his views. It is not. It is a result of his inability to control himself.
It isn’t a tactic used by dictators. It is a tactic used by people who want to be surrounded by reasonable people they like.
Continued refuting of his circular arguments are exactly what we don’t want.
briansd1
September 11, 2012 @
9:32 AM
Flu, sorry I don’t recall Flu, sorry I don’t recall your starting any real discussion that don’t include a WTF comment.
I might accept criticism coming from someone else, but not from you. If you dish it out, you need to take it.
(former)FormerSanDiegan
September 11, 2012 @
9:39 AM
briansd1 wrote:Flu, sorry I [quote=briansd1]Flu, sorry I don’t recall your starting any real discussion that don’t include a WTF comment.
I might accept criticism coming from someone else, but not from you. If you dish it out, you need to take it.[/quote]
I recall plenty of discussions with FLU that didn’t involve WTF. In particular their have been a range of real-estate related discussions as well as some OT discussions on health, stocks, and technology.
Perhaps your recollection is related solely to political topics.
sdduuuude
September 10, 2012 @
12:33 PM
Just to add fuel to the fire, Just to add fuel to the fire, let me demontrate a post that briansd could have submitted instead of the one above.
“I am concerned that calls for austerity and cuts in both Europe and America will lead to economic decline.”
Amazing how I didn’t even have to mention Republicans, isn’t it ?
SD Realtor
September 10, 2012 @
7:50 PM
This is not nearly the same This is not nearly the same site that it used to be. Whether it has grown better or worse is in the eye of the beholder. Some people think it has changed for the better and others do not.
I keep in touch with the posters who I want to keep in touch with and they do the same with me.
NotCranky
September 10, 2012 @
8:13 PM
There’s a professional real There’s a professional real estate post on the home page of this blog that’s been up for 1 day and four hours and hasn’t had a reply yet.
urbanrealtor
September 11, 2012 @
12:48 PM
I just looked at the ecb I just looked at the ecb thread and I really don’t see what was non-topical about the posts that brian made.
I found his posts annoying but I really did not see recent evidence of threadjacking.
NotCranky
September 11, 2012 @
1:47 PM
Good luck to you, Brian. Good luck to you, Brian.
jstoesz
September 11, 2012 @
3:35 PM
Heck, I have probably thread Heck, I have probably thread jacked at one time or another.
This thread is a good reminder to stay on topic and be courteous.
Cheers and thanks for the forum.
bearishgurl
September 12, 2012 @
12:03 PM
I’m a bit taken aback that I’m a bit taken aback that brian will not be here anymore. I found him purportedly well-traveled, highly intelligent in many subjects … and, thru pm, also well-versed in the complicated and tricky procedures he works with.
I could care less what people’s opinions are. They are simply opinions of one individual. However “insulting” they may be perceived by a few others, sometimes the truth is hard to swallow at times. Everyone came by their own unfettered “prejudices” honestly and far be it from me to try to influence that.
In other words, I never had a problem with other people’s truths, even if they don’t jive with my own “truth.”
I didn’t really follow very closely all the Repub/Demo “slapfest” threads so really didn’t notice who was steering the ship on them. However, I am aware that there are several posters here who could have been likely captains of “Ship Piggington” steering all those left/right ideological threads.
I agree that it is the perogative of the moderator to call the shots on forum decorum.
sdduuuude
September 14, 2012 @
1:54 PM
This site is seriously better This site is seriously better already. Oddly enough, the off-topic posts are more productive.
Even squat250’s political post has prompted people to post thoughts instead of bickering.
It’s just better this way.
I found myself over at bubbleinfo alot more lately but yesterday and today, I’m back and it seems so much better.
Seems like Brian showed up Seems like Brian showed up just as PerryChase disappeared forever. If the PerryChase account lights up again, it’ll raise my suspicion.
May 25, 2010 @ 9:47 PM
I don’t know aobut you, but I
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.
May 25, 2010 @ 10:25 PM
I actually kind of miss
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?…
May 25, 2010 @ 10:35 PM
It isn’t really about
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.
May 25, 2010 @ 11:00 PM
If you can’t stand the heat,
If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).
May 26, 2010 @ 11:59 AM
briansd1 wrote:If you can’t
[quote=briansd1]If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen (or make sure you have good air-conditioning).[/quote]
Well, you didn’t do much to defend your debating skills there.
May 26, 2010 @ 8:20 AM
Sure his style of argument is
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 8:32 AM
sdduuuude wrote:It isn’t
[quote=sdduuuude]It isn’t really about agreement, it is about being on-topic, which is economics and housing[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:50 PM
KSMountain wrote:
Remember
[quote=KSMountain]
Remember the guy that was upset about Jeff Bridges and Hyundai? Whatever happened to THAT guy?…[/quote]
He bought a Hyundai….after making tons of money selling pig iron parts (wink wink wink Allan)
May 26, 2010 @ 8:44 AM
I haven’t been active that
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 🙂
May 26, 2010 @ 9:01 AM
How about let’s play, “Lynch
How about let’s play, “Lynch the Liberal”?
May 26, 2010 @ 9:31 AM
“I may not agree with what
“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?
May 26, 2010 @ 10:39 AM
Allan from Fallbrook wrote:“I
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
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..)
May 26, 2010 @ 11:44 AM
personally, I vote to kick me
personally, I vote to kick me off.
May 26, 2010 @ 11:53 AM
I don’t believe that Brian
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 12:07 PM
afx114 wrote:I don’t believe
[quote=afx114]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.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 12:25 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:.
What is
[quote=Rich Toscano].
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. [/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 12:32 PM
My main objection to you
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 12:51 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:My main
[quote=Zeitgeist]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.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:05 PM
You are correct. I did take
You are correct. I did take the bait. I will do better next time.
June 11, 2010 @ 10:54 PM
sdduuuude wrote:
To All –
[quote=sdduuuude]
To All – less troll feeding, in general, when it comes to Democrat vs. Republican comments, could help brian moderate his threadjacking habits as well.[/quote]
Is this like having women wear burkas because men can’t control themselves around women if they’re not wearing full body sheets for clothing?
May 26, 2010 @ 1:21 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:My main
[quote=Zeitgeist]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!
[/quote]
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.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
I also notice that you rarely answer questions you are asked by other posters. Allan comes to mind.
[/quote]
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.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
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.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 12:44 PM
briansd1 wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=briansd1][quote=Rich Toscano].
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. [/quote]
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.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:31 PM
briansd1 wrote: I saw the
[quote=briansd1] I saw the hair-brained anti-government and anti-Obama posts from Zeit, et al.
[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:43 PM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]”I’m morally flexible”, or “I’m really an incrementalist”.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:44 PM
And here we go …
And here we go …
May 26, 2010 @ 1:47 PM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][
Brian: “Hair-brained”? Dude. Its “hare-brained” and means the flighty nature associated with rabbits.[/quote]
Sorry for not proofing… but if you want to correct spelling and grammar on this site.. you have lots of work to do.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:33 PM
briansd1 wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=briansd1][quote=Rich Toscano].
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. [/quote]
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.[/quote]
I changed my vote… get a rope.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:45 PM
briansd1 wrote:
In the past,
[quote=briansd1]
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.
[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:50 PM
flu wrote:briansd1 wrote:
In
[quote=flu][quote=briansd1]
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.
[/quote]
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.[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:53 PM
briansd1 wrote:
Rich, you’ve
[quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:59 PM
The real hare brain
[img_assist|nid=13351|title=The real hare brain|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=90|height=127]
May 26, 2010 @ 2:00 PM
Technically, brian can’t
Technically, brian can’t threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it’ll be right on-topic.
May 26, 2010 @ 2:01 PM
sdduuuude wrote:Technically,
[quote=sdduuuude]Technically, brian can’t threadjack this thread. If he does something stupid enough to get himself banned, it’ll be right on-topic.[/quote]
Ha! Hilarious…. 🙂
May 26, 2010 @ 2:00 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:briansd1
[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
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.[/quote]
Where’s Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again!
May 26, 2010 @ 3:30 PM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Where’s Dan (urbanrealtor)? I think we need to start talking about sharks again![/quote]
Or perhaps we should talk about the best way to kill zombies… Now that was a COOL threadjack.
May 26, 2010 @ 3:54 PM
Or even better…
.
Or
..
Or even better…
[img_assist|nid=13353|title=.|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=350|height=241]
Or
[img_assist|nid=13352|title=..|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=569|height=400]
May 28, 2010 @ 7:37 AM
Rich Toscano wrote:briansd1
[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
What complete nonsense. I haven’t noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.
…
— 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.[/quote]
Dude, Brian, Rich really doesn’t like you.
May 28, 2010 @ 8:13 AM
Weberlin, all I said in the
Weberlin, all I said in the quote above was that Brian seems to be at the bottom of most if not all of that subset of threadjacks I have observed myself. It’s not personal or a matter of like/dislike. Let’s try to keep this thread civil, thanks…
Rich
June 11, 2010 @ 9:06 AM
Rich Toscano wrote: … But
[quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
1.
http://piggington.com/economic_collapse_2011
June 11, 2010 @ 9:39 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
1.
http://piggington.com/economic_collapse_2011%5B/quote%5D
I’d like to see NewToSanDiego and Brian in a pissing match, frankly. I think it would be pretty entertaining….It seems like they are the mirror equivalent in parallel universes.
Gotta love the entertainment factor in a blog. ok, I’m done for today…
June 11, 2010 @ 9:46 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Rich Toscano
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=Rich Toscano] … 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.[/quote]
1.
http://piggington.com/economic_collapse_2011%5B/quote%5D
I’m the one that brought up estate taxes. Did I hijack… I don’t think so since the OP was about increased taxes – and my comment was that people should always be looking forward with tax implications in mind when making investments, making financial moves… except the estate tax can’t be planned for… because people die when they die.
Brian commented on my estate tax thing – Zeitgeist called him a dumbass – and it went from there.
So… do I get kicked off? I brought up the estate tax thing.
June 11, 2010 @ 9:50 AM
No UCgal, I was typing my
No UCgal, I was typing my response as you replied. You did nothing wrong. It is the nature of a forum to jump from topic to topic, that’s what makes it interesting. The “threadjack” part was A) trying to polarize the discussion along right-vs-left lines and B) trying to start an argument about a peripheral topic.
June 11, 2010 @ 9:53 AM
intent matters
intent matters
June 11, 2010 @ 7:13 PM
There is no reason to ban
There is no reason to ban Brian. He is not offensive and is never nasty. Whether we agree or disagree with him, there is nothing that he says that would “ban” him. He means well…I really believe that.
June 11, 2010 @ 9:59 PM
Since the topic of this
Since the topic of this thread is about me, I should have the opportunity to respond.
Contrast whatever I may have posted to the following thread which I didn’t even respond to.
http://piggington.com/lou_pritchett039s_letter_to_obama
Did I ever post anything as outrageously partisan as that?
June 11, 2010 @ 10:33 PM
Stop It!
Stop It!
June 11, 2010 @ 11:27 PM
sdrealtor wrote:Stop It!
sdr:
[quote=sdrealtor]Stop It![/quote]
sdr: He can’t. And, no, that’s not meant as a putdown or an insult. He can’t. I don’t respond to Brian anymore and not just because its pointless. As ucodegen pointed out on another post, its nearly pathological now.
I agree with the other posters that said Brian isn’t mean spirited. I don’t think he is, either. But its now become almost sad, the way he responds to any sort of bait at all. Which is why I don’t bother responding. At some point, you find yourself right down there with him. So, you don’t feed the negativity, and instead respond to those posters that want an intelligent debate and an open discourse and to contribute positively.
June 12, 2010 @ 12:31 AM
I didn’t think that all this
I didn’t think that all this time Brian has been talking to himself ???
I believe he has been talking to a bunch of guys who also responded in kind, no matter how “intelligent” a language and contents they think they could distract with.
If one can’t stop responding and attacking (ie to the point of categorizing him as “pathological”), why ask him to stop responding and attacking?
And being here for years reading posts, one has to wonder: who came first, the chicken or the egg?
I disagree with many things Brian said but I would not ban him from saying it. All I need to do is to ignore it like I ignore so many others.
If it’s from the standpoint of this website’s sake, beside the faults of starting a flame throwing topic, it is also the failure to ignore and the hot desire to attack back that keep the flame going and more.
Blaming everything on Brian from a few here is another act of bullying.
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.
June 12, 2010 @ 7:40 AM
KIBU wrote:
One exception
[quote=KIBU]
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.[/quote]
That I agree with. You may have noticed that I did not start off-topic threads in several weeks.
June 12, 2010 @ 9:06 AM
KIBU wrote:I didn’t think
[quote=KIBU]I didn’t think that all this time Brian has been talking to himself ???
I believe he has been talking to a bunch of guys who also responded in kind, no matter how “intelligent” a language and contents they think they could distract with.
If one can’t stop responding and attacking (ie to the point of categorizing him as “pathological”), why ask him to stop responding and attacking?
And being here for years reading posts, one has to wonder: who came first, the chicken or the egg?
I disagree with many things Brian said but I would not ban him from saying it. All I need to do is to ignore it like I ignore so many others.
If it’s from the standpoint of this website’s sake, beside the faults of starting a flame throwing topic, it is also the failure to ignore and the hot desire to attack back that keep the flame going and more.
Blaming everything on Brian from a few here is another act of bullying.
One exception however, I would ask Brian to respect the website and Rich and not post any more hot topic. I think everyone understand Rich’s standpoint and I would agree that his new rule in the long term will keep this website informative and a nicer environment.[/quote]
Well said, KIBU.
June 12, 2010 @ 7:35 PM
I agree with KIBU. It is good
I agree with KIBU. It is good to keep it civil. As for going to the OT posts that are clearly political, anyone that does not like politics or is not a political junky and you all know who you are, might think about steering clear. Obviously, some of us thrive on negative attention. Thanks Rich for not booting me off for my opinions.
June 12, 2010 @ 8:08 AM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdrealtor]Stop It![/quote]
sdr: He can’t. And, no, that’s not meant as a putdown or an insult. He can’t. I don’t respond to Brian anymore and not just because its pointless. As ucodegen pointed out on another post, its nearly pathological now.
I agree with the other posters that said Brian isn’t mean spirited. I don’t think he is, either. But its now become almost sad, the way he responds to any sort of bait at all. Which is why I don’t bother responding. At some point, you find yourself right down there with him. So, you don’t feed the negativity, and instead respond to those posters that want an intelligent debate and an open discourse and to contribute positively.[/quote]
When did you quit, like 5 minutes before that last post? That’s a very self serving post, Allan.
June 14, 2010 @ 12:37 PM
Ricechex wrote:There is no
[quote=Ricechex]There is no reason to ban Brian. He is not offensive and is never nasty. Whether we agree or disagree with him, there is nothing that he says that would “ban” him. He means well…I really believe that.[/quote]
Since I have defended not banning Brian and against bullying( as opposed to the regular mutual fighting that occurs here), I gave some thought to this post, Ricechex. While he does not load up and drop four letter laden pejoratives, he heaps moral praise on democrats and compares anyone one else to greedy monkeys. Other than people who don’t believe in a human soul, no one likes being accused of not having one. So my conclusion is that policy arguments have less to do with the return barrage on naming calling than his dismissal of people’s value based on their opinion of policy and policy makers.
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
This is not to say he should be banned, but he is not innocent of insulting others. I have claimed previously that he is the example of civility when he is not.
June 14, 2010 @ 1:31 PM
Russell wrote:
Take, for
[quote=Russell]
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
[/quote]
Russell, I apologize if you took offense to my description of Kansas.
In the context of my use of the word Kansas, it is not a real place but an imaginary nirvana for people who despise, and I quote, the “liberal elite”, the “hate America first” crowd, “the granola munching”, “Prius driving”, “tree hugging” environmentalists, the “San Francisco radical”, etc…
My use of hyperbole is far from carpet bombing. I will be more mindful of using words that offend.
June 14, 2010 @ 1:40 PM
wait a minute there; i don’t
wait a minute there; i don’t believe that anyone has a soul, but I still don’t like to be accused of not having a soul, if the accuser believes in the existence of souls. If we both agree on the non-existence of the soul, i take no issue with your accusing me of not having a soul. I do not like to be called a “greedy monkey’ though, whether or not you believe in the existence of greed among monkeys.
June 14, 2010 @ 1:49 PM
walter aka scaredy – you are
walter aka scaredy – you are cracking me up today.
June 14, 2010 @ 1:55 PM
walterwhite wrote: i don’t
[quote=walterwhite] i don’t believe that anyone has a soul, but I still don’t like to be accused of not having a soul, if the accuser believes in the existence of souls.[/quote]
I really dig your posts. I anoint you the Piggington Philosopher.
June 14, 2010 @ 3:14 PM
briansd1 wrote:Russell
[quote=briansd1][quote=Russell]
Take, for instance, how he dismisses the entire population of Kansas. No one who has the common sense to realize there are multitudes of decent people in Kansas can easily stomach an a verbal carpet bombing against that much humanity, especially since it is inevitable that some of us have things in common with them.
[/quote]
Russell, I apologize if you took offense to my description of Kansas.
In the context of my use of the word Kansas, it is not a real place but an imaginary nirvana for people who despise, and I quote, the “liberal elite”, the “hate America first” crowd, “the granola munching”, “Prius driving”, “tree hugging” environmentalists, the “San Francisco radical”, etc…
My use of hyperbole is far from carpet bombing. I will be more mindful of using words that offend.[/quote]
Kansas of course is not really the point …but I agree with flu, enough points. Also agree that the soon to be “Bad Ass” used to be “Scaredy cat” is the stuff.
June 11, 2010 @ 9:48 AM
That is pretty annoying, but
That is pretty annoying, but upon some thought, it wouldn’t be fair to ban him on that.
This is what I said earlier in this post: “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.”
Well, the thread in question is a political thread to begin with; the OP is about tax policy. So Brian’s post doesn’t fit the letter of the definition.
But this is a threadjack in spirit. While Brian wasn’t the first to bring up the estate tax as a topic, the prior poster brought it up to illustrate a point. Brian brought it up with the obvious intent (successful, sadly) to start a left-vs-right debate, and one that wasn’t even relevant to the original topic.
So in fairness, here is the more refined definition of a threadjack:
Do not try to turn any discussion, even if already political in nature, into a left-vs-right slapfest. And do not try to turn a discussion, even if political in nature, into a debate about a contentious and politicized issue that is only peripherally related to the original discussion.
Threadjacks will be deleted and repeated threadjackers banned.
(And remember, when I delete a comment, the system automatically deletes all replies to that comment).
Rich
May 26, 2010 @ 11:58 AM
scaredycat wrote:personally,
[quote=scaredycat]personally, I vote to kick me off.[/quote]
Please, Please,Please ban my ass. I’ll buy you some beer, Mexican food…and what else was it?…Yeah, wtf is hockey?
May 27, 2010 @ 9:15 PM
Allan from Fallbrook wrote:“I
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
Actually Allan the Anonnance Equation Stands at…
Allan << Brian 😛 CE
May 27, 2010 @ 9:34 PM
Lastly…
I am surprised to
Lastly…
I am surprised to see you leading this little insurrecton SDDuuuude…
I know how you feel about particular people on this thread but I always thought you were a little more chill about people flapping your chops. But then again, I know that things can push your button very quickly as well… Like getting sucked out on the river card!
Remind me never to take you to Nicaragua on a bad weekend with a 100 dollars in your pocket. I don’t think that country could take another revolution.
See you at World Cup…
😛
CE
May 27, 2010 @ 9:57 PM
CDMA ENG wrote:Allan from
[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=Allan from Fallbrook]“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?[/quote]
Actually Allan the Anonnance Equation Stands at…
Allan << Brian 😛 CE[/quote] CE: Well, I guess I'll just have to work harder, right?
May 28, 2010 @ 6:17 AM
he is not spamming, so he
he is not spamming, so he should stay.
May 26, 2010 @ 9:49 AM
russell wrote:How about let’s
[quote=russell]How about let’s play, “Lynch the Liberal”?[/quote]
I guess one could make assumptions about me due to the yard signs I’m currently displaying – LOL!
May 26, 2010 @ 10:01 AM
I rarely agree with Brian but
I rarely agree with Brian but sdduuuuude you are just being catty.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:11 PM
Brian, if you agree to create
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:24 PM
bob2007 wrote:Brian, if you
[quote=bob2007]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.[/quote]
Bob: Well said, and spot on.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:39 PM
Duuuuuuude.
I’m normally in
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 1:48 PM
I for one find it pretty
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…
May 26, 2010 @ 2:39 PM
8bitnintendo wrote:I for one
[quote=8bitnintendo]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…[/quote]
Exactly!!!
May 26, 2010 @ 3:14 PM
Plus banning, all it does, is
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..
[quote=Rich Toscano]
[quote=briansd1]
Rich, you’ve been very tolerant with the right wing posts as you’ve been with mine.
[/quote]
What complete nonsense. I haven’t noticed anyone who threadjacks to anywhere near the degree that you do it.
[/quote]
‘brainsd1‘ – are you trying to play chicken with a train??
May 26, 2010 @ 1:41 PM
He must have created thirty
He must have created thirty accounts to vote for himself. Always count on a democrat to stuff the ballot box.
May 26, 2010 @ 2:53 PM
I voted for Brian to go, but
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…
May 26, 2010 @ 3:25 PM
Rich
How ’bout a “mute”
Rich
How ’bout a “mute” button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?
May 26, 2010 @ 3:29 PM
sd_matt wrote:Rich
How ’bout
[quote=sd_matt]Rich
How ’bout a “mute” button when the inevitable threadjack occurs?[/quote]
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 3:54 PM
I’ll give B-Ri credit, he
I’ll give B-Ri credit, he does not give up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SswamS7kQbQ&feature=related
May 26, 2010 @ 4:25 PM
Personally I don’t think a
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.
May 26, 2010 @ 4:36 PM
Who is briansd1 ?
Who is briansd1 ?
May 26, 2010 @ 4:51 PM
This thread is so meta.
This thread is so meta.
May 26, 2010 @ 8:50 PM
SD Realtor wrote:it equally
[quote=SD Realtor]it equally concerns me when others make recommendations based on their thoughts rather then real life experiences.[/quote]
What makes you think I don’t have real life experience?
If you must know, I’ve been to Philadelphia once a month to buy a warehouse. They are opening a new casino on the waterfront and the opportunities are like the East Village 25 years ago.
I said that I recommended that my friend who got transferred to Philly buy a house. The prices are good and there is a 10-year property tax abatement. Go check it out.
On China, I was challenging the notion that absentee Asian buyers moving their money from China would stabilize California real estate.
On Public Radio, and other subjects you don’t have to read the OT treads, many of them I didn’t even start.
May 26, 2010 @ 7:47 PM
Ok, after reading the last
Ok, after reading the last few posts from two very reasonable people, Rich and SD Realtor, I am changing my vote to he goes. SDR describes the same problem reading the threads that I do, and it has reduced my reading and participation here as well.
Brian, you posts in this thread alone discredit you, and I honestly can’t tell if your laughing when you are writing them or are actually trying to be sincere.
People have to be motivated to actively post in a forum like this, and I see indications the most insightful posters don’t enjoy coming here as much due to the off-topic posts, which isn’t acceptable.
May 26, 2010 @ 10:12 PM
bob2007 wrote:Ok, after
[quote=bob2007]Ok, after reading the last few posts from two very reasonable people, Rich and SD Realtor, I am changing my vote to he goes. SDR describes the same problem reading the threads that I do, and it has reduced my reading and participation here as well.
Brian, you posts in this thread alone discredit you, and I honestly can’t tell if your laughing when you are writing them or are actually trying to be sincere.
People have to be motivated to actively post in a forum like this, and I see indications the most insightful posters don’t enjoy coming here as much due to the off-topic posts, which isn’t acceptable.[/quote]
Agreed. Guys like SDR and TG have made this site a very enjoyable destination and not just for their real estate insights, but for the very humorous posts (especially TG, who should really get into the blogging business himself). There was a lot of banter and good natured back and forth before.
Lately, though, the dialogue has coarsened and split along Left/Right fault lines and it isn’t quite so fun. I’m as guilty as the next guy, but some of this nonsense makes my blood boil and I feel compelled to respond. Not an excuse, just the reality. Combined with the fact that everything now seems to get twisted or skewed along political lines, regardless of topic or content, well, its making this a far less enjoyable venue.
May 26, 2010 @ 11:04 PM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Lately, though, the dialogue has coarsened and split along Left/Right fault lines and it isn’t quite so fun. I’m as guilty as the next guy, but some of this nonsense makes my blood boil and I feel compelled to respond. Not an excuse, just the reality. Combined with the fact that everything now seems to get twisted or skewed along political lines, regardless of topic or content, well, its making this a far less enjoyable venue.[/quote]
Well put, Allan. Lets get it back to housing and econ and analysis and food. Twisting each other’s words gains nothing.
When your blood boils, maybe just request that it be deleted (dare I say “nuked”) instead of responding.
May 27, 2010 @ 8:05 AM
sdduuuude wrote:
When your
[quote=sdduuuude]
When your blood boils, maybe just request that it be deleted (dare I say “nuked”) instead of responding.[/quote]
Yes, this is a good idea.
If people email rich@piggington.com with the link to a political threadjack comment (regardless of authorship) I will delete it. Please send direct link to the comment itself, so I don’t have to hunt around.
Warning: when I delete a comment, it deletes all replies to that comment. So directly reply to a nuke-worthy comment at your own risk!
Rich
May 27, 2010 @ 7:54 PM
FYI from Rich re. nuke worthy
FYI from Rich re. nuke worthy comments, etc. Consider this a bump.
May 26, 2010 @ 10:27 PM
Off topic: As long as the
Off topic: As long as the record seems to be setting straight…Hey Flu, I’m sorry I exposed Fiquette by posting his photo, but I did it because I thought his ‘typical, useless, and unbelievably boring political slapfighting’ was…. typical and useless as Rich mentioned. And it made me angry. But it was wrong for me to do that. And I apologize.
On topic, I oppose the thread jack, especially political, but recognize the OT designation as my choice to view or for others to post through.
May 27, 2010 @ 5:47 AM
Portlock wrote:Off topic: As
[quote=Portlock]Off topic: As long as the record seems to be setting straight…Hey Flu, I’m sorry I exposed Fiquette by posting his photo, but I did it because I thought his ‘typical, useless, and unbelievably boring political slapfighting’ was…. typical and useless as Rich mentioned. And it made me angry. But it was wrong for me to do that. And I apologize.
On topic, I oppose the thread jack, especially political, but recognize the OT designation as my choice to view or for others to post through.[/quote]
Off topic response.
Hi Portlock,
First off. There is no need to apologize to me, because fquette isn’t me :). Second, you took down your post on your own after my comment (which I wasn’t asking you to do anyway). Third, the only reason why I brought fquette was counterexample to Brian’s post that suggested Rich was giving favortism to “conservative” viewpoints, since I recall fquette use to post a lot too and recall Rich giving him a warning.
My only point back last time was to suggest that perhaps (a) some people want to remain anonymous and (b) some people aren’t as careful to do so. In hindsight, I should have just PM’ed you privately about my opinion.
Anyway, seems like according to this poll, more people favor freedom of speech. So, again, as a counter example, I don’t think folks here in the majority are backward conservative southern hicks as briansd1 might have envisoned. Perhaps there is such a thing as socially liberal/fiscally conservative :)?
June 14, 2010 @ 2:09 PM
Can we let this topic die,
Can we let this topic die, please…It’s more attention that needs to be directed on one person, or issue really….
June 14, 2010 @ 2:43 PM
flu,
Maybe he wants a
flu,
Maybe he wants a recount. There could have been a hanging chad…
June 14, 2010 @ 2:50 PM
Aecetia wrote:flu,
Maybe he
[quote=Aecetia]flu,
Maybe he wants a recount. There could have been a hanging chad…[/quote]
HA, HA. Good one.
June 14, 2010 @ 3:03 PM
jpinpb wrote:Aecetia
[quote=jpinpb][quote=Aecetia]flu,
Maybe he wants a recount. There could have been a hanging chad…[/quote]
HA, HA. Good one.[/quote]
Nah, it had to be an empty bubble.
June 22, 2010 @ 9:34 AM
Really? In a soccer thread ?
Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa
June 22, 2010 @ 9:46 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Really? In a
[quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
The unintentionally funny part is that Jack Kemp was a former NFL QB (as well as being a noted Republican). Football guys are notoriously anti-soccer, so I think its less a function of Kemp being a Republican and more him being a football guy. Of course, Brian seizes on anything that will aid in his own little personal intifada against the evil, perfidious GOP.
June 22, 2010 @ 10:34 AM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
The unintentionally funny part is that Jack Kemp was a former NFL QB (as well as being a noted Republican). Football guys are notoriously anti-soccer, so I think its less a function of Kemp being a Republican and more him being a football guy. Of course, Brian seizes on anything that will aid in his own little personal intifada against the evil, perfidious GOP.[/quote]
You’re reading too much into what wasn’t said.
Who’s talking Republicans vs. Democrat?
Many American-football guys think that football is a socialist un-American sport. So?
June 22, 2010 @ 10:59 AM
sdduuuude wrote:Really? In a
[quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
I disagree sdduuuude. If you look at that thread closely you’ll see that IForget started down the political path in a very inflammatory way and others followed, before briansd1 even got there.
I thought briansd1’s quote by Jack Kemp was interesting actually, and somewhat funny coming from him. It brings to mind the whole debate of whether they should keep score in young kids sports. If not, why not? If so, why? At what age? Is the answer country-specific? Why?
Is this a threadjack? I’m now talking about the virtues/perils of childhood competitiveness on a thread that’s supposed to be about kicking out a member…
June 22, 2010 @ 11:59 AM
KSMountain wrote:sdduuuude
[quote=KSMountain][quote=sdduuuude]Really? In a soccer thread ? I can’t call this #2 as it is an OT thread to begin with. But … Really ?
http://piggington.com/slovenia_vs_usa%5B/quote%5D
I disagree sdduuuude. If you look at that thread closely you’ll see that IForget started down the political path in a very inflammatory way and others followed, before briansd1 even got there.
I thought briansd1’s quote by Jack Kemp was interesting actually, and somewhat funny coming from him. It brings to mind the whole debate of whether they should keep score in young kids sports. If not, why not? If so, why? At what age? Is the answer country-specific? Why?
Is this a threadjack? I’m now talking about the virtues/perils of childhood competitiveness on a thread that’s supposed to be about kicking out a member…[/quote]
June 22, 2010 @ 2:25 PM
You know, actually, reading
You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.
June 22, 2010 @ 2:37 PM
sdduuuude wrote:You know,
[quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.
June 22, 2010 @ 2:40 PM
Allan from Fallbrook
[quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.[/quote]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.
June 22, 2010 @ 3:11 PM
Arraya wrote:
lol.. My dad
[quote=Arraya]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.[/quote]
haha.. And your dad brought up your sister and you…
As I said before, it’s only a matter of time until everyone is co-opted by un-real American ideas.
June 22, 2010 @ 3:33 PM
Arraya wrote:Allan from
[quote=Arraya][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdduuuude]You know, actually, reading it again. He may have been trying to be funny. It is kind of funny that Kemp would say that.[/quote]
Kemp = football guy. Also, being a staunch Old School GOPer, I’m pretty sure that anything that didn’t involve red meat, distilled spirits and violence was considered socialist and possibly un-American.[/quote]
lol.. My dad called my sister a communist for being a vegetarian a few years ago at Thanksgiving.[/quote]
Arraya: That is funny. My dad was a former Marine DI and we had a running joke whereby everyone we didn’t like or agree with was a “Godless dope-smoking Commie fiend”. This list encapsulated everyone from Linda Ronstadt to Roger Staubach to Bill Clinton.
And the term “friggin’ Communist” was used to describe anything non-functioning, irritating, or just generally bothersome. This term was also interchangeable with “chingadera” as well.
June 22, 2010 @ 3:46 PM
I cancel out Arraya as the
I cancel out Arraya as the vegetarian free eater!! We are in harmonic balance.
June 22, 2010 @ 7:07 PM
Upon reviewing the thread in
Upon reviewing the thread in question, here are my findings:
1. The nature of Brian’s post was sufficiently vague that it’s too hard to determine whether or not it was it purposeful political threadjack (as defined in the official threadjack policy here).
2. The same can’t be said for IForget’s completely out-of-the-blue commentary on “right-wing Christian nutjobs” in a thread about World Cup soccer. He or she will no longer be joining us.
Rich
September 7, 2012 @ 9:02 PM
I think it may be time to
I think it may be time to rethink this. lately I’ve several non-political threads get turned int the afore mentioned “political slapfest” by Brian. The ones that come to mind were a thread about Eyeglasses that Brian tried to turn into an Obamacare debate, and more recently was a thread about Scaredy calling the top of the stock market where Brian’s first post was deliberately political. I never voted on this thread before because, while I thought his behavior was annoying, I thought it would be extreme to ban him. Now, however, I have voted to ban him because it’s become clear that he won’t or can’t stop doing it. Personally, I’d like to be able to discuss things over than political BS on every single thread.
September 7, 2012 @ 9:30 PM
mike92104 wrote:I think it
[quote=mike92104]I think it may be time to rethink this. lately I’ve several non-political threads get turned int the afore mentioned “political slapfest” by Brian. The ones that come to mind were a thread about Eyeglasses that Brian tried to turn into an Obamacare debate, and more recently was a thread about Scaredy calling the top of the stock market where Brian’s first post was deliberately political. I never voted on this thread before because, while I thought his behavior was annoying, I thought it would be extreme to ban him. Now, however, I have voted to ban him because it’s become clear that he won’t or can’t stop doing it. Personally, I’d like to be able to discuss things over than political BS on every single thread.[/quote]
I just read that thread and I don’t think it was particularly off-topic.
I suppose the cumulative irritation might make a difference but I can’t agree with you about that particular perceived transgression.
September 7, 2012 @ 9:31 PM
Fucking liberal sharks.
Fucking liberal sharks.
September 7, 2012 @ 9:35 PM
Nobody will see this post
Nobody will see this post but, if they did, I would remind them that we do have an ignore function now.
That said, I changed my vote.
September 8, 2012 @ 9:10 AM
In truth B-ri needs help, and
In truth B-ri needs help, and I am not making a joke about this, and btw there is nothing wrong in seeking help, I have. To many “hates” and “put downs”, (people to fat,etc) along with “it’s his way or the highway” (political, USA, etc). I am no saint, but I admit it, B-ri is in total denial.
September 8, 2012 @ 10:22 AM
Who the fvck cares?
Just let
Who the fvck cares?
Just let him be…..One of the best things about this forum unlike others, is there’s very little cybernanny cops going around…
Don’t like something? Just ignore it, and don’t respond. If you don’t like something getting out of hand, don’t contribute to it. (Easier said than done, especially if someone says something meant as bait)…But you know, just take the higher road and STFU… If there is no dialog, there is no out of spiral thread. It’s a simple as that.
September 8, 2012 @ 12:12 PM
Thanks for the defense,flu.
Thanks for the defense,flu. You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. The funny thing is that when people say WTF, they don’t stop to think WTF.
I’m biased, I admit. For example, when I defend the Fed and government intervention, I give good reasons for the actions, which have worked. Other people simple rail and say WTF, but that’s all.
My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.
September 8, 2012 @ 1:51 PM
briansd1 wrote:My posts are
[quote=briansd1]My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Man, I miss Marion. She was really weird.
September 8, 2012 @ 3:39 PM
briansd1 wrote:You post quite
[quote=briansd1]You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. [/quote]
That’s true, but usually in response to a thread that has already become political.
[quote=briansd1]I’m biased, I admit.[/quote]
….and I don’t mind that. Your opinions are yours to have.
[quote=briansd1]My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Unfortunately, your posts are quite often one-liner headlines deliberately meant as bait to incite another Right vs Left BS argument. Now, don’t get me wrong, if some Tea Party Jack-hole pulls the same kind of BS, then go get ’em, but I would hope that you could refrain from doing it yourself every once in a while. I don’t want to ban anyone, and I don’t want to “ignore” anyone. I like a good political argument as much as you, I’m just asking you to try not to turn non-political threads into them.
September 8, 2012 @ 4:24 PM
briansd1 wrote:Thanks for the
[quote=briansd1]Thanks for the defense,flu. You post quite a few WTF partisan comments. The funny thing is that when people say WTF, they don’t stop to think WTF.
I’m biased, I admit. For example, when I defend the Fed and government intervention, I give good reasons for the actions, which have worked. Other people simple rail and say WTF, but that’s all.
My posts are really a pushback against people who think in one-liner headlines.[/quote]
Brian, the reason why I answer a lot of time with 1 line is because not even that is worth my time.
But let me break character for this 1 time and respond to your loaded question…I’ll get on the high horse you usually get on…Let me say something that hopefully will sink into your thick head…The irony is that they way you talk the way you’re refined and better than everyone else. Despite you saying how progressive you really are, you’re the most stubborn narrow-minded geo-phobic person on the face of the earth. The only thing worse, is on top of that you’re a hypocrite because you “think” you’re refined.
Being open-minded has absolutely NOTHING to do with pandering or paying lip service to minorities or “colored” people or foreigners and thinking every other foreigner is “refined”… Being open-minded has everything to do with mutual respect for all humans, including (1) obese people (which you have a problem with) (2) red-neck people (which you have a problem with) (3) religious/religion people (which you have a problem with) (4) people with different political beliefs (which you have a problem with) (5) people of different gender and to some extend (5) even people who aren’t refined..
It’s called human decency. It means that even though personally I would never bang a woman that is 200lbs+, I definitely would not discriminate against them because they are obese when it comes things like renting to them, or working with them, or sitting with them, working with them, hiring them..It means that if you some a bible humper, you would step back sand say, as different and “I can’t relate” as possible to some of those people are, you respect their beliefs and what they believe in, and you don’t snicker snear, or thumb your elitist nose thinking their fvcking morons…so long as don’t cross the line as long as they don’t cross yours.. And in some cases, when you do run into an occasional idiot or do, you don’t let that cloud your judgement in thinking every person of “that kind” is a frickin idiot…
And frankly, it is exactly why, I’m not particular supportive the idea of you getting banned frankly…
Which is exactly the opposite of what you would do… See the difference is that while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement. respect, and human decency. You, however, (well, at least your internet persona, don’t know about you in person…) have demonstrated time and time again that you would….And that’s not even the bad part. The irony is you *say* you’re actually open-minded and “progressive”
… I know a lot more Rush Limbaugh fans (which you probably would think are redneck “meatheads”) who have demonstrated much more open-minded thinking than you ever will in your lifetime…
That is the irony.. The sad part is, from your other posts, you do strike me as a fair intelligent person…But seriously, your thinking is so far off that, no offense, is so blantantly contradictory to what comes out of your mouth in terms of being “liberal” and “open-minded”, that any sane person would question your integrity, and imho would be an instant turnoff if I were a woman.. So frankly, I can’t tell if this is really you or just your internet persona, not that I particularly care nor is it my business..
So there. That’s more than a one line sentence for you… And that’s the last time. Feel free to respond, if you don’t mind wasting your time responding, because frankly, I won’t anyway… I’m too busy putting duct tape on my falling apart car, as any self respecting redneck would do…And frankly a roll of duct tape has a lot more educational value for me than a lot of things these days.
September 8, 2012 @ 5:35 PM
Flu, some people are meant to
Flu, some people are meant to be put down. But I certainly don’t discriminate against anyone. Far from that. I have friends of all races and different culture. I have friends who are fat also.
You post topics like: wow the ECB or the Fed did such. WTF. Then you go away without expanding. You really don’t think they don’t know WTF they are doing? You sound like Rush Limbaugh to me. He deserves to be put down, not respected. Nothing to do with human decency.
September 8, 2012 @ 9:52 PM
briansd1 wrote:Flu, some
[quote=briansd1]Flu, some people are meant to be put down. But I certainly don’t discriminate against anyone. Far from that. I have friends of all races and different culture. I have friends who are fat also.
You post topics like: wow the ECB or the Fed did such. WTF. Then you go away without expanding. You really don’t think they don’t know WTF they are doing? You sound like Rush Limbaugh to me. He deserves to be put down, not respected. Nothing to do with human decency.[/quote]
I don’t think anyone could have proved Flu’s point better than you just did.
September 8, 2012 @ 11:15 PM
We don’t need to respect Rush
We don’t need to respect Rush Limbaugh to have human decency.
Rush makes drive-by comments like: “look at that, WTF, how stupid, how irresponsible, WTF.” He adds nothing to the conversation.
We need to treat him like he treats everybody else. Like a fat-ass idiot that he is. People who follow him are even bigger imbeciles.
September 10, 2012 @ 11:39 AM
briansd1 wrote:We don’t need
[quote=briansd1]We don’t need to respect Rush Limbaugh to have human decency.
Rush makes drive-by comments like: “look at that, WTF, how stupid, how irresponsible, WTF.” He adds nothing to the conversation.
We need to treat him like he treats everybody else. Like a fat-ass idiot that he is. People who follow him are even bigger imbeciles.[/quote]
I don’t think briansd1 should be banned.
It’s pretty easy to scan through his posts (or any post for that matter )and when you spot inflammatory words/phrases, such as … fat-ass, embecile, idiot, WTF, etc.
When you spot any of these words stop reading and move on to another post/thread.
Of course, for those who are (or have loved ones who are) embeciles, fat-asses, or idiots, you have the right to get angry and be offended by those remarks.
P.S. – My apologies to all the embeciles, fat-asses , and idiots out there.
P.S.S. – If you got this far, WTF, you are an idiot because you ignored my suggestion above.
September 9, 2012 @ 10:58 AM
flu wrote: while some people
[quote=flu] while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement.[/quote]
Not sure that statement is entirely true, but seriously folks, get a life. Far too many of you spend far too long wasting your lives away on forums. Put down the lap top, and go outside into the fresh air and get a hobby. Drink wine, get drunk, get in bar brawl, go help starving people around the world, write a book, have sex with an insect …anything that puts you in touch with living.
Brian, I’m not here enough to know whether these claims are justified, but from what I have read it seems many of your views offer a healthy counter to what seems (on the surface at least) to be a strong conservative undercurrent on this forum …IMHO.
The problem is that for a view to heard above the modern cacophony of special interests and egocentricity of the media culture, nuance and impartiality need to be exchanged for the megaphone of bias. You become that which you most ardently oppose. Petty but easy to get drawn in.
Talking of bannings, I used to see a picture of a cat when trying to access piggs URL. Not quite sure why that was, but I overcame it by removing the offending cookie. I like to think that was an innocent aberration.
September 9, 2012 @ 3:25 PM
Jazzman wrote:flu wrote:
[quote=Jazzman][quote=flu] while some people have biases, most people don’t let their biases get in their way of judgement.[/quote]
Brian, I’m not here enough to know whether these claims are justified, but from what I have read it seems many of your views offer a healthy counter to what seems (on the surface at least) to be a strong conservative undercurrent on this forum …IMHO.
[/quote]
I’ll just clarify that my issues are not with Brian’s positions, but with his tendency to add posts to non-political threads that are deliberately meant to incite an argument or as Rich called it a “right vs left political slapfest”.
September 9, 2012 @ 8:21 PM
i rarely participate in the
i rarely participate in the politcal nonsense,
especially when JFMarquette and the other right wing trolls
start going all AM Radio
September 10, 2012 @ 1:25 PM
Jazzman wrote:
The problem is
[quote=Jazzman]
The problem is that for a view to heard above the modern cacophony of special interests and egocentricity of the media culture, nuance and impartiality need to be exchanged for the megaphone of bias. You become that which you most ardently oppose. Petty but easy to get drawn in.
[/quote]
That’s unfortunate, but you have to speak the language that people understand.
I admit that some of my posts poke at people.
I don’t particularly like the comments of the other side. But I don’t start a campaign to ban posters through online community pressure… then turn around and say that I want the webmaster to unilaterally enforce the ban I desire.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:30 AM
First this:
briansd1 wrote:
I
First this:
[quote=briansd1]
I don’t particularly like the comments of the other side. But I don’t start a campaign to ban posters through online community pressure… then turn around and say that I want the webmaster to unilaterally enforce the ban I desire.[/quote]
and now this:
[quote=Brutus]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
No. Wrong.
You two are patting yourselves on the back because you don’t wish to ban posters who disagree with you. But nobody is suggesting that. That’s what conversation is about, and it never was.
It’s about POLITICAL THREADJACKING. As already explained above, several times, it is about:
– taking a non-political thread and turning it political OR
– taking a thoughtful thread on a political topic and turning it into a partisan slapfest (or starting a thread that’s guaranteed to turn into one)
It’s got nothing to do with the quality of anyone’s posts not with their political leanings. It’s got to do with threadjacking. It’s not that complicated.
Please stop trying to reframe the debate as something that it’s not. Please don’t make me explain this very obvious distinction yet again.
And, don’t threadjack. Again — it’s not complicated.
September 9, 2012 @ 1:09 PM
I always find flu’s posts
I always find flu’s posts informative and usually entertaining. I cannot say the same for Brian’s posts, but I do not block him, so that is on me. Now where did I put that roll of duct tape?
September 10, 2012 @ 11:37 AM
flu wrote:Who the fvck
[quote=flu]Who the fvck cares?
Just let him be…..One of the best things about this forum unlike others, is there’s very little cybernanny cops going around…
Don’t like something? Just ignore it, and don’t respond. If you don’t like something getting out of hand, don’t contribute to it. (Easier said than done, especially if someone says something meant as bait)…But you know, just take the higher road and STFU… If there is no dialog, there is no out of spiral thread. It’s a simple as that.[/quote]
While I agree with your view that this site thrives due to the lack of cybernanny-type activity, I have heard more than one person say they have started to avoid Piggington due to the spats between briansd, specifically, and others.
Yes, some people like his posts and yes, diversity is good. But brian’s posts don’t necessarily represent diversity. There will always be a host of liberals to defend the side. The annoying thing is he always claims those who want him banned are just doing so because of his views. As if he is some genius martyr or something. His cry for retaining diversity and his expectation that no action will be taken against him is really his excuse for being an instigator and argumentative ass.
The bottom line is that helpful, long-term, thoughtful, on-topic posters are avoiding the site because of him and the useuless debates that follow him. I think it is time to take action.
Hey brian – can you guess what this means:
GYOFF
September 8, 2012 @ 4:12 PM
Personally, I enjoy reading
Personally, I enjoy reading the posts on this board–with, (I should add)–the exception of those that are discriminatory in nature.
I may not necessarily agree with every post, but most are interesting, and, sometimes I learn something. That’s why I’d never “ignore” anyone–I’d miss out on too much of the fun.
In the end, hopefully everyone realizes these posts are all just opinions–nothing more. We all still have to go out in the “real” world and live our “real” lives.
September 10, 2012 @ 11:49 AM
I thought this one was
I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:23 PM
This is not a democracy so
This is not a democracy so you start a thread asking for votes in your favor. Why didn’t you email The Man directly?
September 10, 2012 @ 12:28 PM
briansd1 wrote:This is not a
[quote=briansd1]This is not a democracy so you start a thread asking for votes in your favor. Why didn’t you email The Man directly?[/quote]
I had an epiphany after posting.
And I wasn’t seeking votes in my favor.
I was seeking votes against you.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:28 PM
Hamstring in the central bank
Hamstring in the central bank and making threats to its independence, advocating for budget cuts in the middle of economic difficulties. Those are Republican ideas and what has happened in Europe. Not partisanship, but reality on the ground.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:30 PM
sdduuuude wrote:I thought
[quote=sdduuuude]I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.[/quote]
How is brian’s quote any different from this?:
[quote=Brutus]Jeremiah Wright and Frank Marshall made Barry tick.[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Paul0373]Obama has had direct contact with and been influenced by more committed communists than anyone i’ve ever heard of. (Barack Sr, his own mother, his grandparents, Frank Marshall Davis, Said, Unger, Ayers, Bernadine Doern, Jeremiah Wright,et al….)How many communists do you know or hang with? Funny, don’t think I’ve ever met one. Yeah, I’d probably lean to the left with that much help.[/quote]
A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.
I can’t imagine avoiding this website because of Brutus or Paul or their numerous ilk. And I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:34 PM
zk wrote:… I can’t see why
[quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:39 PM
sdduuuude wrote:zk wrote:…
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Very cryptic.
In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?
September 10, 2012 @ 1:16 PM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:zk
[quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Very cryptic.
In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?[/quote]
Not really, no. But you are welcome to start your own thread on those two if you like.
September 10, 2012 @ 1:27 PM
zk wrote:In any case, what
[quote=zk]In any case, what about Brutus and Paul? Do you want to ban them, too?[/quote]
[quote=sdduuuuude]Not really, no. But you are welcome to start your own thread on those two if you like.[/quote]
Clearly I don’t want to ban any of them. But I am curious why you would ban brian but not Brutus and Paul.
September 10, 2012 @ 1:56 PM
Brutus came real close in
Brutus came real close in another thread, but has been ok since then that I’ve seen. Not familiar with Paul outside this thread (I consider this one “ruined” already so threadjacking is not really possible).
I thought Brian has been ok since this thread was originated… he’d really cleaned up his act at least til recently. His “are we better off than 4 years ago” in a stock market thread was VERY borderline but it was ambiguous and I try to give people the benefit of the doubt.
I’ll just remind everyone to please be respectful of the rule that sdduuuude copied above… here is the whole post for reference: http://piggington.com/threadjackers_will_be_persecuted_maybe_even_prosecuted
I’m too lazy to police the forums, but don’t mistake that for reluctance to send people on a cruise to Ban Island.
And Brian, don’t try to slip in political threadjack comments and pretend they aren’t political. I gave you the stock market one, but that’s all you’re going to get. Keep in mind your checkered history here, and understand that people are sensitive to that kind of stuff coming from you… so you should be extra careful that your posts cannot be interpreted as threadjacks, whether you meant it or not.
I don’t have time to keep up with all content and often skip the political stuff. If someone — anyone — is political threadjacking or otherwise violating the afore-linked rule, please feel free to let me know. But if you are going to do this, don’t make me hunt through an entire thread… please send a direct link to the comment and some context to justify that it is a bannable offense (per the above), and I will take the appropriate action. (Tip: you can use the “report spam” link to send a direct link to a thread… just remember to provide some context por favor).
Thanks all…
Rich
Mostly benevolent, entirely unmotivated dictator and President-For-Life, piggington.com
September 10, 2012 @ 2:39 PM
Rich Toscano
[quote=Rich Toscano]benevolent, entirely unmotivated dictator[/quote]
That’s good work, if you can get it.
September 10, 2012 @ 2:44 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:And Brian,
[quote=Rich Toscano]And Brian, don’t try to slip in political threadjack comments and pretend they aren’t political.[/quote]
Gee, you noticed ? I thought he was being soooo sly.
September 10, 2012 @ 8:54 PM
zk wrote:Very cryptic.
This a
[quote=zk]Very cryptic.[/quote]
This a little less cryptic for you, zk ?
[quote=flu]That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
[/quote]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.
September 11, 2012 @ 6:19 AM
sdduuuude wrote:zk wrote:Very
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]Very cryptic.[/quote]
This a little less cryptic for you, zk ?
[quote=flu]That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
[/quote]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Dude, I sent you an invite…Did you not get it?
September 11, 2012 @ 8:20 AM
sdduuuude wrote:
Let me
[quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:00 AM
briansd1 wrote:sdduuuude
[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.[/quote]
I think we should just be honest and start the “Attention Whores” forum.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:03 AM
briansd1 wrote:sdduuuude
[quote=briansd1][quote=sdduuuude]
Let me interperet. FLU is off having interesting and possibly informative RE discussions that you and I are not privy to because of brian.[/quote]
Wow big loss! Flu’s private thread is so salacious that he has to come here advertising them.
The inventory is so tight these days that anybody who has a deal is keeping it to himself.[/quote]
No, just trying to get real discussions going, obviously not here anymore. Later.
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:52 AM
flu wrote:
But I’ll continue
[quote=flu]
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.[/quote]
sdduuuude, after some consideration, I’m coming around to your point of view.
When the “ot” section was first added, I was strongly for it. But the idea then was that if we wanted to find a good dentist (which I do, if anybody knows one) or tell others about a great bike path or about old Jews telling jokes, this would be a place where we could share these things with others. Occasionally politics would be discussed, but it wouldn’t dominate. It’s strayed away from that. I put my two cents into the political discussions as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is brian). So maybe I shouldn’t be complaining. Perhaps after this thread has exposed the depth of the divisiveness and distraction that political discussions are bringing here, the political discussions will regain their rightful place as an occasional topic. If not, I was thinking that perhaps a ban on political discussions would be appropriate. But that seems unnecessary and overly restrictive to reasonable discussion. The other option, and here I’m starting to agree with you, would be to ban those who bring everything around to politics (brian) or who post overly numerous political topics (markmax). A trickier question is what to do with occasional posters whose posts are almost all strident, wildly-partisan posts (Brutus).
Just my 2 cents.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:59 AM
zk, if you were the judge,
zk, if you were the judge, and if I were the only poster for my side, can I compensate for multiple posters on the other side?
September 11, 2012 @ 10:34 AM
briansd1 wrote:zk, if you
[quote=briansd1]zk, if you were the judge, and if I were the only poster for my side, can I compensate for multiple posters on the other side?[/quote]
No. What do you not get about this? It’s not about “sides.” It’s about threadjacking, ie, being obnoxious. I don’t care whose “side” anyone is on. Don’t threadjack.
September 11, 2012 @ 10:56 AM
zk wrote:flu wrote:
But I’ll
[quote=zk][quote=flu]
But I’ll continue to posting OT’s here, because that is what we have evolved to.[/quote]
sdduuuude, after some consideration, I’m coming around to your point of view.
When the “ot” section was first added, I was strongly for it. But the idea then was that if we wanted to find a good dentist (which I do, if anybody knows one) or tell others about a great bike path or about old Jews telling jokes, this would be a place where we could share these things with others. Occasionally politics would be discussed, but it wouldn’t dominate. It’s strayed away from that. I put my two cents into the political discussions as much as the next guy (unless the next guy is brian). So maybe I shouldn’t be complaining. Perhaps after this thread has exposed the depth of the divisiveness and distraction that political discussions are bringing here, the political discussions will regain their rightful place as an occasional topic. If not, I was thinking that perhaps a ban on political discussions would be appropriate. But that seems unnecessary and overly restrictive to reasonable discussion. The other option, and here I’m starting to agree with you, would be to ban those who bring everything around to politics (brian) or who post overly numerous political topics (markmax). A trickier question is what to do with occasional posters whose posts are almost all strident, wildly-partisan posts (Brutus).
Just my 2 cents.[/quote]
I wouldn’t want to ban political stuff outright. I want people to talk about what they want to talk about, as long as it doesn’t disrupt the “function” of the forum.
Also, there’s value in it. You, zk, are actually a great example of this. When there is a political discussion, you respond by addressing the issues in a logical, insightful, and polite manner. But you don’t threadjack, and when you are in a political debate, you stick to the issues rather than name calling, changing subjects to more controversial issues, or thoughtlessly aligning with a “side.” I enjoy and benefit from reading your posts, and I can say the same about many others (who have varying political leanings).
The problem isn’t politics, it’s behavior of certain people who act obnoxious. That will not be tolerated. To address the three examples you noted above:
– Markmax — He was banned for constant threadjacking.
– Brian — He used to be terrible about it, but after this thread he cleaned up his act. I haven’t seen conclusive evidence that he has reverted to his evil ways. If he does so, he will be banned.
– Brutus — I warned him recently when he started with the name calling. Haven’t seen anything since then. (Again, I don’t keep up with everything). But that kind of behavior is definitely bannable.
I do have to say that if the only thing someone brings to the table is strident partisanship, that is harmful to the function of the forum, even if they aren’t strictly threadjacking by the definition above. Maybe I need to be more subjective about it, and rather than defining certain behavior, just ban people who are harmful to the function and spirit of the forum. I’ve tried to avoid that because I want people to know what the ground rules are, and I want to keep a light touch, but certain people really make it difficult.
One last thought. I think too much is being blamed on political talk. The fact is that the bubble is over, so the real estate market is not as interesting any more. I think that goes a long way towards explaining why the forum is a less vibrant place than it used to be. It’s too bad, but it’s the cycle of life.
That said, while political discussion can be great, political partisanship is lame and boring (as well as being immensely harmful to the country). There are plenty of places for that on the web — this isn’t one of them. So everyone please intelligently discuss political topics to your hearts’ content — but take the partisan tribalism elsewhere.
September 11, 2012 @ 11:25 AM
OK, after all that, I am
OK, after all that, I am changing my mind on Brian based on new evidence from poking around the threads some more. I just saw this, which I had missed before.
http://piggington.com/whoa_ecb_bailout_move#comment-217779
Brian, that is a TEXTBOOK political threadjack. Textbook. When adding it to this:
http://piggington.com/squat250_calling_a_top#comment-217776
It’s now clear that you have returned to your threadjacking ways and have blatantly disregarded the rules that I’ve made clear so often. This is after you were warned many, many times, and after I gave you a huge amount of slack. You’ve abused my forgiving nature and wasted my time, as well as lots of other peoples’ too. You are no longer welcome here.
If you could reply, I strongly suspect it would be to play the victim card and try to slant this as you being singled out for which “side” you are on. This would be pretty comical given the conversation that has gone on above. Still, I want the record to show that even after this, I have still banned a lot more right wing people than left wing.
As I’ve said many times, it’s not about your political philosophy, it’s how you comport yourself. Brutus and others, take heed.
September 11, 2012 @ 2:09 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:OK, after
[quote=Rich Toscano]OK, after all that, I am changing my mind on Brian based on new evidence from poking around the threads some more. I just saw this, which I had missed before.
http://piggington.com/whoa_ecb_bailout_move#comment-217779
Brian, that is a TEXTBOOK political threadjack. Textbook. When adding it to this:
http://piggington.com/squat250_calling_a_top#comment-217776
It’s now clear that you have returned to your threadjacking ways and have blatantly disregarded the rules that I’ve made clear so often. This is after you were warned many, many times, and after I gave you a huge amount of slack. You’ve abused my forgiving nature and wasted my time, as well as lots of other peoples’ too. You are no longer welcome here.
If you could reply, I strongly suspect it would be to play the victim card and try to slant this as you being singled out for which “side” you are on. This would be pretty comical given the conversation that has gone on above. Still, I want the record to show that even after this, I have still banned a lot more right wing people than left wing.
As I’ve said many times, it’s not about your political philosophy, it’s how you comport yourself. Brutus and others, take heed.[/quote]
I think you’re wrong on the first linked comment. You can’t really talk about bailouts comprehensively without addressing their political ramifications, whether it’s fiscal bailouts or monetary bailouts by central banks. They will always be influenced by politics, and even if they weren’t, they have political ramifications. Global economic policy and political policy are inextricably linked.
Was it threadjacking solely because he mentioned and compared the policies of a US political party in a post about the ECB? I don’t think so. His comment was both accurate and a political reality.
The second one, yeah, he brought politics into it. Pretty benign though. It could have easily been ignored.
September 11, 2012 @ 2:59 PM
No, I’m not wrong.
The
No, I’m not wrong.
The question was about a very specific monetary policy action by the ECB, and what effect it might have. Brian’s response didn’t address that question at all… he made a dismissive remark about Europe (“The Europeans have nobody but themselves to blame”) and then started editorializing about Republican policy in the US.
It doesn’t matter that there was a segue. It doesn’t matter that the topics are somewhat related (though not the same topic). It doesn’t matter whether his comment was accurate or a political reality.
What matters is that the OP posted about a certain topic, and Brian tried to turn from that topic it into a left-vs-right flamewar. This is PRECISELY, like to the word, in violation of the anti-threadjacking rules that I created and have laid out over and over, including several times within this thread. So no, I’m not wrong.
It also doesn’t matter that you think his other violation was benign, or easily ignored. Apparently some people are having trouble ignoring it. And more to the point, I’ve made just a couple simple rules for forum behavior, and Brian has repeatedly violated them. I’ve been unbelievably patient with him over the years (including even contacting him offline and trying to “guide” him, as if I have time for that kind of babysitting). He’s rewarded me by continuing to flout those perfectly reasonable rules. I guess I don’t see this pattern of behavior as so benign.
September 11, 2012 @ 4:20 PM
I feel like I should go make
I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …
September 11, 2012 @ 4:48 PM
sdduuuude wrote:I feel like I
[quote=sdduuuude]I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …[/quote]
I feel like I should threadjack this threadjack thread.
September 11, 2012 @ 4:49 PM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:I
[quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude]I feel like I should go make a housing post or something now …[/quote]
I feel like I should threadjack this threadjack thread.[/quote]
LIBERAL !
September 11, 2012 @ 5:01 PM
Brian knew what he was doing
Brian knew what he was doing he just could not stop himself. Rich made the decision, it’s over. Nobody dislikes Brian, maybe everyone can treat each other with more respect, myself very much included.
September 11, 2012 @ 5:08 PM
desmond wrote:Brian knew what
[quote=desmond]Brian knew what he was doing he just could not stop himself. Rich made the decision, it’s over. Nobody dislikes Brian, maybe everyone can treat each other with more respect, myself very much included.[/quote]
Yep I won’t be crying a river for him, but sometimes I felt dragged into the muck and could easily have been doing the same thing.
September 11, 2012 @ 6:11 PM
sdduuuude wrote:
LIBERAL
[quote=sdduuuude]
LIBERAL ![/quote]
CONSERVATIVE!
Hey, that was easy. And it felt good, too. Screw that thinking stuff. I’m just gonna type in caps from now on.
September 12, 2012 @ 11:27 AM
I cannot say that I will not
I cannot say that I will not miss some of Brian’s posts. I found him entertaining and infuriating. I know Rich warned him repeatedly. In the past, I too was warned and I am trying to behave appropriately here. That being said, I do wish Brian well. I think he was self- employed, so perhaps he will start his own blog.
September 12, 2012 @ 1:08 PM
Zeitgeist wrote:I cannot say
[quote=Zeitgeist]I cannot say that I will not miss some of Brian’s posts. I found him entertaining and infuriating. I know Rich warned him repeatedly. In the past, I too was warned and I am trying to behave appropriately here. That being said, I do wish Brian well. I think he was self- employed, so perhaps he will start his own blog.[/quote]
+1
In spite of often wanting to hit Brian in the head with a shovel, he always behaved like a gentleman and never stooped to nasty, overly personal attacks like certain other odious little posters on this board.
It is a shame it came to this, but Rich did exercise tremendous patience. This election cycle has proven to be exceptionally vicious and civil discourse seems to unfortunately be a thing of the past. I was as guilty as the next person of getting drawn into pointlessly nonsensical arguments that added nothing to the debate. Kudos to FLU for whacking me upside the head and telling me to STFU.
September 12, 2012 @ 2:24 PM
I’ll miss him.
He brought a
I’ll miss him.
He brought a unique, and as said above, infuriating perspective.
He was kind of like Frank Burns in M*A*S*H…
September 12, 2012 @ 4:23 PM
KSMountain wrote:I’ll miss
[quote=KSMountain]I’ll miss him.
He brought a unique, and as said above, infuriating perspective.
He was kind of like Frank Burns in M*A*S*H…[/quote]
Frank Burns — that’s a good one! Some people can be terribly annoying…and likable.
While brian and I might both be considered “left-leaning,” we agree on very little, especially when it comes to public employment, illegal immigration, family, and other personal issues. Still, I’m very sad to see him go because it’s always good to hear from a variety of people who have different experiences, knowledge, and beliefs. I wish him the very best and hope that he can come back after the elections(?).
September 12, 2012 @ 11:12 PM
was there a briansd prior to
was there a briansd prior to briansd1?
what will briansd2 be like?
are all iterations of brian sd banned?
why is the punishment ramped up from gentle admonitions all the way to complete and utter banishment in such a swift and merciless manner?
maybe an errant poster could get a type of probation where they are limited to 3 posts a week. a sort of hobbling, like having to sit in the village stocks for a spell and have people toss rotten food and feces at you for amusement…imagine what banishment was like in the middle ages, when they tossed you outside the village walls, at the mercy of highwaymen, no food, wolves at the edge of town….
must have been terrifying, just like being banished from piggington
which and I hope this isn’t a threadjack, reminds me of the amazing TORTURE exhibit viewable at Balboa park. i think it’s still there. actual torture implements from the middle ages. http://www.balboapark.org/calendar/event/2012-07-21/instruments-torture
just amazing. we literally got sickened during the exhibit. like, i felt like i was going to throw up vomit.
makes ya think…
would make an excellent first date spot…
something about seeing actual items that were actually used to torture…(although some are reproductions or heavily refurbished…)
I’m NOT saying torture is a particularly republican or democratic issue. it seems to be a longstanding problem of all humanity…however, i did find viewing bits of both political conventions to be an extremely mild form of torture.
ok, that’s not funny, esp. if you’ve recently seen the torture exhibit…
this site was more exciting when there was a big giant real estate bubble.
September 12, 2012 @ 11:15 PM
were there two frank burns?
were there two frank burns? or was it hawkeye’s sidekick that there were two of?
there was only one houlihan, right?
man that show would not fly nowadays, would it?
so burnt out on war,M*A*S*H”
September 12, 2012 @ 11:17 PM
the theme song is so clear in
the theme song is so clear in my head. even more clear than my current reality.
i can hear the incoming choppers even…still seem slike it wouldve been cool to be hawkeye pierce. so competent. drinking gin in the little cool bar. the coolest frat brothers on the base. probably made a fortune after the war. had great stories. filled with righteous indignation.
September 12, 2012 @ 11:28 PM
i would like the piggington
i would like the piggington record to reflect that it is coming up on one year in which i have not had one drop of alcohol. i will cease and desist from deviating from the topic of this thread which is, i think, why banning people from piggington is tantamount to torture.hawkeye always had a hot nurse, right? why didnt i go into surgery.
September 12, 2012 @ 11:38 PM
squat250 wrote:i would like
[quote=squat250]i would like the piggington record to reflect that it is coming up on one year in which i have not had one drop of alcohol. i will cease and desist from deviating from the topic of this thread which is, i think, why banning people from piggington is tantamount to torture.hawkeye always had a hot nurse, right? why didnt i go into surgery.[/quote]
Scaredy: One might gently suggest that your return to alcohol isn’t such a bad thing…
September 13, 2012 @ 2:36 AM
Wow, scaredy, not a drop? I
Wow, scaredy, not a drop? I thought you gave up after a few weeks.
How does it feel? Are you planning on continuing down the teetotalling path, or was this just a temporary thing to see if you could do it?
September 13, 2012 @ 2:52 AM
squat250 wrote:were there two
[quote=squat250]were there two frank burns? or was it hawkeye’s sidekick that there were two of?
there was only one houlihan, right?
man that show would not fly nowadays, would it?
so burnt out on war,M*A*S*H”[/quote]
Two sidekicks: B.J. Hunnicutt and Trapper John.
There were two characters who were relative antagonists: Frank Burns and Charles Winchester.
Yep, it was all about being disillusioned with war, and lamenting the destruction that always results from war.
I wish we still had TV shows like that.
September 13, 2012 @ 6:52 AM
i would be drinking but in a
i would be drinking but in a moment of bold strength, i said i would not drink till i squatted 300 lbs. and ive recently had some setbacks. so it may be a while.
in fact, we could be ina new housing bubble by the time i need to shop for some more tonic water.
September 13, 2012 @ 6:52 AM
i remember being slightly
i remember being slightly disturbed as a kid when the characters switched on mash
September 13, 2012 @ 7:23 AM
I thought about the
I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
I didn’t get the theme song as a teenager watching mash. Did you guys?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO7uemm6Yo
September 13, 2012 @ 7:27 AM
Blogstar wrote:I thought
[quote=Blogstar]I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
I didn’t get the theme song as a teenager watching mash. Did you guys?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO7uemm6Yo%5B/quote%5D
The theme song was from the movie that predated the tv show… which was much darker.
The song was performed by the military dentist – who was depressed and going to commit suicide (if I remember correctly.)
September 13, 2012 @ 7:35 AM
UCGal wrote:Blogstar wrote:I
[quote=UCGal][quote=Blogstar]I thought about the comparison several times,brian1 to Frank Burns. No kidding.
I didn’t get the theme song as a teenager watching mash. Did you guys?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gO7uemm6Yo%5B/quote%5D
The theme song was from the movie that predated the tv show… which was much darker.
The song was performed by the military dentist – who was depressed and going to commit suicide (if I remember correctly.)[/quote]
Maybe I did comprehend some of the lyrics but thought is was a joke…I’ll look for that original movie. Thanks, Ucgal.
September 13, 2012 @ 3:55 PM
Blogstar wrote:
Maybe I did
[quote=Blogstar]
Maybe I did comprehend some of the lyrics but thought is was a joke…I’ll look for that original movie. Thanks, Ucgal.[/quote]
Here you go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVUXPjFWfX4
What happened after this a hot nurse was shown the Docs member, she gasps and stays with him while the others leave………
September 13, 2012 @ 8:27 AM
squat250 wrote:i would be
[quote=squat250]i would be drinking but in a moment of bold strength, i said i would not drink till i squatted 300 lbs. and ive recently had some setbacks. so it may be a while.
in fact, we could be ina new housing bubble by the time i need to shop for some more tonic water.[/quote]
Scaredy: You should consider combining booze and powerlifting. The Russians do it and boast some of the world’s best powerlifters.
Plus, since you insist on not bracing those knees, you won’t feel it if you toss a patella during a set.
September 13, 2012 @ 8:16 AM
squat250 wrote:
why is the
[quote=squat250]
why is the punishment ramped up from gentle admonitions all the way to complete and utter banishment in such a swift and merciless manner?
[/quote]
If a person continues to political-threadjack after being “admonished” (gently or otherwise), then it’s clear that they just aren’t willing to abide by the rules, so banning is justified. This is especially so if they were admonished multiple times, as in Brian’s case.
Sorry about your squat setbacks. What are you up to now?
September 13, 2012 @ 10:03 AM
Rich Toscano wrote:Sorry
[quote=Rich Toscano]Sorry about your squat setbacks. What are you up to now?[/quote]
Please provide historical weekly data on your squats so Rich can put a chart up.
September 13, 2012 @ 11:31 AM
Just on the scale of
Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.
September 13, 2012 @ 11:55 AM
Blogstar wrote:Just on the
[quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
Blogstar: You have just (possibly inadvertently) created one of the best phrases ever! “Shared Group Hubris”!
I’m going to introduce this one to my Pop Warner players before this Saturday’s game. Whip ’em into a frenzy and when the PC parents want to know what I’m doing, I’ll let them know it’s a perfectly acceptable team normative experience, called “building Shared Group Hubris”. I’ll probably have to throw some blather in there about appropriately channeling one’s primal aggressions into a manner acceptable to society or something, but still…
September 13, 2012 @ 11:59 AM
I bet you will win your game.
I bet you will win your game.
September 13, 2012 @ 3:43 PM
Blogstar wrote:I bet you will
[quote=Blogstar]I bet you will win your game.[/quote]
Only if they can snap the ball to the punter without skidding it on the ground.. over and over…….
September 13, 2012 @ 6:26 PM
desmond wrote:Blogstar
[quote=desmond][quote=Blogstar]I bet you will win your game.[/quote]
Only if they can snap the ball to the punter without skidding it on the ground.. over and over…….[/quote]
Desmond: Ah, dude, that’s just wrong. You know the Raiders pulled a guy in that hadn’t long snapped since high school, right?
Gawd, that was just awful. Shane Lechler looked about ready to have an embolism. Well, that’s the Raiduhs for ya.
September 13, 2012 @ 6:34 PM
Through early morning fog I
Through early morning fog I see
Visions of the things to be
The pains that are withheld for me
I realize and I can see
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
I try to find a way to make
All our little joys relate
Without that ever-present hate
But now I know that it’s too late, and
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The game of life is hard to play
I’m gonna lose it anyway
The losing card I’ll someday lay
So this is all I have to say
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The only way to win is cheat
And lay it down before I’m beat
And to another give my seat
For that’s the only painless feat
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
The sword of time will pierce our skins
It doesn’t hurt when it begins
But as it works its way on in
The pain grows stronger watch it grin, but
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
A brave man once requested me
To answer questions that are key
Is it to be or not to be
And I replied ‘Oh, why ask me?’
That suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
‘Cause suicide is painless
It brings on many changes
And I can take or leave it if I please
September 13, 2012 @ 6:51 PM
the squatting thing is
the squatting thing is embarrassing. I don’t want anyone to mention it any further until I can pull myself together.
On the good side, my legs and knees feel fine. I was just overcome by lethargy.
alternative sentence:
“the shrew’s fiddle”, a kind of portable wooden stockade that holds your hands in a fiddle position, and also binds your neck. see photo below. it abrades the wrists raw, causing infections. and that was a light torture.
for women who speak out too much. at balboa park exhibit of torture. wear the shrew’s fiddle a few days and that’ll take the fight out of her.
was briansd1 given the choice of banishment or 1 day in the shrew’s fiddle?
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=shrew%27s+fiddle&hl=en&safe=active&client=safari&sa=X&rls=en&biw=1917&bih=960&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=OCX-Bbfu6maaqM:&imgrefurl=http://www.myspace.com/insightintoinsanity/photos/42049274&docid=ikn0sM5yu1AK2M&imgurl=http://a1.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/20/0e3222ad6402547bff38920fcf411d63/l.jpg&w=453&h=604&ei=M41SUKuRBeXIigLhuoEo&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=629&vpy=121&dur=5457&hovh=259&hovw=194&tx=97&ty=207&sig=107533165541476461914&page=1&tbnh=143&tbnw=99&start=0&ndsp=52&ved=1t:429,r:3,s:0,i:84
September 13, 2012 @ 12:17 PM
Blogstar wrote:Just on the
[quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
I don’t understand this post. The issue isn’t flawed character or “shared group hubris” (I don’t really know what that means). The issue is a repeated unwillingness to follow the few simple and entirely reasonable rules for forum behavior.
September 13, 2012 @ 12:52 PM
Rich Toscano wrote:Blogstar
[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=Blogstar]Just on the scale of character flaws it doesn’t seem like brian’s political fixation was worse than other types we see around here…mine included. I think he lacked the cover of shared group hubris because his issue was just harder to ignore or enjoy.[/quote]
I don’t understand this post. The issue isn’t flawed character or “shared group hubris” (I don’t really know what that means). The issue is a repeated unwillingness to follow the few simple and entirely reasonable rules for forum behavior.[/quote]
That’s just the way I see it, Rich. My post looks like a straight forward opinion to me. Besides I am not really in a position to argue publically with any dictator.
September 13, 2012 @ 1:32 PM
I think it is clear that Rich
I think it is clear that Rich made a decision and I respect that. I think he probably debated it for a long time. I remember when Zeit and Brian were in some kind of right-left slap fest and Zeit almost got kicked, so Brian knows how that works. Also, Brian is not the first to go. Brian was good for a laugh (for me) because no matter what the topic, he could skew it for his own political leanings. He was very talented that way and pretty well read. I do not think Rich wants Zombie Brian back. I am sure Brian will find another outlet for his creative energy.
September 10, 2012 @ 3:41 PM
sdduuuude wrote:zk wrote:…
[quote=sdduuuude][quote=zk]… I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
That’s because you haven’t received the emails I have in the last 2 weeks.[/quote]
Well, for me the 100% off topics don’t bother me that much, because they are off topics.
The threads that bother me are the ones for which there is a discussion about RE on a thread and those unravel into either slapfests, or “my area is better than yours” or “I don’t know why anyone in their right mind would want to live in rat infested xyz areas”. We rarely here from the Pigg realtors anymore, and I’m guessing for those that want the information just take it off line, and to avoid a flamewar, I figured out that’s it’s probably better to do that anyway.
Or threads asking about where are better schools, and immediately devoid into a discussion about how school is not that important and that “I don’t know any idiot that would want spend $$$$$ to send their kids to private/Ivy schools”…
then there’s a few thread started that talking about stocks and what folks are doing (not necessarily because any of us knows what we are doing) but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
But the other things is I figured out a the folks here who have been really helpful to me personal on my journey to the RE/finance maze, and I love staying in contact with them to see what is going on and to enjoy exchanging ideas, even if it’s not necessarily on the public section.
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
Anyway, someone just tell me to STFU and go back being a productive member of society… Personally, sometimes, I wish I could self-ban myself. If at all, just have a limit on the number of times I can post and/or open a browser to this site. But you know, when I look at the ticker each morning or late at night, it’s always google.finance + piggington…
September 10, 2012 @ 3:54 PM
I’m flattered that some
I’m flattered that some people sensitive to things I write. I’ll have to return the compliment and be equally sensitive. They that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
September 10, 2012 @ 4:02 PM
I shouldn’t be surprised that
I shouldn’t be surprised that you are flattered by a revived thread about you being asked to leave the room, but I am.
September 10, 2012 @ 4:21 PM
There are a lot of people I
There are a lot of people I regularly just give a quick scan to see if it’s another political rant or whether there’s some content worth reading.
Brian fits in that group.
So do quite a few folks on the right.
I try to stay out of the politics because I assume most people disagree with me… especially since I find I disagree with most of the political rants (on both sides.)
It’s funny how people on the right seem to think this message board leans left, and people on the left seem to thing this message board leans right. I see a whole lot of fact-free posting representing both sides. From my vantage it’s got plenty of representatives from all sides of the political spectrum. (Including some that defy easy categorization like Arraya.)
(edited to add- this isn’t to imply Arraya is fact free. He usually backs what he says. I was just trying to say that he doesn’t fit neatly into the right/left categories.)
I always read Walter/Scaredy/Squat’s posts. They make me laugh. Same with TG when he comes around.
No need to ban anyone. We’re all grownups and can ignore/skip posts we don’t want to read without taking it personally.
September 10, 2012 @ 6:06 PM
briansd1 wrote:I’m flattered
[quote=briansd1]I’m flattered that some people sensitive to things I write. I’ll have to return the compliment and be equally sensitive. They that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.[/quote]It is not ‘sensitive’ in the way you think, or are portraying. It is sensitive in the sense of being chafed raw with almost the same thing over and over again. First one.. no problem, second.. no problem.. but after a while.. “not again!”.
September 10, 2012 @ 4:19 PM
flu wrote:
As far as the
[quote=flu]
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
[/quote]
You don’t care, but you really do. Or it is the other way around? Perhaps you cared before you stopped caring?
Sorry, flu, but your posts are not policy specific that examine the effects of legislation. Your posts are ideological rants.
[quote=flu] but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
[/quote]
Nobody said that capital gains should be taxed more. But why not taxed the same?
Take your own advice, flu. If you don’t like the direction of the thread, don’t argue that capital gains should be taxed less.
September 10, 2012 @ 5:13 PM
briansd1 wrote:flu wrote:
As
[quote=briansd1][quote=flu]
As far as the election outcomes, my official position is I don’t really care, since I don’t think either are really good candidates. I just care whoever allows me to pay less taxes.
[/quote]
You don’t care, but you really do. Or it is the other way around? Perhaps you cared before you stopped caring?
Sorry, flu, but your posts are not policy specific that examine the effects of legislation. Your posts are ideological rants.
[quote=flu] but even some of those devoid into “why capital gains should be taxed more”….
[/quote]
Nobody said that capital gains should be taxed more. But why not taxed the same?
Take your own advice, flu. If you don’t like the direction of the thread, don’t argue that capital gains should be taxed less.[/quote]
I do take my own advice. I do care about what certain people think. You’re not one of them.
That’s why I’ve decided to keep in touch with folks offline more and more…
And if there’s any indication. Take a look at the tops 6 topics. Most of the old Realtors and RE folks are gone now…No more monthly data updates, no more north county updates….Nothing. Absolutely nothing now…
Me? I like talking to the folks who are in the know. So really, I’m bummed about out they aren’t here anymore. But I guess all user-forums kinda end the same way, and it’s this one we’re probably close to the bottom too.
Anyway, enjoy… Later
September 10, 2012 @ 8:44 PM
flu wrote:
And if there’s any
[quote=flu]
And if there’s any indication. Take a look at the tops 6 topics. Most of the old Realtors and RE folks are gone now…No more monthly data updates, no more north county updates….Nothing. Absolutely nothing now…
Me? I like talking to the folks who are in the know. So really, I’m bummed about out they aren’t here anymore. But I guess all user-forums kinda end the same way, and it’s this one we’re probably close to the bottom too.
Anyway, enjoy… Later[/quote]
Give me a break, flu. Real estate moves at glaciers’ pace. There is little inventory now and prices are up. Buy elsewhere if you need investment cash flow. If you need a residence, then rent or select from the available inventory. Not a lot can be said.
If you don’t like non-real estate topics, don’t post them and don’t participate. Did you start an informative RE thread lately?
As far as politics and voting your pocketbook, you want to lower your taxes and maximize your benefits. Good for you. You should be on my side when I suggest that lower-income Republicans are irrational.
On people in the know…. Did george chamberlain know?
There’s one realtor who predicted high inflation. Was he right? Eventually he will be, but when?
September 10, 2012 @ 12:37 PM
zk wrote:A lot of people on
[quote=zk]A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.[/quote]
Again – not your decision. Here are the rules.
[quote=The MAN]Do not try to turn any discussion, even if already political in nature, into a left-vs-right slapfest. And do not try to turn a discussion, even if already political in nature, into a debate about a contentious and politicized issue that is only peripherally related to the original discussion (especially if the debate is polarized along left-vs-right lines).
Come to think of it, don’t even bother starting such a discussion.[/quote]
September 11, 2012 @ 5:37 AM
zk wrote:sdduuuude wrote:I
[quote=zk][quote=sdduuuude]I thought this one was completely undeducated, unecessary and was only there to annoy:
[quote=briansd]
It should not be lost on us that, in America, Republican ideas are the same as the policies in Europe — austerity and cuts that lead to economic decline.[/quote]
I don’t really care if any forum participants think he should be banned or not. I’d like to convince Rich, though because there really is only 1 decision maker and it isn’t a democracy.
He is keeping good posters away and keeping housing matters in the background. It’s a fact.
It will only get worse as the election draws near.
Maybe we could just suspend him until the elections are over.[/quote]
How is brian’s quote any different from this?:
[quote=Brutus]Jeremiah Wright and Frank Marshall made Barry tick.[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
Or this?:
[quote=Paul0373]Obama has had direct contact with and been influenced by more committed communists than anyone i’ve ever heard of. (Barack Sr, his own mother, his grandparents, Frank Marshall Davis, Said, Unger, Ayers, Bernadine Doern, Jeremiah Wright,et al….)How many communists do you know or hang with? Funny, don’t think I’ve ever met one. Yeah, I’d probably lean to the left with that much help.[/quote]
A lot of people on this board make comments that are unnecessary, uneducated, and only there to annoy. So if we’re going to ban brian, let’s ban everybody who makes such comments. Or, better yet, not.
I can’t imagine avoiding this website because of Brutus or Paul or their numerous ilk. And I can’t see why a “good” poster would avoid this website because of one poster whom they consider uneducated and annoying.[/quote]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.
September 11, 2012 @ 6:15 AM
Brutus wrote:
Brutus
[quote=Brutus]
[quote=Brutus]Stalin, Mao, and I used a very effective tool, one that has gained popularity with leftists in the USSA: They used censorship to control political opponents and the population. And it worked.
Thanks for permanently shutting up my opponents.
Adolf[/quote]
The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
Hmm. Then what was the “leftists in the USSA” comment about?
September 11, 2012 @ 9:18 AM
Brutus wrote:The point I was
[quote=Brutus]The point I was making is that banning Briansd, even though I despise his politics, is a tactic used by dictators and their ilk. Don’t ban him. Refute his arguments, instead.[/quote]
This suggests that the ban is a result of his views. It is not. It is a result of his inability to control himself.
It isn’t a tactic used by dictators. It is a tactic used by people who want to be surrounded by reasonable people they like.
Continued refuting of his circular arguments are exactly what we don’t want.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:32 AM
Flu, sorry I don’t recall
Flu, sorry I don’t recall your starting any real discussion that don’t include a WTF comment.
I might accept criticism coming from someone else, but not from you. If you dish it out, you need to take it.
September 11, 2012 @ 9:39 AM
briansd1 wrote:Flu, sorry I
[quote=briansd1]Flu, sorry I don’t recall your starting any real discussion that don’t include a WTF comment.
I might accept criticism coming from someone else, but not from you. If you dish it out, you need to take it.[/quote]
I recall plenty of discussions with FLU that didn’t involve WTF. In particular their have been a range of real-estate related discussions as well as some OT discussions on health, stocks, and technology.
Perhaps your recollection is related solely to political topics.
September 10, 2012 @ 12:33 PM
Just to add fuel to the fire,
Just to add fuel to the fire, let me demontrate a post that briansd could have submitted instead of the one above.
“I am concerned that calls for austerity and cuts in both Europe and America will lead to economic decline.”
Amazing how I didn’t even have to mention Republicans, isn’t it ?
September 10, 2012 @ 7:50 PM
This is not nearly the same
This is not nearly the same site that it used to be. Whether it has grown better or worse is in the eye of the beholder. Some people think it has changed for the better and others do not.
I keep in touch with the posters who I want to keep in touch with and they do the same with me.
September 10, 2012 @ 8:13 PM
There’s a professional real
There’s a professional real estate post on the home page of this blog that’s been up for 1 day and four hours and hasn’t had a reply yet.
September 11, 2012 @ 12:48 PM
I just looked at the ecb
I just looked at the ecb thread and I really don’t see what was non-topical about the posts that brian made.
I found his posts annoying but I really did not see recent evidence of threadjacking.
September 11, 2012 @ 1:47 PM
Good luck to you, Brian.
Good luck to you, Brian.
September 11, 2012 @ 3:35 PM
Heck, I have probably thread
Heck, I have probably thread jacked at one time or another.
This thread is a good reminder to stay on topic and be courteous.
Cheers and thanks for the forum.
September 12, 2012 @ 12:03 PM
I’m a bit taken aback that
I’m a bit taken aback that brian will not be here anymore. I found him purportedly well-traveled, highly intelligent in many subjects … and, thru pm, also well-versed in the complicated and tricky procedures he works with.
I could care less what people’s opinions are. They are simply opinions of one individual. However “insulting” they may be perceived by a few others, sometimes the truth is hard to swallow at times. Everyone came by their own unfettered “prejudices” honestly and far be it from me to try to influence that.
In other words, I never had a problem with other people’s truths, even if they don’t jive with my own “truth.”
I didn’t really follow very closely all the Repub/Demo “slapfest” threads so really didn’t notice who was steering the ship on them. However, I am aware that there are several posters here who could have been likely captains of “Ship Piggington” steering all those left/right ideological threads.
I agree that it is the perogative of the moderator to call the shots on forum decorum.
September 14, 2012 @ 1:54 PM
This site is seriously better
This site is seriously better already. Oddly enough, the off-topic posts are more productive.
Even squat250’s political post has prompted people to post thoughts instead of bickering.
It’s just better this way.
I found myself over at bubbleinfo alot more lately but yesterday and today, I’m back and it seems so much better.
Was this one of you guys ?
http://www.bubbleinfo.com/2012/09/10/living-amongst-you/
September 16, 2012 @ 12:10 AM
Seems like Brian showed up
Seems like Brian showed up just as PerryChase disappeared forever. If the PerryChase account lights up again, it’ll raise my suspicion.