(Discussion) Title for Macross

[Connor MacLeod]

Plus, I'd like to know.. if he's not a stalker, upon what are we going to be basing a title? Is thre some specific rule violation or what? (We might as well start getting that set up, since we still have the "specific evidence/burden of proof") thing to address.

[seanrobertson]

I'm largely in agreement with Mad, Surlethe, Knife and Adam (Connor).

I realize Macross has stepped on some of y'alls toes and, indeed, I'm aggrieved to learn his posts reminded some of you (Marina, Lady Tevar) of experiences you'd rather forget. I sympathize: I've been the target of a woman's obsession, and she stalked me relentlessly.

This Macross ... *sigh* What can I say? He should've known better. A person in his position is incredibly misguided to seek "relationship advice" here, especially inasmuch as he didn't really seek advice: As others said, he used the thread largely to sate self-centered needs.

(Note: I'm not suggesting SDNetters can't ask, and receive very good answers to, questions about dating, relationships, etc. My statement's more an indictment of Macross's naïvety; i.e., any "permavirgin"-type should know he'd be flamed in the given context.)

And yes, Macross displays cowardice vis-à-vis women, and he's certainly not honest with himself. Neither's an inescapable sin here, but that he goes on to to tell married (or otherwise involved) people ... well, anything about relationships, is arrogance defined. Perhaps worst of all, he's really dropped the ball in protesting as much. Stubbornly disagreeing with the likes of Darth Wong is a very good justification for getting his ass kicked out.

However ...

If Mike wants to ban Mac, it's Mike's forum; I've no problem with him doing as he sees fit with this place or anyone in it.

But if Mike isn't giving Macross the boot, I see no compelling reasons why the Senate should either.

Titling is another matter. I don't intend to sound indelicate in saying this, so consider my preamble an apology-in-advance: I'm appalled to see the kid continually labelled a "stalker."

It seems that, in order to embrace this site's "mockery of stupid people" ethos, some posters are playing too fast and loose with their own reasoning. Glibly citing that credo ain't any goddamn good if our own arguments are lacking; that's just thoughtless mudslinging.

(Marina, I'm glad you recanted the idea about contacting Mac's employers. Given your bad experience with a stalker, I can certainly sympathize that you reacted harshly; still, if acted on, that reaction would result in a disaster. If Mac were fired as a result of a SDNetter's meddling, he'd have very good grounds for a defamation suit.)

As such, I will not support any title with the word "stalker" in it.

Moreover, since many people characterized Mac's behavior as "creepy," and several members couldn't disassociate that term from stalker, I'd also vote against a title containing "creep," "creepy" or anything similar. My reasoning's simple: if some of the board's brightest can make such leaps in logic, plenty of other members would likely draw similar inferences.

I'm also not too keen on lampooning the guy's virginity or "loserhood." While I do find his situation rather pitiful, I have nothing against Macross personally; simply because SDNetters can write people off as losers, cumstains or hopeless dumb-fucks doesn't mean we have to, either. We've had PLENTY of trolls and assorted trash that deserve whatever they get, but I don't see that Macross belongs with them.

Call me soft; I just see little gained in simply shaming a guy who, in all likelihood, has at best a thimbleful of self-esteem.

Therefore, if we're to employ a sexual-type title, I'd prefer one that, as Adam noted, might give Macross a friendly kick in the ass. For example: "Needs to ask girls out while he can still get it up."

Barring something along those lines, I say the only relevant title would be a VI. It covers Macross's posts well-enough.

Then again, Mac already got his ass kicked six was from Sunday and by several heavy-hitters at that. That thread started out with kids' gloves, but it got pretty damned ugly. He has the dubious distinction of being dragged before the Senate, too -- a warning in and of itself. Perhaps he's been punished enough for foolish behavior in one misbegotten thread?

[Edi]

Another voice from the crowd would like to have himself heard and makes very reasonable points, so here goes:

As a voice from the crowd I'd like to say that while Macross' antics and stubborness in the thread in question is stupid and ridiculous (and donwright creepy), titling him as a stalker or some such is perhaps going a bit too far. While socially incredibly ackward and infuriatingly stubborn in his refusal to listen to advice, he hasn't actually shown any evidence of being a stalker or a borderline one. Emotionally unbelieavably immature, yes, but not in stalker territory. Titling him as such would also give major vibes for all users and readers in general far above and beyond any Village Idiot title (and I might be wrong, but hasn't the stalker title been usually reserved for those who harass female members of the board?). Edi posted a link in "coworker advice" thread where the opening poster had been titled Crybaby (link here), which sounds more fitting, or perhaps Permavirgin (or both of them). Titling him "creepy stalker" without actual evidence seems a bit over-reaching, that's all.

Furthermore, I would like to add that I agree with both him and the others who have said stalker is not an appropriate title for him. As I've said before, his behaviopr falls squarely into the creepy territory, but he has not acted on his ideas, just stewed on them. So while he deserves the smackdown he has been given due to his attitude and arrogance, keep it in perspective, at least that much.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The PM that Darth Wong posted to his thread, in which he tries to get Wong to treat Nitram like a psychotic lunatic, is the last straw for me. No, he isn't a stalker, but I just want the little fuck banned. Has he necessarily broken the rules? They're there as guidelines, the rules themselves state so, and harsher punishments can be imposed.

But I don't favour a senate vote, certainly; that's not our place. I'm just saying this out in a public forum, because I want to be on record for it, that this kind of insidious smear campaign against Nitram's mental health is unacceptable, and I just sorely wish someone would use the banhammer on his putrid, vile guts.

[Edi]

That PM was certainly out of line, but based on what we can see, we are not dealing with a completely rational individual here. I just sent him a fairly longish PM because it won't do anything to post stuff in public, it'll just get swamped in that fiasco. I'd at least like to see what he says in reply. So for me it's wait and see for a while yet.

[Coyote]

If SDN were an actual, physical village, and we were all living there in whatever function or dysfunctional community we'd have ( ), how would we react to someone like this coming and setting down stakes?

I'd most certainly keep a weather eye out. And I have a feeling some of the females would be in that "would you mind walking with me to my car?" mode after work.

The dude is wierd. Not the endearing eccentric wierd, but in that 'have you noticed there's no more stray cats in the neighborhood since he showed up' wierd.

[Connor MacLeod]

The PM to me looks like he was trying to spin doctor this senate thread (and Nitrams comments in the OP about Macross being a "stalker") into some sort of vendetta against him. The thing he didnt account for, of course, is that Mike isn't stupid and wouldn't fall for it (Unlike Mac, I assume he reads this thread). Of course maybe he thinks Nitram is using some EVIL SDNET CONSPIRACY POWAH to malign him, but then we're just dealing with the same nonsense we've seen from other loons (eg the "Evil Warsie conspiracy")

Frankly, he's pathetic and creepy, but not much else as far as I can tell. He's inept at defending himself AND at maligning others. So inept you can't really call it malicious as sad. And it looks ot me people have far too much fun mocking him to get rid of him (at least not now.)

So at worst, titling I think would deserve something like "Chew Toy number XX" or whatever number we ascribe to him. Just to let him (and others) know its okay to tear into him (when appropriate at least.) Mockery is what he truly deserves for his actions. Banning is a way out and deprives everyone of the ability to mock him for his actions and words. He really doesn't deserve anything more than that - certainly not to be treated as if he's somehow an actual annoyance or irritation to the board, much less a problem.

Edit: On the other hand, the "creepy" part warrants some attention. How about "Creepy Chew Toy #1?" And more to the point, since we know what he's like, we can rely on the rest of the board to keep an eye on him for any further BS, ,which can of course be addressed at a future time. (I'm sure there are those among the plebes who froth at the mouth at a chance to dogpile him again - there usually are with chew toys.)

I'm also confident Mike can decide what to do with him on his own without us telling him, so why should we deprive Mike of that? I say let Mike (or the Admins at least) decide when Mac's become useless.

[Coyote]

"Impotent Creep"?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Let's not let him think he's special.

Village Idiot.

[CmdrWilkens]

There have been quite a few suggestions put forth so when I put the votes up on the 25th I'm just going to list the option as "Title, let the Admins select one" unless folks REALLY want to see a paticular title on the vote.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

There have been quite a few suggestions put forth so when I put the votes up on the 25th I'm just going to list the option as "Title, let the Admins select one" unless folks REALLY want to see a paticular title on the vote.

That seems quite reasonable.

[LadyTevar]

I second the idea, Wilkens.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'd also be in favour of a special exemption to the No Vendetta rule: Anyone, in any thread, when replying to a post by Macross, can ask him some variation on "Have you asked her out yet?" without getting in trouble for doing so.

[Sea Skimmer]

Either out and ban him, or let him be as far as I’m concerned, nothing in-between makes any sense, and of all the options around coming with a unique custom title for him is just plain retarded. Custom tilting people as punishment does NOT make sense if every last title awarded is unique, and yet for as long as the senate has existed some people have seemed to think that’s what we should do to everyone.

[seanrobertson]

I'd also be in favour of a special exemption to the No Vendetta rule: Anyone, in any thread, when replying to a post by Macross, can ask him some variation on "Have you asked her out yet?" without getting in trouble for doing so.

I can't agree with that, Marina. I grasp the temptation, but I see the potential for that to knock too many threads off their tracks.

Besides, if anything, I'd like to see expanded rules on things like vulturing and the NV rule.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I'd also be in favour of a special exemption to the No Vendetta rule: Anyone, in any thread, when replying to a post by Macross, can ask him some variation on "Have you asked her out yet?" without getting in trouble for doing so.

I can't agree with that, Marina. I grasp the temptation, but I see the potential for that to knock too many threads off their tracks.

Besides, if anything, I'd like to see expanded rules on things like vulturing and the NV rule.

He needs to have this ruthlessly driven into his brain 24/7 or else he'll never do it.

[seanrobertson]

Either out and ban him, or let him be as far as I’m concerned, nothing in-between makes any sense, and of all the options around coming with a unique custom title for him is just plain retarded. Custom tilting people as punishment does NOT make sense if every last title awarded is unique, and yet for as long as the senate has existed some people have seemed to think that’s what we should do to everyone.

A couple of things:

*I still don't see that his behavior warrants a permanent ban.

I've read all of Macross's posts from the thread in question. He made one mistake after another but none I'd call fatal; and given the circumstances, I think the responses he received later in the thread are punishment enough. He was hit with many times more heat than he gave, and the vultures really stunk the thing up with all that wild-assed stalker/serial killer talk.

A potentially different matter is his attempt to bullshit Mike and talk a bunch of nonsense behind Nitram's back. Has someone has been banned for something similar?

*Custom titles: Aside from the "he's not special enough to warrant his own label" school of thought -- something with which I generally agree -- why can't individualized titles be punitive? If anything, a specifically tailored label is much more insulting.

Mind you, I've said my piece on titling the guy, and it's a moot point now.

[seanrobertson]

He needs to have this ruthlessly driven into his brain 24/7 or else he'll never do it.

Perhaps. That's why I liked a "Needs to ask a girl out while he can still get it up"-type title.

I'm unsure any title or an exception to the NV rule would compell Macross to act; he seems to suffer from a bit of a persecution complex, so any significant reminders of his failures* with women might see him stick to lurking (or, more likely, leaving the site in a huff).

Ah, screw it. Can't know until we try, right? If Macross does feel harassed enough to take off, it's his loss. I second your motion.

*Oops. Failure isn't the right word ... I figure somebody has to TRY to form a relationship before he/she actually fails.

[Hotfoot]

A title should be enough to pound it into his head. Let's not get stupid. If he wants to be alone his entire life, that's his damn choice. Hounding him in ANY THREAD he might participate in not only won't do anything for him, it will actively discourage discussion in those threads, requiring more work for mods as they split the retarded tangents.

[Sea Skimmer]

*Custom titles: Aside from the "he's not special enough to warrant his own label" school of thought -- something with which I generally agree -- why can't individualized titles be punitive? If anything, a specifically tailored label is much more insulting.

Because it makes a random irrelevant person everyone should just be ignoring seem way more important then they actually are. Most of the people who come up for titling or banning are just attention whores, so if we waste time and excite them by acknowledging they even exist it should be in the most minimal way possible, thus a generic title like village idiot.

[Connor MacLeod]

I've got a wacky idea. Since we can't apparently agree to this, why don't we vote much more simply:

Punish or not punish? The punishment will be decided by the mods/admins/mike. I think we can trust in THEIR judgement to render appropriate punishment, if need be.

And I would also like to further reiterate the whole burden of proof thing. I am not opposed to the idea he might deserve punishment, but doing so still needs clarified justification.

[Connor MacLeod]

He needs to have this ruthlessly driven into his brain 24/7 or else he'll never do it.

To be blunt, if it hasn't sunk in now, its NEVER going to. Given the BS he tried with Nitram, he's either exceptionally dense or outright dishonest (And thinks us stupid.) Either way I have doubts we can enact any "corrective" action on him.

Furthermore, ,would you PLEASE stop acting as if we need to invoke corporal punishment with him? This has to be the second time you've proposed an "extraordinary" means of dealing with him, and I'm starting to gt this vibe that its becoming a bit personal for you, which I am not at all comfortable with.

[Connor MacLeod]

A title should be enough to pound it into his head. Let's not get stupid. If he wants to be alone his entire life, that's his damn choice. Hounding him in ANY THREAD he might participate in not only won't do anything for him, it will actively discourage discussion in those threads, requiring more work for mods as they split the retarded tangents.

True, but as I said to Duchess, I don't think corrective measures are going to work with him. I suppose that might lend credence to what Sea Skimmer is saying.

Edit: Moreover, it looks like any residual amusement he may have had has died off.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Oh I STILL say a forced avatar of Ray Cav. or Ted would be good...

especially after Ray Cav kept writting/stalking that girl "Amy" in high school. Though at least Ray's getting mental help.

[Coyote]

The thing about a custom title is that it reminds us of what he's all about, and serves as a descriptive warning to potential n00bs. His trouble is of a particular variety.