[Discussion] General Brock

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-02-26 12:11pm

Please read the following thread:

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?t=104854

In it, Brock makes the spectacular claim that there is zero correlation between mental illness and poverty. When Superman contradicts him, not only does he fail to provide supporting evidence but he expects Superman to provide supporting evidence for his challenge. When Superman does so, a true tour de force of evasive bullshit begins.

We have rules against ignoring demands for evidence, ignoring evidence, relying on fallacies, etc. With that in mind, and after having read the thread, please render some kind of feedback on what, if anything, should be done with Brock.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2007-02-26 12:33pm

V.I.

I'm still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor from some that shit in his last post in the thread.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2007-02-26 01:57pm

Definitely VI. The train-wreck that is his participation in the thread was painful to read.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2007-02-26 02:07pm

Superman's Bitch.

I always feel that it's important to acknowledge the contributions of those that go above and beyond with stupid claims.

Post by **Coyote** » 2007-02-26 02:43pm

Spyder wrote:Superman's Bitch.

Indeed, Heeheehee... put a wig on him, slap his ass & call him Lois.

Publius · Post by **Publius** » 2007-02-26 05:41pm

He is unquestionably guilty of violating board policy. There is no dispute over that. His post count should be reset as a matter of course, quite apart from whatever punishment the Senate may choose.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2007-02-26 07:28pm

If he's going to be a bullheaded idiot, just throw him out.

It is one thing to just up and leave because you having nothing to stand on, something entirely different to crow how anyone but yourself is not seeing your genius.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2007-02-26 07:59pm

Village Idiot, he's a fucking moron, ok.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2007-02-26 09:32pm

Hmm...a development.

General Brock wrote:I've made several mistakes; I sense them but can't see them. Even now, I refuse to admit wrong, because somewhere in there I think something was right. The moment my temper kicks in, the I.Q. drops like a stone. Seeing nothing but a red haze is all that matters. You can call it arrogance or pride, or whatever, but rage doesn't care. It simply is.

The meaness of this thread is offensive, repugnant in the way that got to me, unexpectedly. I'm not entirely sure why, because that requires a level of clear thought I am not presently capable of. Whatever Britney's problems are, she appears to have enough sense to stay away from her kids and not drag them along with her.

I can't learn. I'm not making the time to. This is a problem, my problem, not the board's, and banning is the only appropriate solution.

Even if I calm down enough to work it through, I won't remember the lessons in time prevent another meltdown if something sets me off. I've done this before. I will certainly do it again.

I'm sorry for failing my position and spirit of the name I hoped to live up to, and failing the standards of the board and its members. I have to apologize for that.

There is a line, however, where apologies fix nothing and mean nothing. I've crossed it. Banning will ensure it never happens again and serve as a reminder to others it should never happen in the first place.

Such a noble fall-on-his sword post and totally not a feign of remorse to make himself seem reasonable at all...

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2007-02-26 11:31pm

I'm all for giving him what he says he wants (the banstick.) I suspect he actually wants us to take pity on him and let him off the hook, but I also suspect that he's just taken it right out of the Senate' hands.

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2007-02-26 11:40pm

Wong wrote: So full of arrogance and pride that you'd rather be banned than admit a mistake.

I think that pretty much sums it up, coupled with his usually penant of standing on a soapbox. I'd still recomend VI over a ban though, if for anything than just to go against his pride.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2007-02-26 11:57pm

I'd incline toward a VI for Mr. Brock. He has yet to engage in the sort of Wall of Ignorance construction projects that people like the late and unlamented Tharkun regularly put up or to reach the level of truly offensive idiocy typical of a Darkstar or a RevPrez. Hang the VI around his neck. We can always make it a noose later.

Post by **Edi** » 2007-02-27 01:41am

VI. If this incident repeats itself, he can be booted out then, but I don't think it's quite time for bansticking him yet.

Edi

CmdrWilkens · Post by **CmdrWilkens** » 2007-02-27 03:56am

If only because I'm usually a lenient SOB I'd go with V.I. but if he keeps pulling shit then slap the banstick on him.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2007-02-27 04:20am

you realize, that the queen of hearts and southern death penalty judges are going to have a shit fit, we almost never use the
VI option any more

Post by **fgalkin** » 2007-02-27 09:40am

VI. We haven't had one of those in a while.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Post by **Coyote** » 2007-02-27 01:16pm

I reiterate a custom title, and add this-- if he wants to go the "ban" route like this, I say he can ban himself and just not show up anymore. Use a li'l of that "self control"-- or be welcome to come back and make a fool of himself further.

This leaves the door open for any miracle epiphanies that occur, so he can also come back and display more sense, less hubris, and contribute again.

Spyder · Post by **Spyder** » 2007-02-27 09:09pm

I think it's important that when considering banning people that we take into account things like the overall harm an individual is doing to SDN's signal to noise ratio, how likely they are to improve and what impact not banning them will have.

Post by **LadyTevar** » 2007-02-27 09:15pm

I agree with the majority on this. VI, and reset his post count.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2007-02-28 04:37am

and someone do it fast before I change my mind, that was the most bac handed and insulting appology I've read in a long while.

Post by **Edi** » 2007-02-28 05:11am

The Yosemite Bear wrote:and someone do it fast before I change my mind, that was the most bac handed and insulting appology I've read in a long while.

Quoted for truth. One more smarmy weasel reply from the moron will get my vote changed to immediate ban.

Edi

Post by **Surlethe** » 2007-02-28 08:57am

Slap him a VI or "Superman's Bitch" and reset his post-count. At least he seems to be bowing out; that's better than staying in the thread and flailing with bullshit smarm.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2007-02-28 12:31pm

I'd prefer titling him "Superman's Bitch" and resetting his postcount.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2007-02-28 03:51pm

yeah, we haven't used the "Bitch" title for a while.

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2007-02-28 04:15pm

*mutters under breath*

Yeah, Supermans Bitch would be an acceptable CT