What should be done with Ted?

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-06-19 05:41pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:Ted doesn't engage in debates

This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 05:44pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:Ted doesn't engage in debates
This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514

If that's debating then I'm Arminius.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-06-19 05:45pm

fgalkin wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:Ted doesn't engage in debates
This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514
If that's debating then I'm Arminius.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

You have to search, but he's been in a few.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-06-19 05:48pm

Bored, you do realise that a significant portion of the people you are arguing with and insulting are moderators, don't you?

They know what they're talking about concerning Ted. You however, are a relative newbie that appears to be playing Devil's Advocate borderlining appologist.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2003-06-19 05:52pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:Ted doesn't engage in debates
This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514

One liners and general talking don't qualify as a debate. You know what I meant. He's not like patkelly or a creationist, in the sense that he's not disliked for having and defending an unpopular opinion. He's disliked because of his anti-social behaviour. Which varies in virulence, from hidden to insulting people for no good reason. Adding to that, he doesn't really contribute to the board, so having him gone is not a loss.

irishmick79 · Post by **irishmick79** » 2003-06-19 05:53pm

I think this has gone well beyond being a devil's advocate, and BoredShirtless is a flat out apologist. Devil's Advocates are usually smart enough to cut out the insults.

And Ted didn't really debate. All he offered was one-liners and quips. Sure he posted in debates, but apparently he didn't stop to read what anybody else posted before he threw his own opinion in.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-06-19 06:09pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Bored, you do realise that a significant portion of the people you are arguing with and insulting are moderators, don't you?

Spanky, hope you're not suggesting I bend over just cause it's a moderator? Have you no self respect?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-06-19 06:13pm

No.

I am mearly stating that their positions concerning the administration of this board means that they know more about the situation than you do, as you appear to be a meager appologist.

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 06:14pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
fgalkin wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote: This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514
If that's debating then I'm Arminius.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin
You have to search, but he's been in a few.

First link you provided: No debate there
Second link: nope
third link: nope
fourth link: nope
fifth link: where are the debates?
sixth link: nope, I don't see it
seventh one: nope, nothing here, either.
eight one: no debate here, but plenty anti-us bullshit
ninth: a one-liner "debate" post (wheee!)
tenth one:no debate here
elevneht one: nope
twelveth one: nope
thirteenth one: nope
fourteenth one: something resembling a debate appears(from the same anti-us thread as the previous one)
fifteenth one: http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... ht=#546062 erm...
sixteenth one: no debate here
seventeenth one:

Ted wrote:Technically, Bush and the Pentagon are terrorist's, Shock and Awe.

Shock and Awe was basically to terrorize the people enough to not fight the Americans, therefore, it is an act of terrorism, and those perpetrating it are terrorists.

eighteenth one:nope (even though its in the same thread as the above)
nineteenth: shock and awe are bad. (bsically the same post as 17)
20th one: another post in the same thread (a debate, whee!) So far all his "debate" posts are confined to one thread.
21st one: nope
22d one: nope

You get the picture.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-06-19 06:16pm

BS, I do wonder how you managed to write that post with your head lodged so deep in your rectum? It really is a gift.....
You seem to think this is all simply down to the Irish comment, well to be honest it didnt bother me much and I'm near the top of the list of people that should take it very personally with only the likes of Pounder above me. This is a cummulative thing, the proverbial straw that broke the camels back. Read my post all together rather than in little snippets (though I understand reading with your head stuck up your ass must be hard....) then you'd see that's the point I'm making.....just to help you though, I'll put it in bold and red :-

HE HAS PUSHED PEOPLE AGAIN AND AGAIN DESPITE BEING WARNED AND ALREADY HAVING BEEN TEMP BANNED!

Now, did you manage to read that this time?
Just once more to make sure you get it.....

HE HAS PUSHED PEOPLE AGAIN AND AGAIN DESPITE BEING WARNED AND ALREADY HAVING BEEN TEMP BANNED!

Alright?

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2003-06-19 06:17pm

BoredShirtless wrote:
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Bored, you do realise that a significant portion of the people you are arguing with and insulting are moderators, don't you?
Spanky, hope you're not suggesting I bend over just cause it's a moderator? Have you no self respect?

I believe he's suggesting that you have not been exposed to the vast amount of Ted's BS, while the other members of the board who have been here longer have. The moderators have had to deal with his shit in the past, and he has already been warned extensively and even temp bannned once before. There is a reasopn your the only one defending Ted, perhaps because you do not understand the situation.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-06-19 06:22pm

Colonel Olrik wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:Ted doesn't engage in debates
This is a lie. See:
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 514#572514
One liners and general talking don't qualify as a debate. You know what I meant.

Don't make me pull out a dictionary.

Colonel Olrik wrote: He's not like patkelly or a creationist, in the sense that he's not disliked for having and defending an unpopular opinion. He's disliked because of his anti-social behaviour. Which varies in virulence, from hidden to insulting people for no good reason. Adding to that, he doesn't really contribute to the board, so having him gone is not a loss.

Having him gone IS a loss:
1. Ted's unique with his one liner posts.
2. He contributes to News and Politics with articles and debates [he may contribute to other forums I don't know about].

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-06-19 06:26pm

Well I tried. Adios Ted.

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 06:27pm

BoredShirtless wrote: Having him gone IS a loss:
1. Ted's unique with his one liner posts.
2. He contributes to News and Politics with articles and debates [he may contribute to other forums I don't know about].

There is only one thing I can say:

ROTFLMMFGDQQAO!!!

(yes, I know I don't qualify for some of the acronims there)

Bored, you still have yet to provide an example of Ted debating.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-06-19 06:32pm

How was Ted "unique" with his one-line posts?

When they weren't simply "grunt", "okay", or "yes/no" types, they were almost always either veheminently sarcastic or vieledly rude comments.

For example, you could plainly see his seemingly fearful heatred of women where he posted in threads that had something to do with women in some aspect...

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2003-06-19 06:37pm

I guess we shouldn't have banned Mike006, he was unique in his mindbogglying stupid way. My God, I can see it now

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-06-19 06:37pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:For example, you could plainly see his seemingly fearful hatred of women where he posted in threads that had something to do with women in some aspect...

I should add that the thread didn't always have to concern women in its subject matter. Sometimes all that was needed of him to spay his venom was for Kelly, Zaia, Marina, or any other notable female member to simply post in a thread.

Of course, he was like that with all of his other issues, as well...

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 06:45pm

It seems I have just found a compromise: we let Ted back in, flame him for a while, and then perm-ban him.

That way, anyone who has anything to say to him, can do so.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2003-06-19 06:45pm

In fact, there have been no less than 5 different threads in the mod forum over 5 different incidents with him over the last several monthes. I helped defend him in at least two of those, to my great irritation, and asked that he be given leniency despite his history. He has been warned several times, titled, and banned once already. It is quite appearant that he is simply unwilling to change his attitude.

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2003-06-19 07:06pm

After reading your last several posts BS, you either don't understand the situation, or you're just an idiot.

Don't worry though, you're still our idiot, the village idiot to be exact.

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 07:11pm

Son of the Suns wrote:After reading your last several posts BS, you either don't understand the situation, or you're just an idiot.

Don't worry though, you're still our idiot, the village idiot to be exact.

1) I can see the advantage of having multiple admins now.

2) what about my new proposal: let him in to flame him, then ban his ass?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2003-06-19 07:16pm

fgalkin wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote: Having him gone IS a loss:
1. Ted's unique with his one liner posts.
2. He contributes to News and Politics with articles and debates [he may contribute to other forums I don't know about].
There is only one thing I can say:

ROTFLMMFGDQQAO!!!
(yes, I know I don't qualify for some of the acronims there)

Bored, you still have yet to provide an example of Ted debating.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

ROTFLMMFGDQAO!!

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-06-19 07:18pm

fgalkin wrote:
Son of the Suns wrote:2) what about my new proposal: let him in to flame him, then ban his ass?

That would be pretty non-productive, given that Ted thrives from such attention.

Plus on our part, it would just look simply petty...

Post by **fgalkin** » 2003-06-19 07:19pm

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:
fgalkin wrote:
BoredShirtless wrote: Having him gone IS a loss:
1. Ted's unique with his one liner posts.
2. He contributes to News and Politics with articles and debates [he may contribute to other forums I don't know about].
There is only one thing I can say:

ROTFLMMFGDQQAO!!!
(yes, I know I don't qualify for some of the acronims there)

Bored, you still have yet to provide an example of Ted debating.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin
ROTFLMMFGDQAO!!

I've put it in my sig first.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Son of the Suns · Post by **Son of the Suns** » 2003-06-19 07:20pm

*If* we let him come back there will be no more third ( fourth?) chances.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What should be done with Ted?

What should we do with Ted?