or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The definitive statement: failure of Leadership
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The definitive statement: failure of Leadership - Page 7  

post #241 of 278
If you're conservative you get banned, which is why conservatives can incessantly post their conspiracy theories about it.

Wait... what?
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #242 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Compare apples to apples. Your little one and three day bans are not the same as the lifetime bans given to say, Scott, Applenut and likely NaplesX.

Nick

And it just so happens that you list the three people who consistently derailed threads. I'd be very interested in the "locked thread" ratio of those guys to, say, you. The simplest explanation about the politics of the board is just that the most trollish and/or aggressive members tend to be right wingers.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #243 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Compare apples to apples. Your little one and three day bans are not the same as the lifetime bans given to say, Scott, Applenut and likely NaplesX.

Nick

WTF happened to Applenut anyway? When I first started posting here he was a pretty nice guy. Then he just turned into a complete fucking ass hole. Was he in some sort of accident which resulted in trauma to the head or something?
post #244 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
If you're conservative you get banned, which is why conservatives can incessantly post their conspiracy theories about it.

Wait... what?

Don't you mean A conservative...

Token Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #245 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
If a republican gets in, I win, and if a democrat gets in, then you win.

BTW - the above is not an endorsement of the Republican party, I just am comfortable enough that they will win that I can put money on it.

Back on topic, and looking further into the FEMA issue, it seems that Bush owes the country an apology. As a result of the war on terror, it looks like FEMA has been dismembered and put on the back burner - and what was left was filled with well connected know-nothings (and not just at the top).

The governors are saying that the FEMA that worked dissapeared in 2002, based on this newspaper article that I am reading. Putting it under the Homeland Security dept looks like it was a big mistake, because they were a side issue there (since they were not looking out for terrorists).

And it does not make sense to have the bulk of the responders divided up on a per-state basis. It is much better to have a federal workforce, because they will be busy more often (as they will move from state to state), and it will be less expensive as a result.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
post #246 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
...

Token Nick

That made me chuckle.
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think.
post #247 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
And it just so happens that you list the three people who consistently derailed threads. I'd be very interested in the "locked thread" ratio of those guys to, say, you. The simplest explanation about the politics of the board is just that the most trollish and/or aggressive members tend to be right wingers.

I disagree. I really doubt the signal to noise ratio takes a dive just because you happen to be conservative. I also don't mind having that exact comparison you mention done either because I know that I have had a couple dozen threads that I started locked due to the trollish nature of some politically left folks on here. Note that I started the threads and that they would get the silenced through trolling. I've yet to see a lifetime ban tossed down on anyone with a leftist political viewpoint even when they have had multiple temp bans.

Additionally I have not watched any moderator without taking them through a series of increasing bans, simply snap and lifetime ban a member as they have with both Apple and Scott.

Lastly I'll share my own "banning" experience. I consider it appropriate since the thread topic has turned to that.

ShawnJ once got me banned for three days for suggesting that his girlfriend would recoil at the thought of touching him. I finally got the moderator to treat him in kind AFTER the fact by pointing out that this was in response to him calling me a "wife-beating domestic and professional failure."

So note the pattern, liberal calls conservative a wife beater, no problem. Conservative RESPONDS to said post with a comment that the girlfriend might not want to touch liberal and sirens and alarms go off and conservative is temp banned.

Worse still the lefties on the board didn't even consider the comment about being called a wife-beater to be hateful when hurled at a conservative. It was justified using any number of reasons by multiple members of this board.

I don't want to make this personal but I can easily name three or more people on this forum with a leftist political perspective who post nothing but off-topic ranting nonsense. I've never even seen them temp banned.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #248 of 278
Quote:
WTF happened to Applenut anyway? When I first started posting here he was a pretty nice guy. Then he just turned into a complete fucking ass hole. Was he in some sort of accident which resulted in trauma to the head or something?


I wondered the same myself. Maybe he is on drugs.
post #249 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I disagree. I really doubt the signal to noise ratio takes a dive just because you happen to be conservative.

Go back and read what I wrote again. I said that it just so happens that the most trollish and abusive folks around here tend to be conservatives.

Quote:
I've yet to see a lifetime ban tossed down on anyone with a leftist political viewpoint even when they have had multiple temp bans.

Well, I've only seen one at all. Hardly enough evidence to detect a pattern.

Quote:
Additionally I have not watched any moderator without taking them through a series of increasing bans, simply snap and lifetime ban a member as they have with both Apple and Scott.

See, here's the thing: given their consistent behaviour, do you think the lifetime bans on them were appropriate? Do you think they contributed anything meaningful to the discussion here? Do you think repeated warnings worked?

Quote:
Lastly I'll share my own "banning" experience. I consider it appropriate since the thread topic has turned to that.

Yes. Didn't Shawn get banned for that, anyway? I know he's been banned in the past. But yes. You were both out of line and deserved a thump. But then, y'all push each other's buttons.

Look. I'm sorry y'all feel oppressed. I am. But to point to two lifetime bans of people who just happen to be conservatives (I would simply argue that they were both trolls) and infer some kind of conspiracy is silly.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #250 of 278
Yeah, it got personal for some reason. No hard feelings. Anyway, there's no reason to discuss any of these issues in this particular thread. Guys, can you take this discussion elsewhere? Thanks.
post #251 of 278
Quote:
I've never even seen them temp banned.

How would you see someone temp banned? Explain to me how that would work, please.

It's amazing the insight non-mods have into who is banned, when, and for how long.

Oh I do love pity parties.
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #252 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
...Also the only real hostility I've seen comes from Bush supporters when they're cornered. Then they get nasty and then they get banned.

If AppleInsider were a television show, I'd have to say that you missed an episode or two.

V/R,

Aries 1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
post #253 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
And it just so happens that you list the three people who consistently derailed threads.

And look! Another thread derailed by another conservative poster.



I kid!! I kid!!! I kid because I love!!!

Anyway, back to business. Everyone posits that FEMA got shorthanded in DHS because it wasn't terror-oriented. But is there any evidence that the secretive DHS has actually made any positive difference in the ones that ARE terror-oriented?


--B
...


...
...


...
post #254 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
... are not the same as the lifetime bans ... Applenut

Is applenut "conservative?" Not that it matters considering how he's managed to get himself banned on more apple forums than just this one. I guess that's because of his political views ... or not.
post #255 of 278
more on the white house
Quote:
The reality [of Katrina], say several aides who did not wish to be quoted because it might displease the president, did not really sink in until Thursday night.

....How this could behow the president of the United States could have even less "situational awareness," as they say in the military, than the average American about the worst natural disaster in a centuryis one of the more perplexing and troubling chapters in a story that, despite moments of heroism and acts of great generosity, ranks as a national disgrace.

President George W. Bush has always trusted his gut. He prides himself in ignoring the distracting chatter, the caterwauling of the media elites, the Washington political buzz machine. He has boasted that he doesn't read the papers. His doggedness is often admirable. It is easy for presidents to overreact to the noise around them.

But it is not clear what President Bush does read or watch, aside from the occasional biography and an hour or two of ESPN here and there. Bush can be petulant about dissent; he equates disagreement with disloyalty.

....Late last week, Bush was, by some accounts, down and angry. But another Bush aide described the atmosphere inside the White House as "strangely surreal and almost detached." At one meeting described by this insider, officials were oddly self-congratulatory, perhaps in an effort to buck each other up. Life inside a bunker can be strange, especially in defeat.
post #256 of 278
Articles from today's newspapers on the failure of leadership:

nytimes

washington post

la times
post #257 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Go back and read what I wrote again. I said that it just so happens that the most trollish and abusive folks around here tend to be conservatives.

Again I disagree. I've been called just and had alleged just about everything you can about a person from the nice leftist folks in this forum. I've not seen them banned. I've had all manner of allegations and motives assigned to me as well. I've seen exactly ONE person banned as a result of all these actions done to me. The mods pretty much didn't have a choice at that point since it was clear they had banned me for the reaction and no one for the initial action.

Not to be rude but that is akin to going back and arresting the criminal after the fact for breaking in and shooting you while havingt already charged, sentenced and jailed the homeowner for having shot him in the leg while breaking and entering.

Quote:
Well, I've only seen one at all. Hardly enough evidence to detect a pattern.

I thought we could name three. Scott, Applenut and NaplesX. Also the pattern is made clear when the conservative posters, being a clear minority of users and posters happen to be disproportionately banned. If they are 10% of the posters, but 100% of the perm bans, that really should say something.

Quote:
See, here's the thing: given their consistent behaviour, do you think the lifetime bans on them were appropriate?

Nope.

Quote:
Do you think they contributed anything meaningful to the discussion here?

There were times they all added good comments. However the 10 to 1 ratio of insults against them probably didn't help their disposition when replying at times.

Quote:
Do you think repeated warnings worked?

I don't think a warning will work with anyone when it is clearly being applied only against one type of person. As someone who has to manage and discipline people daily, I know that anything less than true fairness only makes the situation worse.

Quote:
Yes. Didn't Shawn get banned for that,anyway?

He did after the fact.

Quote:
Look. I'm sorry y'all feel oppressed. I am. But to point to two lifetime bans of people who just happen to be conservatives (I would simply argue that they were both trolls) and infer some kind of conspiracy is silly.

It doesn't have to start or stop with just that. Again the lifetime bans easily point to a pattern, but so do the thread locks and the motives behind them. I don't have to look at either of them. I've experienced it myself. Hell I was just warned within the last week that I was going to be banned. I've also had Groverat PM me and thank himself for not banning me.

In otherwords when people who clearly consider themselves to be posters of substance (I'm sure you consider yourself that) note that I have not been permanently banned because I post different, more like themselves, they are wrong. I have been banned, and warned repeatedly that I am basically on the edge of being repeatedly and permanently banned as well.

Perhaps you need to open your eyes a bit more.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #258 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Articles from today's newspapers on the failure of leadership:

nytimes

washington post

la times

Wow, it's really hard to imagine any of these three newspapers writing anything negative about Bush.

/sarc off

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #259 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Wow, it's really hard to imagine any of these three newspapers writing anything negative about Bush.

/sarc off

Nick

You know, it's funny, that old canard. The folks who usually use it haven't been reading the NYT or the WaPo at all. The left is way more fed up with them than the right is.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #260 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
How would you see someone temp banned? Explain to me how that would work, please.

It's amazing the insight non-mods have into who is banned, when, and for how long.

Oh I do love pity parties.

Well they have this little red note under their name that says BANNED for one. It also shows up under their profile. Of course I'm not telling you anything you don't know.

It also isn't hard when certain parties that should have been temp banned MULTIPLE times have NEVER had that little red title appear next to their name.

See you don't have to note who has been banned and for how long when for certain parties the action has never occurred.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #261 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
You know, it's funny, that old canard. The folks who usually use it haven't been reading the NYT or the WaPo at all. The left is way more fed up with them than the right is.

I suspect that is why people are starting to prefer blogs now. I mean if you aren't going to report the news, what is the point of buying a newspaper.

Anyone want to take bets about how many times the figure of "up to 10,000 dead" and "25,000" bodies bags has appeared in articles about Bush. Meanwhile we currently have a true figure of under 200 dead in all of Louisiana. I'll wager that the final figure is under 500.

Where was the planning that would have moved those school buses in the 72 hours before Katrina hit that the NO evacuation plan stated was necessary to evacuate the city? Where was the conversion of bidirectional freeways into unidirectional evacuation routes?

And if I read one more story that has a comment from a party that didn't leave because they were concerned or worried about a damn dog or cat, I'm going to barf. It seems like the universal excuse.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #262 of 278
There are a lot of "liberals" here. Liberals are not conservative. In area with a lot of liberals, conservative ideas are going to hit scrutiny and even ridicule.
This is not rocket science.

trumpt:

Quote:
Well they have this little red note under their name that says BANNED for one. It also shows up under their profile.

"Banned" hasn't always displayed like that. So no.

Quote:
It also isn't hard when certain parties that should have been temp banned MULTIPLE times have NEVER had that little red title appear next to their name.

As I've already said

Further, how often do you go profile-prowling?

Quote:
See you don't have to note who has been banned and for how long when for certain parties the action has never occurred.

"certain parties"? Is this some kind of code language?

You have some very heavy accusations to level, but as usual you are terribly short on any kind of specific. You seem to rely mainly on a sense of persecution which, sadly, requires no sense of reality only a desire to survive.

I've been here as a conservative. I've been here as a liberal.

Furthermore, you do not have anything close to a full understanding of who has been banned, how many times, for how long or why they have been banned. You cannot. You do not have access to that information. Yet you still pretend to know. Why?

Pity party.
proud resident of a failed state
proud resident of a failed state
post #263 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
I suspect that is why people are starting to prefer blogs now.

Nope. Political blogs have taken off for the same sorts of reasons that all blogs have.

Well, there's one significant difference: there are more clueless nuts making political blogs than, say, biotech blogs.
post #264 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
It also isn't hard when certain parties that should have been temp banned MULTIPLE times have NEVER had that little red title appear next to their name.

See you don't have to note who has been banned and for how long when for certain parties the action has never occurred.

You mean like yourself? Hell, you were unleashing a torrent of unprovoked personal attacks just yesterday, as is so often the case, yet you're still here. If anything the enforcement of rules here is excessively lax.

This whole whining about persecution while littering the forum with personal attacks and derailing thread after thread is just plain bullying.
post #265 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Anyone want to take bets about how many times the figure of "up to 10,000 dead" and "25,000" bodies bags has appeared in articles about Bush. Meanwhile we currently have a true figure of under 200 dead in all of Louisiana. I'll wager that the final figure is under 500.

Well, it's true that I've had a long history of invoking incredulity at your posts. But this time, really, what are you talking about? If you're leveling charges of bad faith concerning casualty counts, I haven't read anything either suggesting someone *deliberately* upped it beyond reason or did so to make Bush look bad. And you should probably expect journalists to inform readers of the federal response to a national disaster like Hurricane Katrina. Not sure what your point is beyond the conspiratorial overtone.
post #266 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
There are a lot of "liberals" here. Liberals are not conservative. In area with a lot of liberals, conservative ideas are going to hit scrutiny and even ridicule.
This is not rocket science.

trumpt:



"Banned" hasn't always displayed like that. So no.



As I've already said

Further, how often do you go profile-prowling?



"certain parties"? Is this some kind of code language?

You have some very heavy accusations to level, but as usual you are terribly short on any kind of specific. You seem to rely mainly on a sense of persecution which, sadly, requires no sense of reality only a desire to survive.

I've been here as a conservative. I've been here as a liberal.

Furthermore, you do not have anything close to a full understanding of who has been banned, how many times, for how long or why they have been banned. You cannot. You do not have access to that information. Yet you still pretend to know. Why?

Pity party.

If only it were the conservative IDEALS being hit with scrutiny and ridicule. Instead it is the posters themselves via continual personal attacks. Why don't we count up the number of "YOU's" in your reply for a firsthand example.

You couldn't possibly know that the President did something wrong. I mean you aren't in office and you aren't the President.

Think how stupid a person would sound for making such a claim about someone who has a hell of a lot more responsibility than moderatoring an internet forum.

People can email. People can IM. People can do a hell of a lot more than you happen to know Mr. Moderator. The only pity party I see is you blindly ignoring the obvious. I've named individuals and given clear examples. I've related my own personal experience which happens to include an couple PM's from you threatening lifetime bans.

All you've done is claim that I don't know and that no one can know. The saying is ignorance is bliss, not if I can claim your ignorant you should be thankful, blissful, and shut the hell up before I ban you.

Put up some numbers or shut up already. You continually claim, "you don't know, you can't know, you're not a mod" which to mean sounds like a string section playing the world's loudest pity party song. You claim to know the numbers and that I CAN'T know the numbers so pull them up and shut me up with facts.

BTW, considering the thread title, I consider this entirely on topic.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #267 of 278
Quote:
You couldn't possibly know that the President did something wrong. I mean you aren't in office and you aren't the President.

Then how do you know why they got banned? I mean you aren't in a moderating position, and you aren't Groverat.

Wait.. what?
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
post #268 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by bergz
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
And it just so happens that you list the three people who consistently derailed threads.

And look! Another thread derailed by another conservative poster.

That's just their little tactic. Heck, trumpt alone has completely derailed at least two threads (this and the death toll ones are the two on the top of my head) in as many days, yet somehow he's a victim.
post #269 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
If only it were the conservative IDEALS being hit with scrutiny and ridicule. Instead it is the posters themselves via continual personal attacks.

pot, kettle, you know the drill...
post #270 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
And look! Another thread derailed by another conservative poster.

That's just their little tactic. Heck, trumpt alone has completely derailed at least two threads (this and the death toll ones are the two on the top of my head) in as many days, yet somehow he's a victim.

You're still welcome to go back to that thread and add the demonstration to your "demonstratably false" claim.

One of these days you will realize that "because I said so" isn't a fact and pointing that out isn't 1) a personal attack or 2) derailing the thread.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #271 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
BTW, considering the thread title, I consider this entirely on topic.

Nick

If that's the case, you're wrong ... clever, but wrong.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
post #272 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by audiopollution
If that's the case, you're wrong ... clever, but wrong.

I guess I took that global in the moderator title a little too seriously.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #273 of 278
Should we go through your posts, starting with your unprovoked personal attack against shawn and followed by a series of off-topic personal attacks against multiple other posters?
post #274 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Should we go through your posts, starting with your unprovoked personal attack against shawn and followed by a series of off-topic personal attacks against multiple other posters?

Actually they are replies and as such you should quote the original material as well. However I would suggest you start a seperate thread on it since you seem to be so concerned about threads remaining on topic. (Your own reples excluded of course)

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #275 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
However I would suggest you start a seperate thread

You know, that's actually a really good idea! Now why don't you go put it into practice instead of derailing virtually every thread you participate in?
post #276 of 278
Right then! I think it's about time that this thread got back into line.

We all know, now, how persecuted everyone feels and how much they love to persecute others. Let's leave it at that, since there's plenty of blame to mete out.

Okay?

Thanks.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
post #277 of 278
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
That quite simply is true!

How long have you been here?

I've been here since before the site went down in 2000!


I remember very clearly all the flak I took for critisizing Bush back then.

Bush is a shill plain and simple and even his supporters are leaving. Don't believe me? Read the polls buddy.

Also the only real hostility I've seen comes from Bush supporters when they're cornered. Then they get nasty and then they get banned.

I've been here since August of 1999. Quite a bit longer than you. And long enough to know that you thought Mac OS X 10.0.0 had removed the "debug" code and was blazingly fast....cough bullshit...cough

"when they're cornered".....exactly.... because all that is done here is cornering. There is no discussion here. Very rarely is there even intelligence. It's just attack mode, and one side has an overwhelming majority and also moderation power.

Quote:
Is applenut "conservative?" Not that it matters considering how he's managed to get himself banned on more apple forums than just this one. I guess that's because of his political views ... or not.

My banning here was simply because of a hissy fit thrown by Kickaha because he couldn't dismiss any of my arguments. He had shown a pattern of abusing his power and making overly arrogant/critical/strongly worded posts because he could. he's already admitted to it. so he wanted me banned and the rest of the mods (well, most of them) jumped at the chance. you can go look up the thread about mac mini's having too low memory included. it's a very pathetic insight into the moderating staff here.



This thread is only proving my point from earlier in this thread.
post #278 of 278
For your info : Bronxite is Applenut. He was banned after very hard personnal attacks on an ex admin while he was himself a moderator.

And the point 3 of our guidelines is very clear :

Quote:
All comments about a moderator or an administrator should be directed to him personally (or another administrator if the member does not feel comfortable dealing directly) by using private messaging or e-mail. Do not start a thread or make public posts in any forum for the purpose of expressing displeasure with the actions of a moderator or administrator.

This thread is closed

PS : when someone is banned forever, he is banned forever , aliases included.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The definitive statement: failure of Leadership