He thinks I hate him.  I don't.  I don't even know him, and I'm not a hateful person.

 

He has seen the last of me on his blogs though - which will save him precious deleting time, so I'm sure that's welcome.

I'm going to answer Lucas's question here, because I don't want to give any more attention over there.

Whether it is a TOU violation would depend on how the Powers That Be choose to interpret the TOU in the moment. I could see it going either way; I've seen plenty of examples of "fluid interpretation" based on how they felt about certain individuals.

I'm sure admin is well aware of the situation. (Though rarely interjecting, they seem to pay attention to the goings on.) When and if they feel it needs addressed, they will, one way or another.

Considering Jennifer1 initially got defended, and the chilly reception given to the most recent shunning, I would not hold my breath.


(But that's just my ever-defeatist attitude. Continue prosecuting the matter in whatever ways you think will help. )

 

Erathoniel may be a spammer, but at least he doesn't add :shrug: to the end of every sentence, or use the horribly cutesy word 'anywho', or breathe heavily through his mouth (this is an assumption, I don't know for certain that Lucas is a mouthbreather, but I suspect he is).

Anyway, petitions are lame. There's something inherently 1990s about them. In the modern world we snub with wild abandon. It's more pleasing - nothing gives a man strength more than a windmill to tilt against, so deny them that and let them wither away cold and alone, indifference on every side.

As for the pledge, I'll support this measure as long as the spammers don't say anything interesting. But if they do, I reserve the right to abandon my stance. I don't care about personalities so long as they say something interesting. If I started judging people I'd never have any time to get anything done.

I replied on the initially reported thread.  I'll just jump in here with a few quick comments.

The petition is not against site terms of use.  So long as you're just saying you're going to completely ignore an annoying user it's fine. 

It will cross the line if it goes to the point where you're actively bullying an annoying user.  In the past this has included (but is not limited to) things like:

• Writing rather nasty articles about other users, but changing their name in the article itself so as to barely skirt the no personal attacks rule.
• Writing to admins repeatedly because you do not "like" a user
• Dogging a users every article with nasty comments (this was while blacklisting was broken).
• Using real life information to harass or go after users beyond the walls of this site.

Why don't we step into these things very often?  Because we honestly don't care if a given user is liked or not liked.  We give folks a LOT of wiggle room (including folks who have been on the recent set of threads about the current "issue").  This is the Internet.  If you don't like someone, we don't care.  Be an adult about it and simply ignore them and walk away.

I'll comment on this blog as it will not break my promise to comment on the other blog...



EXACTLY.

It appals me how JUers will critisize and condemn a known and active troll and then turn around and continuously FEED IT. Heh, the dude knows what he's doing and any comments you leave on his blog is just fuel for the fire. Take Zoomba's excellent advice folks AND IGNORE HIM!

None of this was ever about having anyone banned or exiled. I do not support that line of reason.

The guy has posted 117 articles in 27 days. That's 4.33 per day since he came here 27 days ago. It affects the visibility of other members here.

If each of those ((or hell, even HALF...gah...if even ONE) articles was rich with content, it would be easier to swallow the fact that some articles that are rich with content are getting buried.

When so many people all point at the same thing and complain about it, I think it is fair to say that it does in fact





Consider that amendment 1 to the pledge. If any such people actually start posting anything interesting, I would also encourage further participation.

But as long as the drivel continues, the only recourse we have is to ignore him as best as possible. For me, that means no more replying. Your (collective) mileage may vary.

I guess writing something nasty about someone and shortening their name is ok.

As someone with a casual interest in this site... I find these melodramatic soap operas amusing.

LOL

Ditto

When you have a large group of diverse people blogging about any and everything. There is gonna be drama.

I was not meaning to mock

you Ock

But now you insist

to persist

to attack

my back.

Era, just stop posting like a million times a day.

I don't like you. I only sided with you because I saw letting a precident be set for legally pursuing someone outside of the site as a bigger threat than a spammer.

 

For the record, I don't think Era saying that I or anyone else hates someone is a big deal outside of the fact that it isn't true.  I told Asaxygirl that if the Navy is so shallow as to take the word of this guy for any purpose whatsoever, then I didn't want anything to do with them.  The "get a lawyer" thing was tongue in cheek because I know my wife's temper.  It was sparked because Era feigned an apology and said he had "changed" what he wrote.  Well, he "changed" it alright - to my wife's name instead of mine.  Asaxygirl is human and she saw red. 

 

How is that emotionally different from you taking sides on the issue?  I haven't had anything against you, CS, and I still do not.  But I will say that you choose very strange moral bedfellows and for what personal motivation you have, I can't begin to understand.

 

For myself, the matter is closed.  I will continue to ignore his existence here, and the sooner a feature comes to JU through which I can stop seeing his poorly written, poorly defended, poorly thought out drivel on the article list, the happier I'll be.

I think it has to do with the same mentality of the rubber neckers at a wreck. They want to see the troll implode (but the trolls seldom do).

Still, let each write what they want. JU is a community of blogs not a blog of a community. It is easy enough to ignore trolls and spammers, even when the writing gets prolific. There is a ton of good stuff to read, and may take an extra minute to find, and an extra mouse blick, but it will always be there.

Ock, you do know the hypocrisy of this article, don't you?

You attack me, then accuse me of Libel. I care about other peoples' JU experience. However, you obviously do not care about my right to write.