Listen… permmabanning Satyr isn’t going to work. He just gets angrier, makes more sock puppet user names over on KTS, and recruits the silly to hit this place up, then systematically hits this place up. Your trying to suppress a cross-boarder guerilla war who is quite determined.
Just let Satyr do what he needs to do to get the shit out of his system… it’s a few months tops before the users on the site adjust. He got absolutely nowhere with me… backfired if anything, a person who is a moderate debater can handle him.
Trixie is expressing a rather generic sexist opinion of women in the gay community (well, the male side of it). It was a pointless thread, but it isn’t any more pointless than say, Shield Maiden’s Anti-American stance, or Smears’ Anti-Poor & Sober stance, or Carleas Anti-American stances, or the Anti-Men stances of feminists, or whatever the fucking hell satyr is doing with the gay cross dressing Hannibal Lecter stuff he always pushes.
Part of being tolerant philosophically isn’t merely asserting no bias, but being willing to here them out and hold dialogue… and often that dialogue is going to be one of revulsion or attraction, or taking it foolheartedly by others. This is natural, it always was that way. How do I know? I had a Dago stepfather who didn’t know shit cept cameras… completely uncultured, a true caveman… but he and his ban of merry men knew how to communicate on this level.
Your not purifying philosophy… all logic, pure mathematics, etc… is still pure rhetoric, it’s communication. A phone hooked into a computer us rhetoric, looking at a painting is rhetoric, thinking and dreaming… your merely sorting shit out on a very poorly declared basis, basis being your own prejudice and bias.
Your better off just reestablishing that silly old subforum on logic, and guarding it. Provide some example threads for what you want, and provide another subsection where people are able to talk freely up front… and no, talking freely doesn’t mean go to off topic, mundane babble. I should be able to call Zizek a cock sucker and give a pretty damn good defence for it. There are alot of good reasons to suspect this of him, and challenge the legitimacy of the philosophy of a needlessly closeted homosexual in this day of age. Why does he have to hide this, what else is he hiding, can we really trust his ideas?
The premise is absurd and emotionally driven… but the thread is conflict driven… the actual thesis isn’t Zizek or homosexuality… that is pure emotion and bias based on a decisive persona… the point of the thread is can you accept a person’s philosophy based off their public biography and respected sense of self, or does one have to dig deeper like a reporter (or do what Derrida did), or if ideas can be accepted on the basis of ideas alone, without regard to the individual.
It leads to larger inclusions in debates, a more vibrant dynamic and higher rates of user viewership. I essentially ask stock philosophy questions in such threads… I fully expect some people (the usual suspects, Kropotkin, Zinnati, You, etc) to get upset because I didn’t bow down to liberal ideological demands in how to form the question… but it is a fantastic sacrifice to make… I get much higher rates of inclusion, and more consider it. It becomes not merely the philosophy of dry academics, but a philosophy that even your average fucking abusive cavedwelling Dago can grasp.
Trixie is compulsively driven to dinegrate women. He is a transexual… he didn’t invent this trend. He was trying for the above. Nobody protested you moving his (or my response thread) away because it… was silly and responded to, by me.
You can counter 90% of forum issues, including Satyr, merely by being a philosopher… if you don’t like what they say, stay incentive and challenge them. I think this was Moreno’s main complain about me… I never hit somebody the way he expects, but comes at them sideways from a completely unexpected position.
I do this because I keep it loose and open, float like a butterfly and sting like a bee… but I can only do that because I appreciate logic and rhetoric, how it relates to dialectics… you gotta have a pretty damn good understanding of psychology and how logic unfolds to consistently do this, while playing to the expectations of a predictable persona. I apply philosophy, and apply it differently to other users. For some,I get under their skin, others, merely point out their contradictions and encourage them, others I just play games as that’s all they are here to do.
I do this for everyone, from the administrator down… but I’m consistent in my approach if you look at the groups I engadge.
You accomplished absolutely nothing… and I do mean nothing, by banning Satyr. We know from past experience banning him doesn’t work. Let him come back, we can slap the silly fuck around some more. Romans feared the elephants in the first few battles in which they faced them, but soon learned to get out of the way and hit them from the sides. Fairly simple creatures to take down. Satyr projects a lot of depth, but is really a rather shallow character… quick in the response, but shallow. He is simple to take down. Had you let him stay, the average user would of been man handling him by the fall, making a mockery of him. Now… he gets to act the martyr, hiding out in his masturbation cave, drawling the impressionable in.
You did absolutely nothing to win Trixie over. Absolutely nothing. No change in behavior, now you have his resentment. Absoluteky nothing will change, other than he now can justifiably call you a dick.
Same with Joker… again… your futile attempts to forceably amend his behavior has failed. Yeah… maybe he will change his lifestyle and outlook and embrace your pathetic shitheaded outlook on life Only Humean… no… he too can point to you being a miserable fuckhead who unfairly persecuted him over something absurdly minor.
You no longer have no rules to point to, as your a failed administrator who long ago made a mockery of all the rules. You can’t really expect moderator solidarity because you even attacked a moderator in that thread over nothing. This site had a bad habit back when Pavlov was still around to randomly ban and attack people, and the only thing moderators could do was point to moderator reinforcement of one another’s absurd actions… you can’t even expect this degenerate form of defence for your bans (which is offensive and authoritarian as fuck on a philosophy forum) because your moving in the direction of banning fellow moderators.
Really, do you think Carleas coming in saying he fully supports your actions is going to change shit? Everyone thinks your a piece of shit… perhaps you can cue support from a few other pieces of shit on thus forum I’ve angered over the years (cue Kropotkin or IAmbigous) but nobody really accepts you or your behavior anymore.
You gotta change. You’ve been skiing the slippery slope for too damn long, it has become the new normal for you. You confuse “What is philosophy” with “What do you like”.
How about we just rename that section “Shit Only Humean Wants To Talk About” and we can lump the rest of the site as “For Everyone Else?”.
I know for certain I will never change who I am, or my approach to anything, ever, do to your actions. I know Trixie won’t, Satyr won’t, Joker won’t… many more will refuse. Yet you do this silly pointless absurd shit, and drag your shreds of authority even further down the drain.
You go around randomly attacking people who aren’t even engaged in a discussion with you. You are a fucking menace, a enemy of philosophy and free thinking, and of all the people here, you are the one who needs banned. You can sit at home and ponder if banning actually does jack in changing of mollifying thought patterns, or if you remain who you are. If you remain the same, and remain philosophically inclined… then I would love to hear your unadulterated, honest ideas. This is the best kind of philosophy. I don’t need some third party doing butcher work to a discussion they aren’t even participating in. Such people should be locked up in prisons, as sadistic enemies of democracy and the first amendment.
Bring Satyr back, the hurt has only begun for him.