I agree with kimba. Make birthers follow the rules and, if necessary, give them directions to do so. If they don't spam and follow the rules, let them stay. (Of course, we saw how that worked with La Taitz with the fules and directions stuff.)

I, for one, would like Apuzzo to come here. I think he'd be an invaluable member. He does argue on point, even though he gets most of it wrong and plays sleight of hand. He is perhaps the only worthy opponent in all of Birfoonistan. Which is saying something, actually. His Charlie McCarthy (Kerchner), not so much. The MountainGoat is duplicitous and changes his arguments fluidly and without conscience or notation when his assertions are demonstrated to be false.

I disagree with Kimba and Stern. (yes... I am afraid.)

That thread filled up so fast, I can only imagine what it would have done to other threads if it had been allowed.

That one thread of insane rantings will soon be buried. As it should be.

But there are gems in that thread posted by our people. Maybe we should mine them and place them in storage somewhere. There was some GREAT new debunking information, if you wade through the sewage.

The thread could be a birther debunking training tool if you would just scrub the poo off the walls from when she went psycho this morning.

Oh, I loved siphoning her crap off into one thread. I thought it kept the place much cleaner.

Oh, now come on! That wasn't scolding you!

OK ... maybe. A little. Mostly it was putting HER in her place, because what it really meant was, the topic was HER, and that's why it was in Teh Funny Stuff.

You know I adore you, babydoll. Cut me some slack.

That's my main gripe with the handling of the blatant trolls here. Not that people are held to rules, but that birfers are apparently allowed to fling their feces against the walls until they are BANED, while anyone pointing out that there are feces on the walls are treated as if they are equal offenders, even when they're the very people who make this a forum worth reading. It gets annoying to be treated as the mental equals of toddlers in the name of some kind of bogus equality, when there is no such equality. There are actual participants here, and there are scumbags trying to destroy the forum.

What chapped my butt wasn't you, it was that she thought she'd gotten the go ahead to pile on. I got over it coz I loves me some Rooster!;;)

In an effort to craft/clarify some rules, might it be helpful to list who* previously has been baned, and for what reason?

* "Who" does not include obvious adbots, etc.

My personal feeling in places like this is that the dude running the board makes the rules, and everyone else either decides if they can follow the rules, or if they need to go.

But when asked I'm always happy to toss in my .02.

I've got a fair bit of experience debating loons - it's pretty much the summary of the time I've spent online since about 1993. The bulk of that time has been spent in the corners of the intertubes haunted by the scientifically-obsessed end of the crazy spectrum. But the same basic principles seem to apply. The majority of the fruitloops are annoying, repetitive, and a waste of time. A rare few are convincible to at least a certain extent. The rest are not convincible, but at least provide the ocasional invaluable teachable moment.

I think there's a lot of value to having the last couple around. Getting them to show in the first place requires at least a bit of tolerance toward the others, just to avoid creating the reputation that their ilk is not welcome here under any circumstances.

I so concur. I felt like it is when someone's relative comes over and you're expected to be gracious while their 4-year-old destroys your house, terrorizes your pets, and makes it impossible to have a grown-up conversation. All to show how open and what good sports we are? Personally speaking, I'm not quite that good a sport.

And "is not! IS TOO! HELLLLOOOOO! IS TOO!!!!" got real, real boring in the first 10 posts. I love a good debate, and don't mind at all people I don't agree with, as long as they are intellectually honest, and knowledgeable or interested in becoming so. But if I'd wanted to be around children I would have had some of my very own. My 2 cents.

I think you handled Tracy pretty well, Fogster. While I do think birthers are allowed more leeway than necessary, the mentally challenged should be given the benefit of the doubt. I agree with the idea of a warning time-out when, as they eventually all do, they drop to the stage of spamming. Tracy went from the usual birther talking points to insulting spam so fast it was obvious she was finished trying to impress us with her cut-and-paste skills. She wasn't going to come out of it. All our mods do a great job and I appreciate all of your efforts to keep The Fogbow the top-notch board it is.

I do too.

She was very much like that child that the parents will not or cannot control, who ends up breaking things, things that you care for. You got rid of her before she broke a single thing.

I may not be the best person to respond to this question.

See my Sig

Oh... and give them a little "birther" icon next to their username.

Maybe they could tick a box when they join.

Their own group!

Foggy,

I think you handled it in a very even handed, balanced way. The thought process you used to come to the final decision was spot on.

Right from the very first post KBOC was belligerent and abusive and clearly had no interest in honest debate. Then came the threats and all the other ugliness.

I think these situations are best handled on a case by case basis. You gave her a fair chance, but she eventually crossed the line. It's a judgement call, and I think you made the right one.

On the other hand, I don't see the need to ban Noz or MichaelN. They both post endless streams of drivel, but they have not veered into outright hostility the way KBOC did. Noz and MichaelN eventually found their way onto my ignore list, and that works fine for me, and for a number of others here as well.

-wavey

It is probably good to work out this issue now. I suspect after today your time spent moderating may have to increase. I favor the 3 strike rule:

1. Warning
2. Suspension
3. Baned

By the time the hammer comes down no one should be surprised.

Nuffink wrong with that, other than moderator time, and that may not be too onerous, specially since we all can be tattle-tales if needed.

On balance, I think Foggy dumped Tracy in a very timely way (although I'd have like to have been able to wave buh bye first ). How to deal with a Tracy prior to that might take some refinement and no doubt there is no slick one-size fits all answer.

I agree that closer moderating about following thread rules should be instituted. Two warnings and you get a few days off to see if you can figure out where things are on topic and where they're not. Come back with no indication of having learned that and buh bye for inability to use an adult forum in an adult way.

I'm also for removing ASAP offensive material with a warning PM and progressive discipline if it repeats. That's easier with more mods, no doubt. If you need help, I'm willing.

Another rule that might be more generally applied -- no saying simply "no, you're wrong" or equivalents without saying why you think they're wrong. And by the second time you're saying that on the same subject, you better provide substantive reasoning and/or a link to an authoritative proof. If you can't do that after a couple warnings, buh bye for inability to use an adult forum in an adult way. I am aware that we have some excellent folks with great legal minds/credentials who can answer some garbage much better than I can and I'll usually hold back and watch them do that. No doubt I'm not the only one who could exercise that discretion rather than stopping at "you're wrong". At least a, "you're wrong, been debunked here countless times, see (link)" is in order (and an index of common Birfer BS debunked to refer to would be handy in that regard).

One thing I'd do when a birfer quits arguing facts and engages in posting obscene, tasteless pics/cartoons is to remove picture posting privileges and delete any/all of these already posted. This would be whilst they're on their way out but still have a slim chance of redeeming themselves enough to keep posting. If they stay, the ban would stay unless otherwise negotiated with mods. I'd still go back and kill Tracy's graffiti off now with a notation what it was ("birfer trash taken out" or some such). There's NO reason to leave that graffiti here. It's all over birfer sitez.

I, like others, like to see our forums not become like birfer sites that ban the other side without excellent reason and after some warning as long as they don't start off pooping on everything. You know they'd like to be able to say "you do it too". But in most ways, on most days, I'm quite thrilled with the excellent moderation we have here.

I know IANAL, and I am not even a frequent poster, and don't keep up on everything...but, your first post in this thread shows me, due to its length and content, that you are deeply concerned about doing the right thing here...
Personally, I totally trust your judgement to handle each birther on a case-by-case basis, and if you think, in your humble opinion!, that someone needs to go....then they oughta be gone. You can obviously tell when they are becoming a problem, so, I trust our leader and moderators to do the right thing! And that's just my two cents, for what it's worth!
You are doing an amazing job!! Carry on!

If they can back their "wisdom" up with proof, let them stay. I get sick and tired of the same old birfer lines day in and day out. I've seen that for the past two years. I know all the garbage. Continuous babble of the same old stuff - give 'em the boot.

I'm working on it, that's part of the Home Page Project.