Obligatory Seriousness About Commenting

Posted on Comments

— by Wombat-socho

Moe Lane has already done me the enormous favor of outlining what my policy is on trolls, so this will be a mercifully short post. I just want to spotlight a few things that I am finding particularly banworthy in recent days, for the benefit of those Loyal Readers who want to make my job easier by pointing out idiots who drop by for the express purpose of fouling the premises:

  1. The old whine that Romney is no better than Obama. I am sick and tired of reading this BS.
  2. Stupid posts by people who don’t get why Stacy is posting like a madman about Brett Kimberlin and Neal Rauhauser. If you’re too dumb to figure out their significance after all that’s been written, GTFO.
  3. On a related topic, anyone encouraging vigilanteism or messing around with BK/NR a la Anonymous or 4chan is going to get banned. Period.
  4. [Reserved for future annoyances]

Thanks for your cooperation.

56 comments

  1. I see #1 a lot.  Rarely #2 (and all of it troll related).  Has there been any #3?  

    As for #4, I assume that is reserved for certain individuals complaining about the FMJRA entries.  Not that I would ever do that.

  2. What has always amazed me about people who advocate vigilantism or domestic terrorism for whatever cause on line is that they don’t seem to understand they’ve just signed up for the suspect list… and deserve to be there.

  7. #1 is problematic.  I could easily enough make an arguement for OR against these viewpoints, and the answer may vary depending on what length of time you’re allowing for the effects.  That is, an answerf that only studies the effects up to mid2013 might get you a different answer than one that went out to 2020.

    In any case, I’m voting Constitutional Party.

  9. How do you ban someone who posts as a “guest?” 

    And far from blogging too much about BK/NR, I haven’t heard that much lately and wonder what is going on with AW and the rest who have been terrorized by these two vile scumbags.

    But if items 1-3 don’t get me, item 4 almost certain will…

  12.  You’re going to be seeing a lot less of #1.
    As for #4…well, everyone is just going to have to guess, aren’t they? 🙂

  13.  Exactly, but we’d prefer not to make it look like we encouraged such idiots, y’know?

  15.  Dave, you’re an ignorant idiot. I didn’t say Romney couldn’t be criticized. I just said I was tired of seeing the “Romney is no better than Obama” BS. And Stacy subcontracts the comment enforcement to me. If you want to compare me to Jay Carney, or even Robert Gibbs, your remaining time here will be very short.

  18. So…I’m allowed to be very critical of Romney as long as I don’t say…uhm, break Rule #1?

  19.  The criminal charges against AW were thrown out, but the bogus “peace order” has to be fought on appeal and those wheels turn slowly in Maryland – the clogged dockets are one reason they pay retired old administrative court judges to hear cases.

  22.  Neither factoid you shared is news.  Life in the People’s Republic of Maryland is one great exercise  in government-created injustice…

  25.  

    Well, there ya go. Yet another backhanded slap.

    Some days that’s all you’re gonna get from DaveO. (Or from several others, for that matter.)

    First, a jab, then a feint, then a denial and perhaps a test or two, an “it’s all about you,” a few more jabs, but never never never an admission that they were out of line nor any indication of learning that their confrontative troll trip is bankrupt, without merit and in the end saying more about them than about Wombat or whoever the current target might be.

  27. The average troll knows how to play people, how to push buttons. In
    fact, if one does have the time to read all the feedback during a siege
    of troll, one will find that it is far from being all junk or all
    argument. The troll throws out food for thought and others think. Only
    when some others react in a very strong negative way towards the troll,
    does the troll get labeled as a devil and a troublemaker. One who really
    has no use for the troll can easily ignore him or her or enjoy them.
    Those who intensely dislike the troll most need to look at what the
    troll is revealing, even if it’s been said hundreds of times.

  28. Before he locked up the nomination, it was open season on the guy as far as I’m concerned. Now, you risk being mistaken for a concern troll or a moby, because the point has been made already, and I’m going to act accordingly. Your call.

  29. Wombat, that is criticism of Romney. You might be “tired” of it, but you’re fighting Mitten’s history as MassGov. I’m going to put my vote in Romney’s column, but I’m not holding out much hope that we’ll be any luckier with Mittens than we would be with Obama. The mechanics of the fall will simply be different.

    I have no trouble with banning trolls, but, frankly, you’re simply being overly sensitive and silly on #1.

  31. That’s one I’m tired of, too.  A vote for A is a vote for A.  End of story.

    The only place to argue that out is in game theory, and all you can do is tweak probability.  You can’t manufacture a guarantee out of it.  Sometimes the coin lands on heads twenty times in a row.

  32. At this point in the election, criticizing Romney from the right serves no purpose, other than to annoy.  It won’t move him farther to the right.  It won’t win over voters for some other unannounced candidate. It won’t make the MSM like anyone.  It won’t make anyone popular with the Kos kiddies. It won’t resurrect anyone who’s campaign is “suspended,” and it won’t make Ron Paul get more votes.

    All it does is annoy and antagonize.

    The time for bringing it out was before he won the primary.  The next time will be after he’s inaugurated, and does something really anti-conservative.

  34.  I disagree. As Wombat wrote, there’s nothing to be gained by slagging Romney at this point, and pointedly if you are going to vote for him.

    At a certain point the incessant whinging is ego-driven vindictiveness or concern trolling. Those are not the kiddie pools you want to be rolling around in.

  37.  In fairness, Anamika is occasionally entertaining, especially during cricket season (=not baseball season).

  38.  If it’s the rule about saying nothing if you can’t say anything nice, we’ll get along fine. On the other hand, if your mom was Alice Longworth, we’re going to have some problems.

  39. Not my website, and I’m not attempting to do what Ace’s more effervescent morons did to him.

    Too bad though. There was a really interesting call in to Rush this afternoon.

  40. Of course he does, but I’m not allowed to explain why that is not as important as other considerations.

  41. Oh, I can do the arguemnent ‘against’.

    1. Tipping point or the variant TEOTWAKI:  In the next four years there will come something that will fundamentally shift the country leftward.  Suggestions for this motivator include Nat’l Health Care, hordes of illegal immigrants voting D, institutionalized vote fraud or All of the Above.The more hyper variant suggests that if Obama wins in 2012, by 2016, he will be President for the Duration of the Continuing Emergency, and the American Experiment will be over.2. We can simply compare and contrast Obama to Romney on a personal level.  One is a community organizer of no result; the other is a man who made tens of millions in a capitalist system.  One is extremely thin skinned; the other has taken the slings and arrows of the more extreme fringe of the Right with calm and courtesy.  It also seems likely to me that Romney is more intelligent, and just generally more able than Obama.3. Supreme Court Justice picks last for a lifetime.  Give Obama two more Sonia Sotomayors, and you must really hate America to do that.  Plus there are a lot of other lesser judges who while not as important, are still plenty important.4. Jimmy Carter, one term horror, caused evil we’re still cleaning up after, and that is decades later.  Obama is likely to be completely unrestrained in his second term as he will view it as a mandate, and a ‘use it or lose it’ one chance opportunity.5. If you don’t support Romney now, then you’re not going to have a seat at the table when he wins.6. Discussion and fighting are for the primaries, but afterwards we unite behind the Party.7.  Romney’s come out for some good ideas.  We, as conservatives like those ideas.  Romney will support them, and we need to support Romney.8. The Establishment likes Romney.  The Punditry, including most of the New Media, likes Romney.  Most of those who voted in Republican primaries voted for Romney.  Why be the odd man out?9. Who you going to vote for, Ron Paul (ahahahahahahahah!!)10. Romney has good hair.  Respect the hair. Fondle the hair.  But its not so good hair as Silky Pony because Romney is a good family man.

  45.  Oh, shut up. You’re still commenting and no one does a damned thing but tease you.

    You’re a pet. That should be enough humiliation for any adult human being, but not, evidently, for you.

  48. That was Ten Reasons to Vote in Favor of Romney.  In Support of Romney!!

    I am left thinking you read the first sentence, and went ballistic, OR I truly do not understand.

    Is it okay to say ‘Vote for Romney’ which is what I did?

  50.  You pretty much nailed it. When she/he/it/they get too far off into the ozone or abusive, I’ll edit or delete the comment.

Comments are closed.