Re: Trolls & other things...
From: Michael Baldwin Bruce (mbbruce_at_mighty.co.za)
Date: 03/08/05
- Next message: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Previous message: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Maybe in reply to: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Next in thread: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 7 Mar 2005 23:19:28 -0800
Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> Nightingale writes:
>
> >>>>> OK.
>
> >>>> Glad you agree.
>
> >>> I'm glad you're glad :-)
>
> >> Shazam.
>
> > Shazam?
>
> Suffering from reading comprehension problems, Nightingale?
What does your classic antagonism, laced with invective, have to do
with
classical music, Bruce?
> >>>>>>> I don't understand why so many of the trolls like to
> >>>>>>> follow you all over the place & cause trouble - judging from
what I've
> >>>>>>> seen here, it's undeserved.
>
> >>>>>> It's not just me; I've observed lot of trolls to follow lots
of other
> >>>>>> people around and cause trouble.
>
> >>>>> So have I, and I even had one, bisectional, follow me around &
cause
> >>>>> trouble for a while. I have not seen anyone with as many pests
&
> >>>>> stalkers as you have though.
>
> >>>> What you've seen or not seen is irrelevant, Nightingale. The
facts
> >>>> are relevant.
>
> >>> What I've observed is no less relevant than what you've observed.
>
> >> Incorrect, given that you're clearly unaware of the evidence I
mentioned
> >> to substantiate my claim. Lack of observation puts you at a
decided
> >> disadvantage, Nightingale.
>
> > Lack of observation?
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Nightingale?
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > I've seen different things than you have
>
> But not the evidence involving Joe Malloy, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > - why is
> > what you've seen any more relevant than what other people have seen
in
> > this case?
>
> Because I know that Malloy has been starved, yet keeps antagonizing.
> You would know that by now if you had better reading comprehension
> skills, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > Have you (or anyone) done a study on the number of pests &
> > stalkers attracted by different newsgroup posters?
>
> Unnecessary for purposes of contradicting Sacque's claim that
starving
> trolls will make them go away, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> So what are the relevant facts?
>
> >> The relevant fact is that Joe Malloy has continued his antagonism
> >> despite not being fed, Nightingale. Of course, I told you that
> >> already, which you would know by now if you had better reading
> >> comprehension skills.
>
> > My question was why so many?
>
> Your question is non sequitur. At issue is Sacque's claim that
> starving trolls makes them go away, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > Joe Malloy is not the only relevant fact.
>
> If you want to provide additional relevant facts, by all means do
> so, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> There are too many troll following people
> >>> around causing trouble & some people seem to attract more of them
than
> >>> others. If we could understand why they pick the targets they
do,
> >>> perhaps that would help us to figure out a better way of dealing
with
> >>> them.
>
> >> The key word here is "if", Nightingale.
>
> > Yes.
>
> >> Do you actually expect to
> >> find out?
>
> > I don't know. It might not be possible to solve the troll problem.
>
> Solving the problem isn't the issue, Nightingale, but rather the
> understanding of why they pick the targets they do.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > I can set up filters to avoid having to see some of the most
annoying
> > ones, but that's not really a solution.
>
> Nor does it lead to an understanding of whay they pick the targets
> they do, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> Don's suggestion of starving them doesn't always work,
>
> >> Glad you finally agree, Nightingale. Now, will you accept the
evidence
> >> I used to contradicts Sacque's recommended strategy?
>
> > I have never disagreed that sometimes ignoring them doesn't work,
which
> > should have been clear from my comment several days ago that there
is
> > probably nothing that anyone can do about Art Deco. My question
was the
> > relevance of your chosen example.
>
> Your question was answered long ago, Nightingale, which you would
know
> by now if you had better reading comprehension skills.
What does your classic antagonism, laced with invective, have to do
with classical music, Bruce?
> > Do you have a better strategy than Don's suggestion?
>
> Define "better", Nightingale; it would depend on what you're trying
to
> accomplish.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> and your digest doesn't either
>
> >> On the contrary, the digest works extremely well at reducing the
> >> clutter in the newsgroup, Nightingale. Would you prefer I write
> >> individual resposes to all 609 of Art Deco's postings, or all
> >> 581 of Michael Baldwin Bruce's postings, including the 64 he
posted
> >> in the last few hours?
>
> > No!!!! Have you forgotten the post I made over a year ago after
seeing
> > what a mess the individual replies to DrPostman were creating in
that
> > thread that was crossposted to several groups? I posted "Tholen, I
take
> > back every comment I made about your 'silly' digests. If you must
reply
> > to this nonsense, it is much better to reduce the clutter and put
it in
> > one post than continuing the threads." and nothing has happened to
make
> > me change my mind. The digests reduce the clutter, but don't really
> > solve the troll problem.
>
> Then why are you claiming that the digest doesn't always work,
Nightingale?
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > Actually, I'm a bit surprised that you are continuing with this
thread,
> > which is certainly off-topic, and probably considered clutter by
some
> > readers. At least the subject line is clear, so it's easy for them
to
> > avoid if they're not interested.
>
> It takes two to continue a thread, Nightingale, although in some
cases
> I am aware of the two aliases belonging to the same person.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> - it actually seems to encourage some of them.
>
> >> What seems to you is irrelevant, Nightingale. In reality, the
vast
> >> majority of the disruptive postings are the antagonists engaging
in
> >> their little circle jerk, responding to each other.
>
> > "Circle jerk"?
>
> Still suffering from reading comprehension problems, Nightingale?
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> > I wish they would go play somewhere else.
>
> Wishing doesn't always work either, Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>>>> You are erroneously presupposing that I actually read your
quote during
> >>>>> the brief time that I did not have the digest thread filtered.
>
> >>>> For something that is allegedly filtered, you managed to post
responses
> >>>> to digests 2453429 and 2453430, within the last week,
Nightingale.
>
> >>> Was the reason for that not clear from the responses I posted? I
set up
> >>> a new account when I signed up for a different server, and for a
few
> >>> days I didn't have any filters on the new one. That problem has
now
> >>> been fixed. The one digest of yours & the few replies that I
read made
> >>> it clear that I am not missing anything of interest by ignoring
that thread.
>
> >> And you didn't have the self-restraint from responding to the ones
you
> >> did see, Nightingale?
>
> > LOL! Not all of them.
>
> Obviously.
Obviously not, not.
> >>>>>>> Do you make New Years resolutions? I very rarely do, and
never announce
> >>>>>>> them - I wouldn't want people reminding me of them forever if
I wasn't
> >>>>>>> successful in keeping them.
>
> >>>>>> What does that have to do with classical music, Nightingale?
>
> >>>>> About as much as the rest of this thread, Tholen.
>
> >>>> Then why are you bringing it up in a newsgroup about classical
music,
> >>>> Nightingale?
>
> >>> I didn't start the thread, Tholen,
>
> >> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say you did, Nightingale.
>
> > OK.
>
> Glad you agree.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
> >>> nor was I the first to mention New Years resolutions.
>
> >> It was bisectional who did, Nightingale. That much you should
know by
> >> now.
>
> > In this thread, it was you.
>
> Only after bisectional decided to violate his New Years resolution,
> Nightingale.
What does your antagonism have to do with classical music, Bruce?
- Next message: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Previous message: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Maybe in reply to: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Next in thread: Michael Baldwin Bruce: "Re: Trolls & other things..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
