DaveR was one of the best members of this site.I agree what he said might have been over the top. but Those comments were made 7 months ago.
The mods on this site have made their decision but I am hoping they are willing to let DaveR give his POV or a chance to apologize.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
DaveR ban
November 18, 2007 - 11:53 ET by shawn228Those in favor of bringing back DaveR can sign this as sort of a petition and state why he should b back.
I will start, those comments were taken out of context, just like Rush Limbaugh's "fake soldiers"
Of course DaveR should be
November 18, 2007 - 14:32 ET by bigtimerOf course DaveR should be re-instated....
The only person here who should of been banned long ago is lilliepad...oops I mean rainlillie, she is nothing but a cut and run leftist troll always has been always will be.
For me this is past sad that he got banned for something seven months ago....
Seems to me I remember lillie saying derogatory things against our military that were over the top....if I didn't have the flu I would see if her treasonous words are still here.
Dave is one of the best...too bad a leftist troll can win over a patriot who has been here a very long time.....
Talk about absurd! I am really disappointed here....
Btw...I read the thread where this all happened, lillie knew exactly what she was doing.
Past pathetic.
I don't think we should ban her at all
November 19, 2007 - 08:14 ET by sarcasmoUnlike Dave, she'd probably consider any ban a feather in her cap, and (probably-unlike DaveR) she'd probably find a way around it anyway. We need some examples around to illustrate what people mean when they say "hit and run troll."
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
i'm not big on banning
November 19, 2007 - 12:53 ET by TruthMongeri'm not big on banning people either - just certain language
i feel that a usage policy from the admins banning swearing, defamation, and also banning death threats would be helpful, and anything else that erodes decorum here of smacks of actual physical injury threats:)...
if there is a policy here already i can't find it - is there? link anyone? the guidelines are really up in the air right now - the style policy for contributors might work well...
}}---> Sanctimonious Truthie
November 20, 2007 - 05:04 ET by Cool ArrowJust a couple of days ago, you posted "Islam s*cks" althouh you spelled the word out completely.
So you're saying that isn't offensive language?
Plant crops - not questions
Reposted from the Fabio
November 18, 2007 - 14:42 ET by JasonCReposted from the Fabio (?!?) thread:
Technically, Dave got banned for responding to a drive-by post with
an elaborate murder fantasy. I don't read that thread and see it as the
logical, clever satire that some are making it out to be. You may call
that censorship if you'd like, you may point out the irony that he was
banned for a post that was in the service of proving a point about
censorship. The fact remains that there are a lot of ways to respond to
a post you disagree with, particularly one that was not making any
personal attacks to other NBers, and Dave chose a wholly unnecessary
one. He could have chosen to phrase it as "If someone comes to my house
and tells me what I can and can't say, I'll . . ." But he chose to
direct it personally at Rainlillie.
A few weeks ago, one of my posts was 'censored' when, in a paroxysm
of indignation, I referred to modern American political discourse as a
cluster----," minus the dashes. Not two minutes later my post had been
edited to [obscene language]. A little irritating indeed, but NB has
standards to maintain. Dave didn't just cross a line here, he
catapulted clear across it. I'll miss his recipes though.
I don't know what Rainlillie has said about the military, but it's neither here nor there. Nor do I think she is any more of a troll than a good 1/3 of conservative posters here.
If DaveR is reinstated, great. He is a strong debater and a generally valuable presence. I'll give my support to the project of this forum. But it strikes me as disingenuous to downplay the seriousness of the post in question. In other words, I support NB's decision to ban him and I will also support the effort to reinstate him.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Jason... Those words were
November 18, 2007 - 14:52 ET by bigtimerJason...
Those words were seven months ago.
Btw....I have been here a long time too, NBs has changed and refined alot for the better in some ways I suppose, we get national attention now which took a lot of work and of course we had to change how we spoke and posted from the beginning here,...but to ban Dave over a pathetic troll like lillie is outrageous as far as I am concerned.
She played Dave like a fiddle...she can push bottons to the point of madness, I have been there when she has.
Like I said this is past pathetic.
The wrong poster was banned.
bt
November 18, 2007 - 14:59 ET by shawn228I want DaveR reinstated ASAP, at the same time I do not see why RainLillie should have been banned, I never saw her call anyone names.
I see that we cannot access her name either, was it her choice?
Hi shawn... Thanks for
November 18, 2007 - 15:07 ET by bigtimerHi shawn...
Thanks for the forum thread by the way.
I do not know why her name isn't accessible anymore...
I haven't been here much lately because of illness, but I do hope it stays that way and Dave is reinstated pronto.
That is my two cents on the whole matter.
Go read it again Jason
November 18, 2007 - 15:20 ET by BlondeYou've got it wrong.
Dave didn't respond to Rainlillie on Friday....his response was made to her seven months ago...later on in that thread (7 months ago) he explained he was being "over the top" to make a point about free speech.
Rainlillie reposted Dave's seven month old comment (out of context, natch) in a drive-by on Friday. Dave got banned ...he wasn't even here to post.
So before you comment to me again, why don't you try to gain some understanding of the situation? You're assertation that Dave posted some kind of whacked out murder fantasy in response to Rainlillie's latest drive-by post is pure poppycock.
And just so everyone reading this thread understands what you wrote is pure and unadulterated crap, I am going to repost what I wrote yesterday....to which you replied and reposted here.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Oh Blonde, it's not crap at
November 18, 2007 - 15:42 ET by JasonCOh Blonde, it's not crap at all and you know it. I'm perfectly aware of the context of this whole scandalette.
What exactly was DaveR's redaction? Where he later said he was engaging in "over-the-top fun"? That makes it ok?
You failed to mention that that post also concluded with the phrase "Besides, I wouldn't shoot her right away. I would want to toy with her a little while first. :-^)"
Now maybe you think the emoticon makes it all ok, but it doesn't look like a redaction to me.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Go look
November 18, 2007 - 15:46 ET by BlondeFor the gaps in the original thread.
I didn't say "Dave's posts were redacted", now, did I? I said "several".
Emoticon, shemoticon, if you read what is left of that thread it should be clear enough even for you to comprehend, but then again, I'm probably mistaken.
Stick to your "guns", though. It's amusing.
Oh, and apologize right now for misquoting me. I didn't say (which you quote) "over-the-top fun". And I resent the implication, Jason.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Blonde, maybe you should
November 18, 2007 - 17:57 ET by JasonCBlonde, maybe you should re-read what I wrote. The over-the-top fun thing is what DaveR said. I realize now that I've misquoted him; he said "inserting a little absurdity." So, I apologize for misquoting DaveR. I never even implied that I was attributing it to you.
Also DaveR's is the quote about not shooting her right away, but toying with her first [insert smiley emoticon]. That's just sick.
So...no apology for you. My post had nothing to do with you, in fact.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Keep twisting Jason
November 18, 2007 - 18:17 ET by BlondeYour post had nothing to do with me? Both of your previous two posts started with "Blonde". Oops for you.
You were responding to me. Quit your prevaricating. If you weren't responding to me, all you had to do was "add new comment". And not reply to me. I'm not buying that misdirection in the least. Very lame attempt, BTW.
And I said "over the top" (twice). Which you misquoted.
And you blithely misread what I said, about "redacted" posts...I notice you've completely ignored that.
Get a grip, Jason. You're losing your composure, as well as the argument.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Oh the post on the other
November 18, 2007 - 18:38 ET by JasonCOh the post on the other thread. I wrote
"technically, Dave got banned for responding to a drive-by post with an elaborate murder fantasy," as opposed to your contention that he got banned because of a drive-by poster. You seem to want to put Dave's decision to post a murder fantasy - which, based on his later addition concerning keeping her alive "to have some fun", I don't believe was particularly satirical - all on Rainlillie. And I thought conservatives were into personal responsibility!
I don't know where you said "over the top", I was, admittedly (mis)quoting DaveR on that.
What exactly is your point about redacted posts? I didn't catch it. What did Dave say or do that so thoroughly expunged the murder fantasy part? Do you remember? His bit about keeping her alive to toy with her is still on the thread from seven months ago, so I hate to think of the brutal nature of the redacted posts!
Don't worry about my composure Blondie, I'm not the one demanding apologies for things that weren't about me. The day I lose an argument to you, I'll know it's time to hang up my spurs.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Keep twisting Jason
November 18, 2007 - 18:40 ET by BlondeSpin, baby, spin.
It's all here for everyone to read in black & white.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Haha, whatever B, way to
November 18, 2007 - 18:53 ET by JasonCHaha, whatever B, way to not actually engage with or rebut a single thing I wrote. You're wrong and you know it. Look at the link to the Imus discussion in April and tell me DaveR does not, in a post immediately after the infamously redacted one, say that if he were actually to do it, he would keep her alive to toy with her. Is that not sick? You and BT both imply that Rainlillie lured DaveR with her inflammatory rhetoric, like the sirens lured Odysseus, as if he had no choice but to indulge in the murder fantasy, despite the fact that Dave himself was one of the biggest advocates of personal responsibility-oriented Libertarianism.
I'd say "I'm done with you", but I'd hate to steal your line. So feel free to keep digging yourself into your hole, but I'm gonna get some supper.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Spin City, Jason
November 18, 2007 - 18:56 ET by BlondeDon't have to do any more "engaging" with you, Jason. Typing my point(s) again serves no purpose.
You continue wrapping yourself around the axle for all to see.
It's simple and plain.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Your points? I think
November 18, 2007 - 19:04 ET by JasonCYour points? I think you're mistaken. I had points. You had shrill demands for unwarranted apologies, and a blame-the-victim mentality toward Rainlillie.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Jason
November 18, 2007 - 19:09 ET by BlondeNot only are you reading impaired, you can't count.
Keep going with the thrashing-about liberal debate tactics, though.
It's amusing.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Cut and run, JC. She's
November 18, 2007 - 19:33 ET by balboaCut and run, JC. She's clammin' up.
Balboa
November 18, 2007 - 19:36 ET by BlondeQuit humping, puppy.
Sheesh...that's pathetic.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
See?
November 18, 2007 - 19:38 ET by balboaSee?
Bad puppy
November 18, 2007 - 19:41 ET by BlondeYou just got your nose rubbed in it.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
since
November 18, 2007 - 14:47 ET by botgUSnotUS came back as Eyecare
Tumbler came back as Tumbler2007
many, many, other trolls reincarnated
it's NBs nature to redeem
Dave needs the same consideration
Finally this going back to long past postings could set a very bad precedent of tracking and hunting long past debates to get people banned. An NB pogrom of sorts which i would see as being very negative and bad for NB as a whole.
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” -Chief Justice John Roberts
Dare R allowed to return? Free Stinker votes YES
November 18, 2007 - 19:47 ET by Free StinkerI agree with botg.
Trolls may sneak back in, but someone who seems to be repentant should be allowed back in.
How many times has hater come back?
November 19, 2007 - 00:25 ET by RJAnd many of his posts were deliberately vile and disgusting.
I recognize that, once brought to the attention ot NB, Dave's post had to be dealt with in the strongest terms, but if hater can be repeatedly brought back after time outs, then certainly a poster like Dave also deserves another opportunity.
This is especially true, since an arguable case can be made that, although he exercised poor judgment, he was not actually threatening another poster. It's understandable that, given her notoriously limited comprehension abilities, rainlillie didn't get the point, but surely NB can....and surely there is room for offering a second chance.
I too am saddened to hear
November 18, 2007 - 17:45 ET by alamojbI too am saddened to hear Dave R has been banned. I always liked him.
On the one hand Dave R "jumped the gun" so to speak. Poorly worded. Should not have written what he wrote.
On the other hand, the Speech police on the left are very dangerous. (I am not defending Imus by the way. He was disrespectful of those women. )
The speech police in Europe are further along in their goals and "free speech" is dying in Europe.
I agree with your entire
November 18, 2007 - 18:09 ET by JasonCI agree with your entire post, but I think to associate liberal control of free speech to the issue of Dave's banishment is a bit off-base (though I'm not sure that's what you meant). It was NB who decided to banish Dave, and certainly no one has the right to tell them they can't decide what constitutes acceptable speech on their site. They have a business to run and an image to maintain. This issue gets particularly thorny if only because not only is the issue of free speech caught up in Dave's banishment, but the reason for his banishment was a post in defense of free speech. It all sort of branches out into this complex system of 1st amendment quandaries. I think the best we can do is take the post in question in and of itself and ask "does this merit being kickid off of NB?" I maintain that it does.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Jason... It was seven
November 18, 2007 - 21:41 ET by bigtimerJason...
It was seven months ago...when are you going to get that through your head?
As I recall it was about lillie-pads rhetoric that had to do with our military, we were all outraged the more she stayed and trolled on, one of her rare times she didn't cut and run...nevertheless it was seven damned months ago.
Dave should not be banned for something that happened SEVEN MONTHS AGO!.
Period.
What does 7 months have to
November 18, 2007 - 21:48 ET by JasonCWhat does 7 months have to do with anything?
Rainlillie's post had to do with Imus, not the military. Whether she was irritating to you or a "troll" or whatever else, doesn't justify murder-fantasies. I'd just like to see you admit that Dave was out of line, and not blame Rainlillie for his indiscretion.
I'm all for Dave's reinstatement.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
I'm all for Dave's
November 18, 2007 - 21:58 ET by bigtimerI'm all for Dave's reinstatement.
Jason....
Good, then we agree on something.
I'm going to leave it at that.
My turn to get banned--Jason
November 19, 2007 - 00:44 ET by misterbillUp until your last statement _"I'm all for Dave's reinstatement", I was thinking that you hadn't changed at all since you came to this site.
I, frankly , although I have never done one, have fantasized about pushing a cream pie in Rainlillie's face. (No, I don't know what she looks like and I do not want know. )
So ban me, I am violent.....
Up until your last
November 19, 2007 - 08:53 ET by JasonCUp until your last statement _"I'm all for Dave's reinstatement", I
was thinking that you hadn't changed at all since you came to this site.
I guess it's a good thing I come here to argue and not to sit up and beg for approval.
Your cream pie thing isn't exactly analagous, especially since you're clearly being facetious. I've never seen RL do anything to deserve banning or to be spoken to the way she was. Her style of bombast and generalization is no more severe than a number of other posters here, it just happens to be coming from the other side of the aisle.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
I don't care for DaveR's
November 18, 2007 - 18:29 ET by balboaI don't care for DaveR's post, but I don't think he should be banned for it. Yeah, it was hyperbolic on purpose, but it was really awful, too.
Perhaps it's showing my age (or Dave's)
November 18, 2007 - 21:23 ET by sarcasmoAnd I happen to like Dave. One sign he may not have been entirely serious is when he called Rainlillie an "ignorant slut," but that assumes everyone else is ancient enough to recall the first episodes of SNL. And for the record, I find "Rainlillie" intensely-annoying (at least you stay around and converse, rather than constantly cuttin' one in the elevator and running out the door) but I don't even think SHE should be banned. Well, most days...
Too bad Dave didn't just say "Rain, you ignorant slut" and leave it at that...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I'm a big believer in
November 18, 2007 - 21:41 ET by JerI'm a big believer in second chances.
Also, maybe a process: Warning...Suspension...Banishment
Jer
My Two Cents
November 19, 2007 - 02:56 ET by candanceThis is a really complicated thing and I wasn't around when the comment was originally made, but I'll give my opinion on what I see before me.
I understand Dave was making a point, but it was done in bad taste and it came off really creepy. To my way of thinking, just because we can say something doesn't mean we should, especially to a troll who might look for any excuse to stir up trouble.
And I do agree with Jason about one point: sometimes there is a lot hatefulness on here from conservatives. I'm NOT condoning censorship. But we ought to encourage people to take the high road and not stoop to using ugly language to make a point.
One thing that annoys me is the over-the-top complaining like "that worthless piece of garbage is not worth a flying load of pig crap and should shut his pie hole before his fans realize just how stupid he really is." When I read stuff like that it turns me off because it's just so negative.
That said, Dave always seemed like a nice guy so maybe he could get probation or something and be allowed to come back?
card holding member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
DaveR ban
November 19, 2007 - 13:02 ET by shawn228I am not saying there is a conspiricy theory going on here but why did the powers at be not punish Dave the the first time he typed those comments? He was only banned after Rainlillie stated she was going the authorities?
I suspect it's because
November 19, 2007 - 13:11 ET by sarcasmoThat was the first time the comments were seen by anyone with the ability to ban him. If you run or co-run a forum like this, you're not going to be able to read every comment, so these things happen. Thanks for creating this thread, though. I doubt she'll go to the authorities, and again, I wish eveyrone had gotten the "ignorant slut" joke.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.