Saturday, July 25, 2009

"Queen Bees" and "Invading Poland"

The following more recent Moderation of yours truly was born out the situation where on two recent occasions a forum member somewhere created topics to try and rabble rouse to get members they didn't like or get along with, permanently banned from membership of that forum.

Their second attempt actually succeeded ... but with an opportunity cost that included a long standing and well respected Moderator renouncing their own forum membership and moderating hat.

Obviously using the "ignore" function wasn't enough for the rabble rousing member, and unfortunately my suggestion to "piss off" to "go and invade poland" fell on deaf ears too.

Now as this particular rabble rousing forum member had made such a big thing about their advancing pregnancy (with a forum topic dedicated to it even) and had shared far and wide various problems that had cropped up on the home front, and because this forum member had also expressed in various ways their desire to be stress free, I penned the following as a reasonable suggestion that could see her more important concerns suitably dealt with and without having to make the entire forum conform to her way of thinking.

[userid snipped] said: "a call was put out a few months ago by ADMIN of this place, asking for donations to keep the board going - doesnt that give us mere members some kind of right to air a grievance or concern?"

[derspatz replied]
No.

Doing the right and responsible thing doesn't entitle such "rights" ... and such "rights" can't be bought either ... and nor should they be.

Also, perhaps it is time you started thinking a bit more about the unborn you've rendered yourself responsible for the well-being of and chose to clear off from this stressful and conflicting (etc, etc, etc) online environment that is so obviously provoking your ire and causing you so much grief and inspiring your repetative "wah, waa, waa"ing and desire to stomp your jackboots over anyone and anything that isn't to your liking, regardless of what anyone else wants or likes.

Why not use the remaining time between now and a certain precious birthday coming up to nick off from here and at last take care of all the crap in your much publicised offline life that has been allowed to slip and come back and bite, so that by the time the new mouth arrives to suckle, all is at peace and calm in your life ?

I doubt if anyone would mind if you took such a break, especially seeing how I suspect most would probably think it would be a good idea if only for the sake/wellbeing of the child you are carrying.

This is derspatz speaking frankly and sincerely here. I really don't think these forums are a healthy place for the unborn of a pregnant woman with a short fuse and the nature thus far exampled ... and I *definitely* don't think that the membership here should particularly change or moderate to accommodate one such as you as you are now, especially seeing how there are more suitable forums out there for ladies in your condition.

Why should we ?

regarDS

Obviously this sensible suggestion and solution didn't go down well with the person busy trying to get members kicked out, and nor with the rabble being roused, and before anyone could say "go and invade poland" three times quickly, poor little me was slapped with the following:

Date: 24-07-2009, 08:32 PM
From: [A Moderator]
Subject: You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Dear derspatz,

You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Reason: Harmful action against another member
-------
Personal attacks against other members will not be tolerated. You have no right to tell another poster when and how often to post, and certainly no right to bring their personal life into it.
-------
This infraction is worth [snipped] and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
[URL snipped ... and I've just reproduced it above anyway]

All the best,[location snipped]

And here is my reply I logged to that Moderation notice.

Date: 25-07-2009, 10:57 AM
From: derspatz
Subject: Re: You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

>> Dear derspatz,
Goodmorning [member names snipped] and/or the Mod Team. I'd like to log a reply for the record. No worries on the holiday, BTW. Tis your forum, your rules, and I continue to respect that even in the face of what I feel to be a mis-judgment this time around.

>> You have received an infraction at [location snipped]

Presumably because a certain gang up preferred to push a "report" button rather than actually properly read something. Ah well, my bad for not expressing myself a more clearly.

>> Reason: Harmful action against another member

I both disagree with and dispute that for I've not done any such thing as what follows in what is quoted below that:

>> Personal attacks against other members will not be tolerated.

Nor should they be, yet meanwhile we've got two threads [url snipped] and: [url snipped] created by a member here for the EXPRESS purpose of rabble rousing in order to get members they don't like, run out of here. A member who then used those threads to post [url snipped] and [url snipped]

Is it really a "personal attack" to calmly suggest to somebody who is so busy rabble rousing to get other members driven out that a well respected member of the Mod team renounces her position and membership here, that rather than try and drive out others, this place may not be the healthiest and best place for them right now ?

Seem kinda out of wack that an infraction should come my way on that.

>> You have no right to tell another poster when and how often to post, and certainly no right to bring their personal life into it.

I agree, which is why I've not "told" ANY other poster when or how often to post, ever.

The more posts, the better AFAIC - I'm all about trying to inspire more posts not less ... as opposed to the member(s) who seem to be more about shutting various folk up forever. I've also not brought anything into the online discussions regarding [userid snipped] in particular that she isn't busy sharing about herself and inviting comment on, complete with a thread dedicated to it.

Yes, one of my comments to what she is putting out about herself, questions as to whether this place is the healthiest place for her if she finds herself so in the need to run out of town other members who she chooses to have a problem with, just so she can have her peace and quiet and associated love-in.

Obviously the recent and repeated individually targetted upset [member name snipped] has brought to this forum lately doesn't sit right with me. Yes, it bothers me the kind of direction she appears to want to take this forum in ... and it obviously considerably bothered [resigned mod member name snipped] too.

I'm all for the accommodating of all points of view (especially when it leads to robust and lively debate and discussion), but these recent attempts by one person to drive other members out, is getting to be a real downer ... and are surely against Forum Roolz ?

That she also used both the [topic name snipped] and [topic name snipped] threads she created to basically suggest that donating to the upkeep of this free forum should entitle a say in its running, demonstrates at least to me where her mind really is.

The reign of "Queen Bee" in the Prisoner series springs to mind.

Anyway, for the sake of some peace and quiet while a few things die down, I'll cop this one sweet (and I suspect sweeter than if the ruling had gone in another more justified direction) and cheers for your time and patience.

I do like this place and I shall continue to promote and support it as far and as wide as my regular online travels take me, and hopefully it will never go down the path of exclusivity that the likes of [member name] seem to want to take it.

regarDS

[repeat of original message snipped]

Feel free to comment, but (as per usual) don't expect outright abuse to be published ...

regarDS

Monday, March 30, 2009

Posted by whirlpool Admin re: Broadband Forums

At last whirlpool mod "WarT" has finally managed to lie his way via dishonest, unjust, unbalanced, and abuse of authority type moderating (as this very derblat list continues to bear witness to) to having "derspatz" permanently banned from "broadband" forums and my voice silenced there on the subject of ISP Level Content Filtering.

And there was great rejoicing from the anti-ILCF pro-pr0n circle-jerkers ?! :)

Actually, they are so starved for a whipping-boy that they've resorted to manufacturing their own "turn on and off at will" devil's advocate. Heh.

Anyway, here is the message delivering the perma-ban. Apparently it was sent on Friday but as I rarely actually log on I didn't get it until a moment a go. Enjoy.

Friday at 5:42 am
Forum Ban
As per previous warnings and your inability to refrain from trolling and hijacking discussion in the Broadband forum, you now no longer have the ability to post there

Such bans are permanent


Sorry Harlen, I know that playing the D.A. is wearing you down but I can't offer to tag and take over from ya now. :)

regarDS

Friday, March 27, 2009

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36

Ok, now that I've done my pro Conroy and pro Bolt thing by way of balance here is a bit of free info that some might want to use as ammunition from the other side of things.

As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".

Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).

In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.

As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.

We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.

Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?

But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?

Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.

THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.

Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?

Glad to be of service.

regarDS

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36

Mark Newton writes...
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.


... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.

Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.

What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.

Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.

Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.

All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.

Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)

Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.

AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.

regarDS

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

derspatz writes...See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/

I am fascinated that you have linked Syd Walker's blog. He is almost fanatically anti-censorship.


Would you lot accept my message on this particular subject any other way ? :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

( @ ) Lillary ( @ ) writes...
(again, Derspatz excepted from that statement as he is an expert at playing with himself). *Oops, I suspect I'm about to have my post removed!


lol. solipsists r us ?

*I guess that makes you and me, both ... :)

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

Source?

And another source for you which details even better why the recent change to the Cleanfeed wiki amounts to vandalism.

See: http://sydwalker.info/blog/2008/12/08/having-fun-falsifying-history/

There are plenty of other examples out there if you care to look. Just put +lapin +curtailment +child +precious.

Now, who is going to undo the recent wiki vandalism in that regard ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

Source?

For starters, try: http://www.aapsonline.org/brochures/lapin.htm where the Rabbi pretends to be Hitler and writes "Finally, dear Julius, you will remember what I frequently said and wrote in Mein Kampf: "The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." I explained that as long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. It is truly heartwarming to see how well this lesson has been learned by the American government. In the name of children, incursions into the private lives of American citizens have been made that we Nazis would have gazed at with open-mouthed admiration. Does it matter that our bodies failed as long as our spirit still triumphs?"

Now THAT is where the wiki quote has been lifted from, with only a tiny portion of it being Hitler's words from Mein Kamf.

Thus, the wiki quote should be attributed to Rabbi Daniel Lapin, yes ?

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

The quote is indeed from Mein Kampf which was dictated by Adolf Hitler. Rabbi Daniel Lapin is not whom stated this quote.

Just fixed that up on the wiki


by now making the wiki incorrect. Go back a page or two in this thread and you will see another user has provided a DIRECT LINK to "Mein Kamf" and what Hitler wrote re: "the Child" and it is NOT what you have now just misattributed on the wiki.

What is in the wiki is a quote from the Rabbi, nothing more and nothing less and if you want to put something there that Hitler actualy said, then I suggest you actually look up Hitler's book and properly quote it.

Here is the link the another user provided a moment ago.
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=berhcMAjzZEC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=The+state+must+declare+the+child&source=bl&ots=KH_Nso_26V&sig=dds3AtPQXQAUCG2jBlovhEmhkbs&hl=en&ei=HOjFSf--HpSZkQX_wszDDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA72,M1

Now compare that to what is on the wiki and to what the Rabbi wrote and tell the forum who rightfully should be attributed for what has been recorded verbatim on the wiki ... and then go undo your vandalism.

regarDS

Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt34

The state must declare the child ... --Hitler.

A common misattribution for the quote as you gave, for it was actually penned by Rabbi Daniel Lapin. For future reference, see the quotes section of cleanfeed wiki found here: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Cleanfeed

regarDS
http://twitter.com/derspatz