A resonse to the ad-hommers and feminist-purge supporters Archived Message
Posted by walter on May 1, 2019, 3:48 pm, in reply to "Why has not ONE person even asked Dan to check out the misunderstanding re Twirlip? "
For those seeking independent mind status who still claim (ludicrously) that "I trust Dan" is the issue: Harassing a moderator = asking questions about a ban? Are moderators not supposed to address concerns and explain decisions? I asked the whole board to say which if any of Dan's differing explanations for wv's ban they agreed with. Out of what must have been scores of posts, NONE did. Now in scene 2 of what is turning out to be a purge of the supporters of feminists, the bone has changed from wv to Twirlip. This time there is not even a semblance of a good reason for the ban. Basically Dan - clearly - got the wrong end of the stick in a heated exchange. He explicitly gave his reason, and it was based on a wrong presumption. But he has refused to change it; or rather, he has not had to even answer, because all of you willing to bury anyone in flak who raises it. When injustices like this are pointed out, decent people should be lining up to complain -instead posters have pretty much tried to turn it into a popularity contest. Ken's analogy about trusting the person who drives the car does not apply - in an atmosphere where people are routinely insulted and smeared, Dan has banned people for minor, perceived sleights against HIMSELF. Banned for...Dan. Dan ban. Easy to remember. So he isn't driving the 'group car' - get that into your heads. Dan himself says he set up this place as it keeps him sane. If the car analogy means anything, it means that wherever Dan drives the car, the group says afterwards that's where they wanted to go. That's exactly what you have said - you agree with all the bans, and - this is important - you DON'T CARE about the reasons. Now I asked specifically about the exchange that led to Twirlip's ban (and before that, wv of course). You're saying "I trust Dan" is your answer, even when he appears to be wrong? Tell me again why that's not cult behaviour on your part. Not to mention this thread - a polite enquiry about someone who has been accused of bad faith and banned leads to such a mindless and transparent attack of the Zombies. Just as Twirlip was piled into before me, and wv before him. (And no, I've nothing against transparents )
|
Message Thread: | This response ↓
- Why has not ONE person even asked Dan to check out the misunderstanding re Twirlip? - walter May 1, 2019, 10:33 am
- I blame you. - Ken Waldron May 1, 2019, 11:45 am
- A resonse to the ad-hommers and feminist-purge supporters - walter May 1, 2019, 3:48 pm
- "Goading, tightrope, slip, fall, repeat" - margo May 1, 2019, 6:31 pm
|
|