Out Of His "mizar"y?


Recommended Posts

Apparently their only crime was that they didn't agree with the political views and agenda of the moderators. Sort of like what happens in North Korea. Standby for this post to be deleted in 3-2-1-

Pure nonsense.

"Their"?... Rozar just went for another handle.... He's not gone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if I were King, I'd have had him on my radar from the first moment I suspected he was the same guy that was kicked out three times before.... And then... I might have watched and hoped he wouldn't repeat the same sort of behaviour that made him so undesirable in the past... and even then, if he did... I'd probably have tried my best to give him the opportunity to detach himself from his previous personas and maintain some civility... but I think if he'd failed at all that, and then even hinted an acknowledgement that he was the same person, I'd have given him the boot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest rattler

something that is worth reading:
http://www.bubblews.com/news/159110-freedom-of-expression-is-not-absolute


Freedom of expression is not absolute

Submitted by scheng1 on January 22nd, 2013 –

Many of us enjoy the freedom of expression online and offline.

We like the fact that we have the freedom to express our opinions of so many things in life.

We pity those people staying in some countries where they cannot just speak their minds.

However, there is a limit to the freedom of expression, and that includes freedom of speech that we have taken for granted.

There is no absolute freedom in the world.

We cannot go around and tell people that we think so-and-so is dead or tell others that we think a certain person is a bad person.

We have to bear responsibility for our words.

We have to make sure of the fact before we say anything.

That includes our opinions of our friends, teachers, bosses and colleagues.

It does not mean that you can badmouth anyone once you are home. Freedom of expression does not give you the rights to tell untruth.

It does not give you the rights to air your opinion of others in public.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who's glad you're not gone for good, I've always found your postings to be a fair and valuable contribution to the discussions that go on here, and I certainly don't recall you ever posting anything that you couldn't say with your real name.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

They will only return (again) under another of the limitless supply of anonymous rocks under which to reside. It is ironic, but the 'threat' of expulsion really only covers those of us who stand behind our postings; I know I would not be able to return, because I don't choose to hide.

Interesting IFG.

A rather perfect example of hypocrisy that Mizar was trying to point out. "because I don't choose to hide" But in reality you are.

I don't know who you are & I don't really care, what matters is the message you are trying to get across & many of you missed Mizar's.

Slagging someone who can't defend themselves is extremely low & I'm not surprised who has jumped on the bandwagon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting IFG.

A rather perfect example of hypocrisy that Mizar was trying to point out. "because I don't choose to hide" But in reality you are.

I don't know who you are & I don't really care, what matters is the message you are trying to get across & many of you missed Mizar's.

Slagging someone who can't defend themselves is extremely low & I'm not surprised who has jumped on the bandwagon.

Hello again, Gatekeeper - My name's in my profile (IFG is my initials). Your accusation of hypocrisy is a little too opaque for me. Can you elaborate, or is it a generic characterization for those who do not agree with you?

Your own suggestion that people here (and I among them, I'd assume) cannot abide disagreement is quite ironic in the light our our last (I believe only) exchange ( http://theairlinewebsite.com/topic/400572-legaliiize-it/page-3?hl=kidding#entry1619058 ). I will leave it to readers to decide who is unable to countenance a difference of opinion, and perhaps who may be the hypocrite here.

Look, Gatekeeper. I don't want a pissing contest with you, but honestly, I have never in my life encountered anybody of any courage or integrity that behaves the way this individual has done, over three(?) incarnations here. Even before his eviction, I ceased to interact with, or comment about him, but the petty defamations a few of you aim at me and others, in your ... defence of him, have drawn a response. I have no desire whatsoever to ever discuss him again, in any way.

& BTW, unlike him (and so far, you) I do stand by everything I say here. If you want to call me a hypocrite, I invite you to do the same.

IFG

Link to post
Share on other sites

IFG, you don't need to defend yourself. I don't think anybody is taking his comments seriously.

And, we're beating a dead horse here, that's already been beaten to death and then some.

http://theairlinewebsite.com/topic/390111-the-banning-of-woxof/

Very predictable as usual & adds nothing to a balanced debate...which is missing from this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IFG, you don't need to defend yourself. I don't think anybody is taking his comments seriously.

And, we're beating a dead horse here, that's already been beaten to death and then some.

You're probably right, cp', but it just rankles. The suggestion that I would ever, in a million years, stifle a civil debate is just anathema to me: a certifiable PITA at just about every dinner table, bar or back yard where there's been a bone to pick at, more seriously in representational work for about 4 decades, where there were real consequences to the argument, and you bloody well had to respect, & grasp what drives the other side. These guys are farcical, and I should just let it go.

Your old link, with the familiar "supporter", recalled something about one of the NRA's favourite "researchers" ( http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost/doc/409524447.html?FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Feb+1%2C+2003&author=Morin%2C+Richard&desc=Scholar+Invents+Fan+To+Answer+His+Critics ) - Ya never know (& really, GK' is not as resonant to me as the other three), but - one could wonder if something similar goes on here (& then there were 4?) :rolleyes: ...

Cheers, IFG :b:

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is an interesting concept IFG, and something I hadn't considered. I wonder if Mary Rosh would have continued to post if Lott had been banned? In this case, I think with the almost OCD nature of the banned individual's postings, he/she would not be able to refrain from posting if he had another identity.

I've been doing a little reading on troll behaviour since someone posted an article about it a while back, and I found an interesting concept called the Karpman Drama Triangle.

http://therapyideas.net/triangles.htm

I think it pretty accurately illustrates why the forum turns into an angry chaotic place when a troll shows up, and why everyone seems to breathe a sigh of relief after they're gone. It's like the difference between a friendly neighborhood pub and a dysfunctional family reunion.

Re getting rankled, me too, but I try to keep in mind that the intention was to rankle me, and try not to fall into that manipulative trap.

Cheers, Jennifer

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.