Off topic split from Interesting Data About Inflation and Millenials - 1970 vs 2017

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by dumbest man on earth, Sep 14, 2017.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,052
    We could start with the 30 infractions you received over the last few years..

    I mean, if that is not enough of an indication that you have a "blatant and repeated disregard for forum rules", then I honestly do not know what is..
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    How does it matter?
    Why dont you look at case to case basis?
    It was absurd on the part of Kittamaru to bring in DMOE excange with Paddoboy. have you or has she forgotten Paddoboy's disgusting abuses to James R and Rpenner? He was like that only, he had this. James R was goody goody to him, Rpenner was lollypopping him, and once they tried to show the place to him, he became belligerent.

    You and Kittamaru may be at the same Moderation standing, but Kittamaru has this deplorable habit of abusing power. He has done that in past and doing now again. He is not capable of any intelligent two sided argument, if that happens she bombards the opponent with her words, provokes the opponent, then infracts and locks the thread.

    I see nothing wrong with the opening post of DMOE in this exchange, he pointed out the apparent issue with the data mined (or copied or culled) by Kittamaru. Yes I would agree the style of DMOE was roundabout in highlighting this, but Kittamaru instead of realising what he was hinting at took off from there.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    DMOE,

    Very recently I have had a tantrum full of nonsense by Kittamaru. Her objection that 1. two body capture is not possible and 2. cooling of universe is not on account of thermodynamic reason but on account of reduction in photon energy density, was totally misplaced and I gave the references. But as usual without comprehending or even without reading he took off, when he got it back, he infracted me and locked the thread.

    The same game he is playing with you, so please stop it, do not feed her. Not worth it. He cannot be engaged in any meaningful dialogue on any subject other than Trump bashing.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,012
    Yes TheGod, we are all quite aware of your disdain for fact based debate and the site rules.
     
  8. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,278
    I think you mean "prejudiced". Prejudicial would mean influencing someone else's judgement process to cause them to be prejudiced. But actually it isn't prejudice on my part. When one has ample experience of someone's behaviour, one is entitled to assume it will go on like that. Whereas prejudice means judging someone before you have any evidence for how they will behave: pre - judice.

    Personally, I find the Ignore feature is very useful, as it prevents me getting annoyed by reading posts from certain people whom I know are highly likely to annoy me. That in turn prevents me from either being tempted into pointless arguments with them, or from giving up on the forum due to the incidence of dickheads. I can edit the dickheads out of the threads I want to read, and that makes the whole experience far more pleasurable. I pioneered my own use of Ignore with Magical Realist, who I find one of the most annoying people here. It was such a success that I rapidly added several others, of who DMOE was one, and then I found the forum much more pleasant to read.

    But it's a personal thing: many people are happy to read everything that is posted, even the vexatious and the cretinous.[/QUOTE]
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2017
  9. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,856
    Of course you could, Bells...you even utilize the word : we
    However, none of those 30 infractions have anything at all to do with the four (4) Posts that Kittamaru excised from the original Thread to start this Thread.

    Should it be noteworthy that both yourself, and your cohort, Kittamaru, were able to to completely ignore the fact that the Request was :
    May I humbly request, Kittamaru, that you provide direct quoted examples from my four (4) ^^above^^ Posts of "blatant and repeated disregard for forum rules" - and exactly which "forum rules" that they are "blatant(ly) and repeated(ly) disregard(ing)...PLEASE?

    Kittamaru, has yet to provide any direct quoted examples of "blatant and repeated disregard for forum rules" from any of my Posts #'s : #1 ; #3 ; #5 or #7...
    It would seem that you are not going to provide any, either.

    So...Bells, did you author your Post#41 simply to cast aspersions against me?
     
  10. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,012
    I already addressed this - the fact that it doesn't satisfy your personal brand of pedantic desire is, simply put, your problem to deal with.

     
  11. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,052
    Hmm.. what exactly is wrong with those 4 posts..

    To be perfectly honest and blunt. You are a troll.

    I read the thread that spawned this particular horror show of a split and what is clearly evident is that you troll. Incessantly and you do so in the most, well, obsessive manner. You nitpick.

    But most importantly, you troll.

    However, let's look at those 4 posts. You trolled. Nitpicked. Took his post out of context to do so. When he addressed your points in post #4, you responded by trolling and flaming and utterly failing to address what he had actually said.

    You want to know which forum rules that you have repeatedly disregarded? Rule I18.

    That's just for starters.

    And then of course the "condolence" message you kept repeating..

    It is trolling. Again, Rule I18.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  12. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,856
    So, Bells... you seem to have missed Kittamaru's Post #2 :

    Kittamaru reiterated his figures - in context - then answered(!?) my query about securing a Loan with No Interest, No closing costs, etc...by telling me to "Show me where you can get a mortgage with no interest, no closing costs, no fees?"!!!
    Kittamaru, was the one that supplied and used the figures in the OP - not me!
    Kittamaru was even kind enough to repeat his attempted "Strawman" - and Claiming/Stating that I had "said" it...
    At the very least, Kittamaru was being blatantly dishonest by Claiming/Stating that I had "said" it when I had made it quite clear that I was ASKING him about it!!

    Also included in Kittamaru's Post #2 :
    Kittamaru attempted to erect another "Strawman" by Claiming/Stating " : "none of what you said refutes the main point"...
    Bells, I never Claimed or Stated that I was "Refuting" any point!!
    Then Kittamaru continued Baiting, Flaming and Trolling me by Posting :
    "how convenient that you ignored the rest to push your preferred narrative."

    Lastly, Bells...Kittamaru had to end his Post #2 with even more Baiting, Flaming and Trolling by Posting the following:
    "How do you put it? Oh yeah... Grok'd!"

    Bells, you and Kittamaru are indeed Moderators on SciForums.
    Bells, you and Kittamaru work very hard to continually exercise those Moderation duties...

    Bells, why do you suppose that Kittamaru did not simply reply to my Post #1, by stating :
    - sorry 'bout that, but "These were direct pricing comparisons before adding in other costs, to keep things simplified."?
    Why do you suppose he chose to respond as he did...?
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2017
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,052
    He as addressing your post, point by point, Dumbest.

    Literally.

    You have an absolute history of flaming and trolling on this site. Your pedantic manner of posting, nitpicking every little thing just to pick an argument with people. You lack any ability to understand nuances in people's posts. For you, it needs to be absolutely black and white. You are unable to glean what people are alluding to or saying. No, you weren't really asking him about it. You made statements that did not read anything like questions. It just looked like you were being pedantic and nitpicking, which is how you always respond to people on this site. He addressed your points directly and provided the answers you were seeking anyway and you still chose to not only take what he said out of context, but you then deliberately chose to troll him about what you took out of context.

    I mean, you even admitted to not having a point in this discussion..

    So your role here is what, exactly? He was attempting to have a discussion. You inserted yourself into that discussion, derailed it with your pedantic trolling, so he split the discussion. And you just kept going and then admitted that you never really had a point to begin with because you weren't here to demonstrate a point. You just wanted to flame. That second sentence, Dumbest, is you admitting that you were just here to flame and troll.

    It is not his fault if you are unable to not be pedantic or understand nuances and context in people's posts, Dumbest. So trolling him and then the repeated "condolences" comments just amounts to flaming and further trolling. That is why you were issued an infraction.

    Perhaps you have a need of attention, even negative attention. Perhaps that is why you behave as you do on this website or heaven forbid, in real life. Whatever the cause may be, it isn't acceptable on this website.
     
    Kittamaru and exchemist like this.
  14. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,856
    • And here, yet again, you launch into a personal attack when your transgressions are brought to light... and you have the audacity to pretend you are a victim here...
    So, Bells you seem to be as sharp as ever.
    From my Post #3 - 2 Pages back :

    The ^^above quoted^^ was originally Posted before Kittamaru "split" the Thread.

    That was one of the "Points" that I was attempting to raise in the original discussion.
    Kittamaru was either unable or unwilling to accept that "Point".
    Kittamaru was either unable or unwilling to have an Open, Earnest and Honest discussion concerning that.

    So...

    Kittamaru chose to excise it...
    Kittamaru created this Thread...it would seem...simply to malign...

    Kittamaru made it abundantly clear that the only "Points" that would be accepted in THIS THREAD would be Kittamaru's incessant and unrelenting attack on a Member of SciForums...
    Bells, it seems that neither Kittamaru, nor yourself would allow me any "Points" in THIS THREAD...that is not what Kittamaru created THIS THREAD for...
    And, again it would seem, definitely not why you chose to join in...

    Bells, the only "POINT" of my Posts in THIS THREAD was to acknowledging Kittamaru's incessant and unrelenting attack on a Member of SciForums...

    And now, Bells, I get to acknowledge your attacks, also...




    ...after all, this is a Science Forum!
     
  15. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,012
    Amazing... in the same breath, you not only attack another member...

    You then have the audacity to pretend that it is you who is the victim here.
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,713
    There are no victims here. There are two parties both willing to spend their time writing paragraph upon paragraph of attacks against the other for the sole purpose of trying to prove themselves "right." You both seem to enjoy it for some reason. To each their own, I guess.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  17. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,012
    If only... But then, I guess, I would be a very different person.
     
  18. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    • This post was reported as inappropriate. Member has been repeatedly warned for unacceptable behaviour and is now warned for making himself a drain on moderator resources.
    Oh yeah, you are different person Kittamaru, not the soft and sweet persona of your pretty avatar.

    But one day, mark my words, administrators of this site will recognise and acknowledge that you are causing bigger harm to this place than the members you infract. You are absolutely incapable of handling dissent, if that happens you bombard the member with your verbose lengthy posts, force them to err, then infract and block them.

    And btw do not get buoyed by few sycophantic 'likes' you get, such people are available dime a dozen everywhere and this place is no exception.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  19. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    True, I agree, but a moderator is expected to stay away from such slugfest. If he does not then he should not exercise his power of a moderator, that's why IMO Kittamaru is at fault for indulging into word war first and then infracting the other side.
     
    cluelusshusbund likes this.
  20. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,302
    Nah, I can dis them both much much worse.

    *ahem*

    I have not read their spat beyond my cats intrigue. If I were admin, I'd ban them both for being too boring.

    Yes, I'm more interested in how cursor moves across the screen.
     
  21. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,776
    this is not in the right location. it should be in site feedback or open gov't
     
  22. Kittamaru Now nearly 40 pounds lighter. Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,012
    Considering you haven't even been able to get something as simple as my gender correct, I hardly feel any compulsion to give your critique of my personality any credibility.

    They may, they may not - if the owners / administrators decide that the rules that were written for this site are not worth enforcing, then changes will be made. Until then, I guess you'll either learn to follow them, or you won't - there's really no third option.

    Funny, I and others would say it is you who cannot handle dissent; you, who gets backed into a corner, repeating your same tired nonsense, then disappears when you get called on it... I do believe one of our administrators is awaiting your reply here http://www.sciforums.com/threads/modifying-newtons-first-law-of-motion.159510/page-9#post-3476102

    Or are you too afraid to show your face there after being called out, hm?

    And how can I force someone to err in a way worthy of infraction, unless they have already been dishonest, hm? If one is debating honestly and with integrity, there is no error to force

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Perhaps, dear neighbor, if one would simply post in good faith and abide by what is, quite honestly, a simple set of rules, then one would find themselves without issue.

    As for likes - unfortunately for your little assertion that I am buoyed by them that I don't pay them any heed, except when I find a post I enjoy and thus add my own. I am not so desperate for external validation as to need internet strangers to "like" my posts. I would say nice attempt... but it really wasn't

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Are they now? I guess you would feel that way - after all, everything about you suggests that anyone who disagrees with you is of a lower caste, barely worthy of your time. Even your very name is a grand example of your terrific ego, one which is, if your actions are anything to go by, quite easily bruised.

    A shame you have to insult entire swathes of an online forum of people you have never met in order to bolster your own self worth...[/QUOTE]
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,713
    Well, but you are. You are choosing to have such discussions with him. I sure hope it's because you enjoy them, because if not, that's some seriously self-destructive behavior.
     

Share This Page