Did y'all really think rDigital was not a right-wing troll?

[DanTex]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by krispos42 (a host of the Gun Control & RKBA group).

Why is it that every right-wing lunatic that comes through here gets the red carpet treatment from the pro-gun regulars?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1240189350

[Atypical Liberal]

1. Truth always outs.

Buh-bye rdigital.

[Warren Stupidity]

2. expect silence.

[ellisonz]

3. Proposal: Un-ban Hoyt, bongbong and bupkus.

At least they aren't right-wing trolls...

[Glaug-Eldare]

4. Hmmmmmm!

This is quite interesting. I hope rDigital will comment.

[Kaleva]

6. He can't comment. He's done been PPR'd.

[Glaug-Eldare]

10. What's that stand for, anyway?

[Kaleva]

14. Posting Privelages Revoked

[Historic NY]

55. We have to go back to pizza.

[Kaleva]

5. I didn't really know him.

Last edited Mon Dec 17, 2012, 06:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I didn't have any problem with his being blocked from here and I didn't have any problem with his reinstatement to this group either so I voted in the affirmative.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=163475

[rrneck]

7. I wasn't that worried about it. ntt

[fightthegoodfightnow]

8. Make Sure You Amend Your Post

....so it ties back into the Statement of Purpose or they'll find a way to lock this thread.

Statement of Purpose

Discuss gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence.

Try this

Why is it that every right-wing lunatic that comes through here gets the red carpet treatment from the those who claim to support the Second Amendment and the use of firearms for self-defense?

Just a suggestion.....trust me they'll try to lock this as off topic.

-------------

EDIT - SEE......I TOLD YOU. Check out Post 9. Got to know how to play their game.

[gejohnston]

11. using his criteria

Jerry Brown and Ted Strickland are right wingers because they don't have the exact same view on guns.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

12. I Suspect to Some They Are

.

[gejohnston]

13. given the current climate,

it seems it.

[holdencaufield]

9. How is this even remotely on-topic?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. this does not meet the SoP for this group.

[apocalypsehow]

16. Note that so far your OP has been greeted with nothing but anger and defensiveness from

our "pro gun progressives"*....

When right-wing troll (DU Admin's phrase) was allowed to come back into this group for an offense that should have seen him blocked from it permanently, he was greeted with loud hosanna's and accolade after accolade, "welcome back, rDigital!!!!11"

Now it's like, "rDigital who?" and angry, defensive "why are you bringing this up?"

Icing on the PPR cake of rDigital's posting history as a Gungeon hero.

[apocalypsehow]

17. rDigital carried the Gungeon vote for reinstatement in a landslide:

The voting will remain open for 24 hours, at which point majority rules.

Thank you for voting.

Regards,
Krispos42, Group Host
35 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Poll closed
Unblock rDigital from the Group
33 (94%)
Clames, ileus, Berserker, GreenStormCloud, Flyboy_451, slackmaster, X_Digger, oldhippie, Eleanors38, ProgressiveProfessor, trouble.smith, OneTenthofOnePercent, TPaine7, DonP, chibajoe, discntnt_irny_srcsm, Jenoch, misschicken, CokeMachine, Angleae, AnotherMcIntosh, Decoy of Fenris, Tuesday Afternoon, Trunk Monkey, petronius, sarisataka, gejohnston, KWorth, YllwFvr, Remmah2, hack89, JustABozoOnThisBus, ManiacJoe
Keep rDigital blocked from the Group
2 (6%)
Spryguy, DrDan
0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Hide usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117290298

The cream of our "pro gun progressive"* crop showed up to give their pal rDigital 94% of the reinstatement vote. Now not one can be found willing to come here and defend that vote, strangely enough....




*( )

Edit: let the Bold step forth and speak!

[fightthegoodfightnow]

20. I Didn't Vote but Will Respond

Must have been missing in action and taking some R&R for my gungeon sanity....open only for 24 hours...what was that about?

I oppose everything he stood for and have no problem telling him then or now. It comes as no surprise to anyone that many right wingers are pro-gun advocates and I'm sure there are others living here now. I could care less, although I know many do.

I tend to err on supporting free speech values (yes, I know this is a private site subject to censorship). Taking joy in his demise is silly. He is probably already posting again using a shadow name. The merits of his bad arguments have not changed and when it comes down to it, it's about the issue not whether we dislike someone. I would have voted to reinstate...group thinking usually doesn't compell me. Besides, he was such an easy target to respond to!

[rl6214]

28. This is why I usually won't participate in polls

So I won't be subjected to a fallout by members that disagree with my opinion.

[apocalypsehow]

34. Hey, I don't hold anyone to "guilt by association" just because they voted to reinstate

a proven right-wing troll: shit happens, and when you are peddling a point of view like "guns for everyone, all the time, everywhere and as many as possible in the maximum number of hands!" as so many of our "pro gun progressives" do on a LIBERAL discussion board, you got to take your friends and allies where you can get them. I understand.

What I don't understand is why those 33 good friends of that proven right-wing troll won't come back in here and defend either their reinstatement vote or their good buddy's posting history and behavior now - as so many of them did so vociferously before the old ban-hammer was lowered? The mark of a true friend is how you stand by him in adversity, no?

I'm sure rDigital would appreciate some comradely shout-outs down here in the Gungeon from his new perch over on an openly right-wing discussion board dedicated to trolling DU....c'mon, "pro gun progressives"! How about a big 'ole for your old buddy rDigital?

[gejohnston]

37. What's the phrase "fool me once"?

being a pro gun liberal or gun owning liberal is one thing. Being a RW, and befriending pro gun liberals while betraying liberalism and undermining responsible gun rights movement, is quite another.
If you are seriously think I'm going to defend it, not fucking happening. He betrayed all of us, "pro" and "anti" alike. Piss on him.

[apocalypsehow]

38. gejohnston, I have long respected you as a genuine progressive gun owner. There is no pretense

with you: I remember when I asked who was going to vote the Democratic ticket no matter what happened with gun policy in November, you were one of only two who stepped forward and said "I'm going to."

I think you are sincere in both your progressive beliefs and your views on gun ownership, the 2nd amendment, etc. I may disagree with you on gun policy, but I respect your input and could have a civil discussion with you debating our differences.

Thank you for your post.

[ellisonz]

41. I second this

Even with some of your bizarre opinions - I don't think you're here just to disrupt.

[ileus]

18. It's a conspiracy....I heard that chic from Canada was registering DU names.

In an attempt to get good poster shitcanned.


Of course what I heard may be wrong....

[gejohnston]

19. I have been wondering the same thing

what was that person doing there? If you wanted a purge, just create accounts in RW forums with the targeted usernames.

[DanTex]

22. I'm pretty sure he got banned from here before heading over there to brag about it.

I'm also pretty sure he'll be back. And you and the rest of the NRA crowd will once again welcome him with open arms.

[gejohnston]

23. NRA, naww

I take it reading the minds and hearts of new people are among your many claimed talents?

[Kaleva]

24. I think he was there before he got banned.

The poster who had taken the screen shot of rdigital being at CC said he sat on that info for four days and then saw that EarlG had banned him.

Edit: The screen shot was taken on the 13th and EarlG banned him today.

[DanTex]

25. Hmm. So he was brazenly trolling.

Unless someone actually set him up, which I doubt. I mean, it wasn't very hard to figure out that rDigital was a nutcase, just based on his posts on DU.

[rl6214]

30. What's CC?

Not familiar with those initials

[Kaleva]

36. Conservative Cave

[rl6214]

42. Ah, don't know if I want to really check it out

Thanks

[Kaleva]

43. I go there to read the funnies.

Basically what they say there about us here at DU.

[apocalypsehow]

29. Yep - he's over there claiming he has "10+" identities here right now. n/t.

[apocalypsehow]

21. So, you think EarlG got it wrong? Your little buddy rDigital is just misunderstood? Done wrong?

Why don't your write EarlG and tell him about your conspiracy theory? Go to your little buddy's transparency page (handy link provided) , click on EarlG's screen name and an option to PM him comes up: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=269047&sub=trans

Put your money where your keyboard is, and fill him in on what you "heard"....( )

[ultra103]

26. 0. Did y'all really think rDigital was not a right-wing troll?

So what exactly was he banned for this time?

[apocalypsehow]

27. Just spotted at the Cave place! I musta really gotten under Digit's thin skin:

rDigital
Probationary (Probie)


Reputation: +0/-1
Online Online

Posts: 10





Ignore


Re: DUmmies claim they've sniffed out a mole. Cave shout out
« Reply #7 on: Today at 12:23:44 pm »

It was amusing. I have about 10+ other accounts there. My best one is an oldie from 2008, ApocalypseHow. They are probably going to ban that one too. It made the antis look a little too crazy.

Funny stuff - I'm not going to link to that sewer, but if you go over there and look for a thread titled "DUmmies claim they've sniffed out a mole. Cave shout out," it's on the first page.

[gejohnston]

32. so he is saying he

had a false flag going trying to confuse you with his sock puppet? I wonder how many of the less rational on both sides are one and the same person?

[apocalypsehow]

35. That seems to be his strategy. The sock game is really an odd one, and you could be right that both

sides have some of that going on. I doubt it fools the Admins or MIRT though. I just found his post over there amusing: I knew I'd gotten under his thin skin here on DU when he followed me around DU for 72 hours alerting on EVERY. SINGLE. POST. I just didn't know how much until I saw that post over at the cave place.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

31. well, at least his socks matched. I find that odd.

[holdencaufield]

33. We have ways of dealing with unbelievers ...

[ultra103]

39. Was he banned for being on the other site?

or did he do something here?

[DanTex]

40. Is that you, rDigital?

He was an all-around right-wing nutjob. It's surprising that he lasted as long as he did.

[ultra103]

45. As I read the post

it seems like a lot of folks believe this guy was some kind of life member on this other site. Well I went and looked for myself as of today he has 10 or 11 post and from what I see they are in response to being booted from this site. I think a little more fact checking would be in order on some of the claims being made. Yea they are not very favorable to this site but my guess he might be a little angry over getting bumped just because he was seen on another site. I am a Union Rep - Full Time - We have the same goals as DU get as many Labor friendly Politicians (democrats) elected as possible we have rules and regulations and penalty's for breaking them but we don't have guilt by association and we do not follow the Mich & Wisconsin practice of throw everybody out of the house that does not agree with every single thing we say - Such things weaken our efforts and ability to move forward. You can not have a real debate if you only allow one side to speak. I understand there must be limits to what is acceptable in your own house but , if someone can get banned from this site because they were seen on another site - not good especially if nothing is being said about this site by that person. As far as negative comments that have been posted after being banned from this site, if it was just his screen name showing up somewhere else that got him banned - can ya really not understand why he is P.O.

[ellisonz]

46. "Yea they are not very favorable to this site"

I vote that as understatement of the month.

You seem a little too interested in this...hmm.

[ultra103]

47. No there not favorable

but if you were banned from any site because your screen name was seen on another site what would your opinion be toward the site that banned you. Not real sure where your headed with the too interested comment but if you knew my background as a Union Rep you would understand

[ellisonz]

48. That wasn't why he was banned...

He was banned because he was a right-wing gun scum misogynist nutbag.

Enjoy your stay at DU.

[ultra103]

49. There has too

be more to it than that. Seriously that's not a reason - that's like a republican calling us a bunch of bleeding heart liberals and thinking that enough to win an argument it's not. We have to be better than that to move forward

[ellisonz]

50. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[ultra103]

52. I guess there no sence in

trying to get anything other than the obvious

[ellisonz]

54. And you're gone...

"Returning Disruptor" - Skinner

[ultra103]

44. No Not rdigital

just asking what got him banned? Did he do something or was being seen on another site the cause?

[villager]

51. The question might be -- what small handful of Gungeoneers *aren't* trolls?

any of them?

[gejohnston]

53. I would say most are not

but that's my guess.

[krispos42]

56. Locking

Meta would be a good place for gravedancing.

Regards,
Krispos42, Group Host