General Discussion

randome

(34,845 posts)

159. Jesus Christ, get a room already!

Thu Mar 17, 2016, 07:07 AM

Mar 2016

He was none of those things from my point of view. He was a deliberate disruptor who dreamed of being something like a new version of Stephen Colbert when all he really was was just another DU poster.

He rarely contributed to threads that he didn't start himself for the sole purpose of getting under people's skin. Granted, sometimes getting under the skin is good but not when it's your sole schtick. Then it's just falling in love with the sound of your own voice as you try ever-so-hard to get more and more attention for yourself.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

173 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Dear Skinner, when may we expect Manny Goldstein back? [View all] Betty Karlson Mar 2016 OP

K&R. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #1

Or at least Third Way Manny jberryhill Mar 2016 #2

No. He wasn't out because of 5 hides. He was PPR'd. SunSeeker Mar 2016 #3

Bullshit. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #4

Ditto the bullshit. SoapBox Mar 2016 #5

3x Depaysement Mar 2016 #13

+10,000 nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #56

Bull. 840high Mar 2016 #8

. MohRokTah Mar 2016 #14

The same could be argued about more than a few who have returned from purgatory. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #16

Those MIRT members that planned off-site to get members hidden here should have been PPR'd polly7 Mar 2016 #28

And of course requests to do so were met with the sound of crickets. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #31

Yes. polly7 Mar 2016 #33

"I'd love to turn Bonobo or cali into the quivering little chickenshits they are." Scootaloo Mar 2016 #32

I have to admit, I have complete contempt for those people and always will after seeing their polly7 Mar 2016 #35

I have to ask: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #36

Well, I don't imagine the alert-stalking is going to do much, if so Scootaloo Mar 2016 #52

And this one ....... polly7 Mar 2016 #63

Wow. progressoid Mar 2016 #65

yikes, I need each and evveryone of these people on my ignore list. Cobalt Violet Mar 2016 #129

As far as I know, Skinner has never banned anyone for what they said off site. Amimnoch Mar 2016 #166

No, folks allowed back under the new rules were alert-stalked into time outs. Mannie was banned. SunSeeker Mar 2016 #48

He was banned for Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #50

That is not why he was banned. SunSeeker Mar 2016 #71

Well that is what is says on his transparency page. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #93

Actually that is why he was banned. Amimnoch Mar 2016 #167

No mostly they were jerks who earned their hidden posts by being jerks. Scootaloo Mar 2016 #67

The admins have obviously noticed a partisan bent to the hides. joshcryer Mar 2016 #91

I know that Manny was banned. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #125

^^^ What SunSeeker Said ^^^ Tarheel_Dem Mar 2016 #92

Sunseeker has been corrected on what (s)he said. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #96

And so have you. n/t Tarheel_Dem Mar 2016 #100

No, all I have seen are assertions, not arguments. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #105

I thorougly love Manny's sense of humor. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #123

And hence the question begs to be asked: when will he be invited back? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #132

Where is kelliekat? Alert-stalked away also. nt Jitter65 Mar 2016 #154

OOPS Omaha Steve Mar 2016 #6

Bring Manny back NJCher Mar 2016 #7

posted without comment or reply. revmclaren Mar 2016 #9

It speaks of overreaction: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #25

Very true Duckhunter935 Mar 2016 #155

You must have been lurking for the 2008 PUMA movement pintobean Mar 2016 #163

it certainly says a lot about the admins redruddyred Mar 2016 #39

No. He wasn't suspended because of hides. He was banned, pnwmom Mar 2016 #10

No shit he was banned. NO, he didn't deserve it, as much as he threatened the polly7 Mar 2016 #11

He was in very clear violation of the terms of membership. pnwmom Mar 2016 #15

Nah, he wasn't. polly7 Mar 2016 #20

If it's so obvious, then why are you disputing their decision? nt pnwmom Mar 2016 #21

Because I think it was 'wrong', why do you think?? nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #23

despite this the rule is bizarre redruddyred Mar 2016 #62

No he was not, quote where he was then Duckhunter935 Mar 2016 #156

He was PPRed. There's no coming back unless he personally pleas his case with Skinner. MohRokTah Mar 2016 #12

So did Trumad, but he is back for an encore. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #17

To the best of my knowledge, Trumad was never PPRed. MohRokTah Mar 2016 #18

Well, he was a Clinton supporter, so I guess a PPR was too much to ask even then. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #19

Oh brother! MohRokTah Mar 2016 #24

I didn't realize he was gone. I don't keep score. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #136

Trumad is back??????? JDPriestly Mar 2016 #131

So did CajunBLazer, by posting verbatim Jew-hate from a neo-nazi site Scootaloo Mar 2016 #26

Good point, Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #29

Was that poster PPRed? MohRokTah Mar 2016 #30

No, they were not, and that's kind of the point I'm making Scootaloo Mar 2016 #40

Then you have no point to make. MohRokTah Mar 2016 #61

Arbitrary rules that are oft allowed to be defied on personal bias is no way to run a kingdom Scootaloo Mar 2016 #86

You are free to leave if you don't like it. MohRokTah Mar 2016 #99

I'd prefer a community with stable, predictable standards of conduct from all sides Scootaloo Mar 2016 #109

I wonder whether your analysis is correct. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #128

We would certainly welcome it. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #134

Not All Bernie Supporters ProfessorGAC Mar 2016 #168

or L0oniz. or NYC_SKP Scootaloo Mar 2016 #22

Yes, they too, of course. Manny was just the first name that came to my mind. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #27

+10,000 nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #55

+1 MissDeeds Mar 2016 #118

Also. I would like to have them back. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #138

Wait, NYC_SKP has been nuked? n/t Turborama Mar 2016 #153

He was banned, not suspended. bravenak Mar 2016 #34

Which in itself speaks of a double standard. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #37

He was banned for a cause. Bernie or bust type stuff. bravenak Mar 2016 #41

Which during PRIMARIES is not disallowed. By the way: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #44

Skinner posted a clarification bravenak Mar 2016 #49

When "arbitrary" now means "biased" Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #53

This place is status quo bravenak Mar 2016 #68

Anything that favors your preferred candidate, eh? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #72

I am not emotionally tied to a candidate. bravenak Mar 2016 #76

Nope. nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #66

It is on his profile.nt bravenak Mar 2016 #70

See post # 57 please. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #74

Here bravenak Mar 2016 #75

Do you even read before replying? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #83

Not my call. bravenak Mar 2016 #88

But the primaries aren't over yet! Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #98

I know. bravenak Mar 2016 #104

OK, great. Seems a reasonable position. Would you then agree Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #107

Okay. bravenak Mar 2016 #113

I remember exactly what was posted. It was a bad ban. Live and Learn Mar 2016 #81

Do you mean to ask if I would have banned him? bravenak Mar 2016 #85

Not at all what I meant. But I do agree. nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #144

No. He was in violation of a clear standard. Read the terms of membership. pnwmom Mar 2016 #45

^^^THIS^^^ SunSeeker Mar 2016 #54

Ah, NO! Please see post # 57 Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #60

The standard is clear. The violation was not: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #57

You missed this part: pnwmom Mar 2016 #79

At the time, it was (and still is) uncertain Clinton would be that candidate/ nominee Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #87

It is only permitted if the poster leaves the door open about changing his mind. pnwmom Mar 2016 #150

You Better Believe It! Tarheel_Dem Mar 2016 #97

We don't believe it, because there is nothing to back up that claim. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #101

You know, you could take it up with Skinner in ATA. That's what it's for. I get that you're trying Tarheel_Dem Mar 2016 #106

Yes, this is applying public pressure. Well spotted. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #108

Good luck with that! Tarheel_Dem Mar 2016 #111

skinner appears to have trashed ATA Scootaloo Mar 2016 #114

Oooh, you just made me spray tea. (LOL) Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #115

Sadly, time to call it a night Scootaloo Mar 2016 #119

I'm in a different time-zone, so allow me to keep up the good fight. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #122

NSS!! nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #38

What? bravenak Mar 2016 #42

Lol! +1 BeanMusical Mar 2016 #82

It certainly seems that some TOS violators are arbitrarily ppr'd while others bbgrunt Mar 2016 #43

I have decided and it speaks of double standards. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #47

The establishment at their finest--much like DWS. bbgrunt Mar 2016 #58

The "establishment." pnwmom Mar 2016 #80

the above statement was brought to you by BIAS - Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #89

But if we set up websites of our own, it won't be any fun. JDPriestly Mar 2016 #139

This is a website promoting the Democratic party owned by an individual. It is not a Democracy.n/t pnwmom Mar 2016 #149

You are free to spend your time elsewhere if it bothers you so much. eom MohRokTah Mar 2016 #69

So are you, there's always the cave, right? nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #77

is that where Moh lives after earning six or seven hides? Scootaloo Mar 2016 #90

Probably. I'd guess mostly camped out in the hidden Grumble section. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #94

Yeah, I mention these things because I'd rather be somewhere else. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #78

Manny was milder than the Rude Pundit LiberalLovinLug Mar 2016 #46

People that don't get satire must have it rough in the real world. polly7 Mar 2016 #51

You don't get it. delrem Mar 2016 #59

F*CK David Brock, then. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #64

shrug. It's reality, Betty. Reality. delrem Mar 2016 #84

K&R nt Live and Learn Mar 2016 #73

Heaven forfend....Dieu nous en garde ! Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #95

It would be fair and even-handed. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #103

He's been banned (thankfully), not suspended. Different rules. Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #110

Banned arbitrarily. Different standards too, perhaps? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #117

Skinner IS the ultimate arbiter around here...thank god. Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #120

Ultimate, but even he has imperfections. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #124

There was nothing "arbitrary" about that decision. NanceGreggs Mar 2016 #126

Yes, it's clear that your side wants a monopoly on reprieves. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #145

Don't like the rules? Change forums! Arbitrary after 10~ years of disruption? Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #127

So you want us to give you Hell and a cold treatment too? Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #147

THE MANNY HATERS CAN FUCK THEMSELVES Skittles Mar 2016 #102

Manny is gentle, kind, witty, ironic, imaginative, and enriched DU immeasurably. senz Mar 2016 #112

Senz, the kindness of your every word is wonderful. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #116

Illegitimi non carborundum senz Mar 2016 #121

Haha. You appeal to the latinist in me now: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #130

Wow, I'm impressed. senz Mar 2016 #140

Actually, I have Horace's collected works on the bookshelf: one very think volume. Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #142

What psycho-babble codswhallop...Bwaahaaaaaa! Surya Gayatri Mar 2016 #143

LOL! Well, I tried senz Mar 2016 #146

+100000000000000 JDPriestly Mar 2016 #148

Jesus Christ, get a room already! randome Mar 2016 #159

He was a troll - banned for TOS violation. n/t Lil Missy Mar 2016 #133

Let me repeat once more: the rule is clear, the violation was NOT at all clear: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #135

It clearly helps Republicans. Get over it. Lil Missy Mar 2016 #137

Here is something for you to get over: Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #141

LOL... SidDithers Mar 2016 #151

Manny had an aversion to the likely... Mike Nelson Mar 2016 #152

Who says he wants back in here? LiberalElite Mar 2016 #157

God, the hero worship here is embarrassing sometimes. randome Mar 2016 #158

Manny is a racist. He was rightfully banned for his racist, and otherwise trolling. nt msanthrope Mar 2016 #160

That's not what he was banned for. Amimnoch Mar 2016 #165

Black posters were on the receiving end of that 'advocacy.' Targeted, alert stalked, etc. You msanthrope Mar 2016 #169

No argument at all there, and Bravenak is one of my most favorite people on this board! Amimnoch Mar 2016 #170

And people want his racist ass back.....unbelievable. nt msanthrope Mar 2016 #171

In order to expect that you'd have to think the rule changes were about fairness and inclusivity aikoaiko Mar 2016 #161

His ban was for something other than violating the "rules" covered in yesterday's OP by Skinner. George II Mar 2016 #162

Reasons as stated by Skinner. Amimnoch Mar 2016 #164

Where did Skinner say he's allowing banned members back? sufrommich Mar 2016 #172

Locking In_The_Wind Mar 2016 #173