WRT inconsistency, I've noticed that some people compartmentalize their online behaviors and exercise their "dark passengers" on some sites while appearing perfectly pleasant and normal elsewhere.
---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote : Unfortunately that is an ad hominem argument, not valid. Just say it: Jim's a damn bastard, seems to like power and control in a rather unsubtle way, and is, like most humans, woefully inconsistent in applying the principles by which he says he conducts his life. What is funny about the posts you mentioned is Jim had to censor himself, not Cardo, as Cardo simply reposted things Jim said here. ---In [email protected], <jamesalan735@...> wrote : What I am about to say may well have been argued to death given the number of posts that I’ve still to read, but here goes. Jim, you say you have a right to post to this group to defend yourself [see below]. I’m down with that. However, I see that four people in your group responded directly to Cardozy today about his post yesterday. But Cardozy can’t defend himself because you've taken away that right from him. How do you square removing Cardozy's right to defend himself on your group, but claiming the same right for yourself here? ---In [email protected], <reverse_archery@...> wrote : Excuse me, Alex? I kept my mouth shut as insults were slung freely around here for a month. If I want to get over here, and even things out, that is my right. If you and Rick do not like it, then please ban me, as I did for Cordozy. I am OK with you exercising your power as moderator. Your phony appeal for calm doesn't mean anything, when you and Rick allow the kind of language and trolling on here, that has made this place a cesspit.
