Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On 10 Jul 2001 12:11:21 +0000, George Wright wrote:
>
>>That is a terrible idea. I have posted a couple of Qs to this newsgroup
>>and lurked for a wee while, picking up hints and help along the way. I
>>have seen the 'debate' about 'JFK' spill over into real anger.
>>
> It's JTK not JFK.
>
>
>>Flame wars, trolling, etc. are pretty bad - and counter-productive - but
>>_banning_? surely this isn't yours - or anyone's - decision to take.
>>
> For a first offense, no. However, JTK has proven he has no desire to
> contribute in any fashion except to disrupt the newsgroup/mailing list.
>
>
>>The allegation [that s/he is] 'potentially causing unjustified doubt by
>>casual passers-by.' sounds _incredibly_ Stalinist.
>>
> "Unjustified doubt" is a bad choice of words. Better discription would
> be consistently disruptive posting with little to no relevant point.
>
>
>>Just ignore, filter, respond angrily, use a killfile, do whatever - but
>>_censorship_?
>>
> It's really not so much a question of censorship, but more a question of
> ground rules. Those that can't follow general use rules don't need to
> use. It's really that simple.
>
>
>>Isn't that what's so bad about MS? the fact that their
>>newsgroups ring hollow with people saying how wonderful OE..or whatever
>>is? If s/he - or anyone - wants to discuss Moz - good, bad, right,
>>wrong, isn't this the place to do it?
>>
> Yes, but the key word here is "discuss" which he has never (in any post
> I've seen) done.
>
Exactly right. He comes along, screams about AIM, AOL, "Maozilla
Politburo", and then when confronted with facts, he stops replying to
the thread and starts another discussion about the finer points of
america's largest ISP in some other non related thread
