I recall two recent comments of worth: > Harry Veeder wrote: > > If political commentary is banned, why not ban religious > > commentary as well?
And from Stephen Lawrance: > The specific problem was caused by incontinent spraying of > political issues over every topic which was introduced. > Religious commentary, which has occasionally gotten a bit > out of hand in the past (partly encouraged by misbehavior > on my part, I admit), played no role, and has not been a > problem for a good many months AFAIK. > > FWIW I, personally, write about twice as many messages to > Vortex as I actually send. My general approach, for the > ones I don't send, is > > a) Write it > > b) Read it over > > c) Think about it > > d) Trash it after deciding it's too far OT or too snarky Good advice from Stephen. I should probably do that more often than I actually do. My own two cents: >From what I could see the "grok" persona was using the guise of wanting to engage in discussions of political ideology primarily as a preferred weapon of choice in which to slay his perceived enemies. I would speculate that this particular troll had some time ago come to the belief that he had acquired a strong arsenal of ideological weaponry that he felt would be capable of protecting himself from a slew of outrageous injustices inflicted on him earlier in life. Now that he felt "armed" (and also conveniently protected with an armor of anonymity) it was time for him to embark on his quest, his "crusade" in which to slay an unjust world and all the pathetic little creatures that inhabit this unjust universe, and particularly all the pathetic little creatures he perceived had done him wrong. Under such circumstances there is very little substance or learning that can occur, unless one is a psychologist studying variations on anti-social behavior. As far as trolls are concerned it's all about slaying windmills. And I for one am tired of being perceived as nothing more than another windmill to slay. You just go around and around... Changing the subject slightly, I see there has been a mini mass-purging of the Vort Collective, mostly in the form of temporary banishments. Make no mistake about the fact that Mr. Beaty, for better or worse, is God. Regarding matters of the proper care and feeding of the Vort Collective, Mr. Beaty can do as he sees fit without impunity. We participate at the pleasure of Mr. Beaty, the virtual god of Vortex-l. If we don't like Mr. Beaty's rules, his universe, we are free to leave it. No doubt some have done so. Others have been forcefully ejected while new participants arrive all the time. Like most wise virtual gods, it would seem from my perspective that Mr. Beaty has done a reasonable job of querying the Vort Collective, sensing its collective mood. It would seem that this virtual god is genuinely interested in creating a continuum where his subjects can thrive and learn from one another. This virtual god has set forth a few ground rules, such as the edict that Vortex-l is primarily a continuum for the discussion of scientific topics. Occasionally OT non-scientific subjects are allowed (tolerated) as long as such discussions make no overt attempt to overthrow the primary purpose of the Vort Collective. (I try to follow this edict very carefully since, technically speaking, I'm guilty of instigating many OT infractions.) This virtual god also seems to show genuine concern when his participants begin to complain incessantly about a particular individual's posting behavior. From what I can tell it seems to take a lot of prodding combined with many examples of infractions before the virtual god of Vortex-l decides to perform a divine intervention. And like the actions of most gods, when divine intervention finally happens, it tends to be swift and decisive. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
