escapefromstress said:
I have never seen a male operate as a drama queen on this level before. He's made every thread in the Lobby about him over the last few days.
Since returning from my one week ban on December 21, I've made one or more posts in 42 different threads. In at least ten of those threads, my contribution was minimal; I commented on the topic, and moved on..
In many of the other threads, I've made many posts. In some threads, I've made many consecutive posts, because they were after midnight EST, and no one else was here.
All of the rest of the threads with one or more new posts since December 21 have no posts from me, and I don't know what's being discussed in those threads; the topic didn't interest me, so I chose to not read any of them. If I've been discussed in any of those threads, I have no direct knowledge, or involvement.
I know I was discussed quite a bit while I was off for a week, but I had nothing to do with that. I read a bit of the forums, but not a lot. I can read and enjoy a thread, without needing to tell people that I'm doing that.
I've been very busy here the last few days, because of the pork poll election; last minute campaigning gained six
No votes.
Thirteen people, along with me, cared enough to say "We
don't want pork
everywhere".
The number of people who
want it everywhere doesn't matter, unless those same people think their rights are the only rights that matter. They're not intended to be excluded from the conversation, unless the only thing they have to contribute, or want to contribute, has no bearing on the topic being discussed in that thread.
papasmerf,
oldguyzer, and you,
Sarah, in particular, but not exclusively, are guilty of playing in other people's back yards, over and over, regardless of how your play affects the people already playing there.
To single out
papasmerf, he makes every effort to say nothing of substance in as many different places as possible, every day, so that his avatar cannot be missed, anywhere. If his contributions to the thread advanced the discussion, I would seek them out. Sometimes they do, but not often enough. In the vast majority of cases, they serve no purpose, other than to boost his post count statistics, to acquire rewards for himself, with no regard to the consequences of his actions. He sees in only one direction, and forgets what he has done, so he can continue to make the same judgement errors, over and over, and learn nothing from any of them. He's a
Seinfeld wannabe.
You've said I can't change him? That might be true. I, however, have no obligation to adapt to him. I can tune him out completely, and not lose any of my enjoyment of this board. If he can say the same, he should put me on Ignore, as well. Anybody can do that, any time, to anyone they want to filter out. I do it informally to all the people who post exclusively in threads I don't want to read. I don't have an obligation to read everything everyone else has to say. I read the posts that interest me, and bypass the rest.
I've read enough
papasmerf posts to know that the quality to quantity ratio is too low to mine the ore profitably, in time expenditure. I have more important things to do, than catch up on yesterday's fluff piece news, that was never important, it was only new unimportant stuff, not very different from yesterdays, and not very different from what tomorrow's fluff will be.
I gave
papasmerf a chance today, and he blew it, again, as usual. I gave you the chance to keep him from blowing it, and you declined. Maybe you just don't want to admit that my assessment is correct. If he's a likeable fuck up, that's great, you like him. To me, he's a fuck up, whether by accident or by design. You fuck up enough times, you get a pink slip, and severance. He doesn't get special treatment from me, based on union seniority.
If it isn't, give me an alternative one, logically consistent with the facts in evidence. Advocate the appeal of his conviction, and try to get it overturned. To me, a period of time past since an offense is not equivalent to remorse for one's actions, not when the perpetrator has every intention of re-offending at the earliest possible opportunity. If that's his fun, fine. Let him have that kind of fun with people other than me, because I'm not going to create new things for him to destroy.
If neither of us wants to bend, nothing changes between us. I don't have a 'time out' box, where he does two minutes of exclusion for poor behavior, and then goes back to the same schtick. If he wants me to recognize him, he has to change, because the status quo is something I can live with, but his shenanigans aren't.
