Self-righteous faggot sucks Obama dick now begs for help

Heh.

It's the same exact plan, except for those places where it's materially different. Silly person. Details matter.

For many conservatives, a legitimate goal of government interference in health care is help ameliorate circumstances where a bad case of affliction x could bankrupt the avg Joe, so it's good to take care of those extreme cases. The market in the employer-provide health care system the US grew doesn't allow for easy access to catastrophic, which would cover that; Heritage plan was limited to a mandate on catastrophic. Fuck the rest of subsidies and redistribution - if some people want to visit doctor a lot, and others prefer to eat right and exercise and fuck visiting doctors except when really sick, the latter shouldn't be force to pay for the frequent dieer. You want a bigscreen tv, visit the doctor less or work harder - I dont' really care what % of budget a family wants to allocate to wellness, or doctors, or whores, or shrinks, or nail polishers. Subsidizing fatties (and other people's personal habits re: diet, etc.) is just another in a long line of ill conceived subsidies, and Heritage will scarcely be found with plans that so badly skew social engineering and misplaced incentives.

Oh, and which other thread, Anna, there've been dozens?

The name is worse than the pic. Ya gotta wonder at the kind of person who'd pick a user name that implies that they gently cup a ferengi's cock and balls within themselves.

No one so much as implied that ACA was identical to the Heritage health proposal in every regard, you blithering pool of anal leakage. Hence the fact that we keep using phrases such as "basically the same general idea", "based on", "similar to", etc.

You mean the details you're unable to provide.

I want to see this catastrophic only plan. I actually looked for it yesterday when evaluating the level of bullshit in Tuttle's post, but google was not my friend.

Not that I have a particular horse in this race re: Castle or any other troll, but I will give my opinion anyway. I have never been afraid or reluctant to either engage or ignore a blatant troll online, and I can't imagine "he's an asshole" ever being enough reason for banishment. If it were, the internet would be one guy and a couple girls talking about their favorite crafting supplies. Are you really looking to turn this board into Pinterest?
Full disclosure: I know very well who Castle is. I have interacted with him else where both as friend and adversary. I once argued him into a corner where he had to either admit to the existence of life after death or state that a decapitated body was not deceased. Fun week that was.

But I am speaking in a general sense here, not as his advocate, and he has no part of my words. I came to Wordforge same as I go anywhere: to interact with interesting people. Including assholes and those who challenge and annoy. And the minute someone tries to "enforce" a shunning or tell me who I can or cannot talk to, I'm out. That isn't how I do things.

Is netiquette banning really what is happening here? Could someone give me a nutshell or link to what actual harm Castle caused? This is a sincere question. Thanks.

Basic reason for his ban was spamming. He would have been back weeks ago, but for his inability to acknowledge that and agree to tone it down. He made matters worse for himself by placing conditions on his return that are not suitable, so it would seem he doesn't actually want to come back. I'm not complaining.

Exactly. Neither party is the same as it was twenty years ago. Back then Democrats supported DOMA, NAFTA, Don't Ask Don't Tell and the deregulation of the banking industry. Today they seem to have amnesia about those facts.

We don't have a liberal party in this country.

We have Oligarchy and Diet Oligarchy.

Shouldnt bans just be a certain length of time and then expire? It seems sketch that the board requires a grade school approach of making a student officially apologize via a short essay. Also I dont see why the board needs to consider the demands of the poster himself. Simply ban then unban after the time period expires. If the poster chooses not to return then thats on him.

Borgs was considered the board's most deadly adversary, and he was let back.

It's not about the offender coming back...it's about feeding the egos of those running this place and trying to humiliate the person banned. It's actually quite pathetic on the side of those in power.

I wouldn't beg them to come back either.

There is a reason pretty much every forum on the internet has bans that just last X duration.

This.

If he was allowed back, we can allow Castle.

Actually, he is both begging and demanding. It's rather pathetic, but he does that to himself. As for the amnesty idea, I'm sure we'll do that again at some point. But we have no obligation to just expire the ban. And that's not how it has ever worked here, nor is it standard for all boards. At any rate, there is a helpdesk thread for this, you folks might want to take your complaining there instead.

I could care less and am not complaining. I have been in a position of administrative responsibility and am a firm believer in banning because of the rule of "fuck - that - guy - that's - why". I was simply responding to a post directly up thread I found troubling, something about forcing people to ignore certain posters etc. And since I know Castle, I took the time to ask why he is booted.

As am I.
There's all kinds of trash that should have been thrown to the curb over the years.
If that's what Castle's ban is, nut the fuck up, and admit it, stop trying to make it "noble", with a bunch of legalese BS.

Ted's ban is a "fuck - that - guy - that's - why", ban, and I wish the pretending around that would stop too.

This. Many times this.

But what you need to know about WF is that a certain tone was set early on that established certain unwritten rules specific to certain posters. Look at any interaction with Dayton for one example. The same pattern happens Every. Single. Time.

We can't call you the power tripping egomaniacs you are in the help desk.

Which all boils down to "banned because the Kewl Kidz don't like you" which I never did when I owned the place. Go down that road and you wind up with the owner and sycophants as the only folks left.

Well, and Packard.

Okay, what was Ted banned for?
I agree with the ban, but since his shenanagins were off-board, what was the legal case?

Whatever Lola wants
Lola gets...

Kinda depends on how fair and balanced a person can consider themselves. And let's face it: every ban ever, on any forum, boils down to somebody with a panel being sick of somebody else's shit. There is no other working model unless you want to bog your forum down with text wall rules pages, and then you just get TOS trolls trying to find loopholes. The only real effective way to police a board is to establish a tone, tell people "don't be an ass hat, " and expect them to conduct themselves accordingly. That includes the last resort of banning the incorrigible and unreachable few that simply can't play nice. No democratic discussion, no wringing of hands, just "good luck in future endeavors away from here, now GTFO. "

Stalking, borderline criminal activity.

Which could have been, and should have been, handled by RL authorities. I wonder if anyone actually did that?

Stalking Tamar's niece, who had recently registered here.

It was kept hush-hush to let the staff save face.

How could they, if no one knew where he lived? AFAIC, most of it was creepy ass PM via the board, and his lard ass was too heavy and too broke to book a flight to stalk GarishNiece in person.

A permaban seemed sufficient enough for that.

IIRC, it was during Elwood's reign, so you'd have to ask him. My bit was not letting him back when I amnesty'ed everyone else.

That's what we've been told in the intervening years. Of course, I find myself wondering how Ted acquired the information he needed to stalk her IRL.

Ted's proclivities were well known. Giving him access to enough details to set him up for a Gotcha! is/was a dangerous game.

Seriously? Tamar claims she can find anyone anywhere. She knew his RL name and where he lived. She also knew his proclivities and decided to play with him "for the lulz."

Because otherwise how would he know it was her niece? How would he find out her RL information unless someone who knew her was feeding it to him?

And again I wonder if Tamar ever called the police or just created a here "for the lulz."

From here the whole thing looked like a set-up. And a dangerous one.

I'm sure Tamar will come along and explain how totally wrong I am, maybe even call me a bint and evoke the flying monkeys meme. For the lulz.

Consi. ering all the shit months before with the staff flaming posters calling him out for the piece of shit wannabe rapist he was, for them to disappear him like that is fishy all the way around. Unfortunately, all the threads leading up to that got axed when the board moved servers in '07. I think wevre in agreement, just looking from different angles.

Also:

She mentioned it in a post once.

And from my recollection, no one did know anything about his ban until other posters insisted on asking and demanding answers, including you IIRC. There was no initial big drama.