Hi, I'm Mick

[NineOneFour]

Mick wrote:

If hackenslash or a popular member creates an ultimatum, we will ban you and call you a troll.

Are you implying that "hackenslash" and "popular member" are mutually exclusive entities?



PS - when I was growing up in Oz (as a very non-religious protestant), "Mick" was the somewhat derogatory term used for catholics. For example, my Dad (not a religious man), when confronted by mormons at the front door, would say "No thanks, we're all Micks here..."

And now, for my sins, I teach maths at a catholic boy's school (they enjoy having a token atheist...)

Point granted:

If hackenslash or another popular member...blah, blah, blah.



Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

No, you're fucked. They pretend that you can appeal and seek information on your suspension/banning. But they'll ignore your emails and hope you go away. Eventually if we kick up enough stink here they might respond, but it will be a glib condescending dismissal and there will be no review. Bad luck, mate.

I don't know where to stand on this one. Even though I think their policy of permabanning on feelings alone is retarded, I don't know enough about your activity/behaviour there to know whether it was a great loss to rationality and debate. If you were a troll like Tyrannical, LionIRC, Hugin, etc., then I don't have a lot of sympathy. But I still think it is wrong to straight out ban people outside the usual suspension system.

Agree.

I specifically said I didn't think Mick should have been banned.

Apparently the nuance that one can think someone is trolling and should receive a warning, but not be outright banned is lost on Ratskep mods, most of the people in this thread, etc.

[Lion IRC]

Mick wrote:

If hackenslash or a popular member creates an ultimatum, we will ban you and call you a troll.

Are you implying that "hackenslash" and "popular member" are mutually exclusive contradictory tautologies?



PS - when I was growing up in Oz (as a very religious protestant), "Mick" was the somewhat derogatory term used for Atheists. For example, my Dad (not a religious man), when confronted by mormons at the front door, would say "No thanks, we're all non-stamp collectors here..."

And now, for my sins, I teach Sports at a catholic girl's school (they enjoy having a token atheist...)

Point grunted:

If hackenslash or another popular member...blah, blah, blah.



Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

No, you're fucked. They pretend that you can appeal and seek information on your suspension/banning. But they'll ignore your emails and hope you go away. Eventually if we kick up enough stink here they might respond, but it will be a glib condescending dismissal and there will be no review. Bad luck, mate.

I don't know where to stand on this one. Even though I think their policy of permabanning on feelings alone is retarded, I don't know enough about your activity/behaviour there to know whether it was a great loss to rationality and debate. If you were a troll like Tyrannical, Loin IRC, Hugin, etc., then I have a lot of sympathy. But I still think it is wrong to straight out ban people inside the usual suspension system.

Agree.

I specifically said I think Mick should have been banned.

Apparently the nuance that one can think someone is trolling and should receive a commendation, and not be outright banned is lost on Ratskep mods, most of the threads in this people, etc.

Really?
I disagree.

[Gallstones]

Skirting-around within the letter of the law whilst pissing all-over the spirit of the law is trolling.

You're a troll Mick; and also an utter cunt.

Fuck off.

Holding up a mirror is "trolling" to those who don't like the reflection.

[Gallstones]

I don't think I was an asshole. I just didn't join hands with you guys and cry along.

I outright said that bullying is wrong, that bullying itself does not build virtue, and that the blame belongs to the bully, etc. I approached that thread with a sort of Vulcan objectivity, and it was misinterpreted as callus apologetics for bullying.

I don't know if the admission of my bully behavior as a kid prompted the ridiculous treatment I received in that thread or not, but the herd was overly zealous in their depiction of me as some sort of a jerk. Indeed, there was a blatant insistence that whatever I said, I was a jerk.

The complaints about it were a fucking moronic, illiterate group wank of the lowest order. I read 914's feedback thread about it, then looked at the original thread. I ended up reading the whole thing because I was trying to find the point where you did and said the things you were supposed to have done and said. I'm still trying to find them.

It's fucking pathetic. So you have a different perspective from them about bullying. Big fucking deal. They could at least read what you actually fucking write and engage with it for what it is rather than reading their own fucking whiny PC prejudices into everything.

And now I'm saying "fucking" a lot. See what they've done?!

That 914 makes me ashamed to be a left wing liberal. He comes over all superior because he thinks he's taking the moral highroad, but he does so based on illiterate incomprehension of any kind of nuance, and moronic appeal to worthy-sounding soundbites.

Fuck you and your pineapple. In the ass. With a loaded bazooka.

And along comes the first glaring example.
How fortuitous.

[Gallstones]

>

[Gallstones]

Mick wrote:

If hackenslash or a popular member creates an ultimatum, we will ban you and call you a troll.

Are you implying that "hackenslash" and "popular member" are mutually exclusive entities?



PS - when I was growing up in Oz (as a very non-religious protestant), "Mick" was the somewhat derogatory term used for catholics. For example, my Dad (not a religious man), when confronted by mormons at the front door, would say "No thanks, we're all Micks here..."

And now, for my sins, I teach maths at a catholic boy's school (they enjoy having a token atheist...)

Point granted:

If hackenslash or another popular member...blah, blah, blah.



Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

No, you're fucked. They pretend that you can appeal and seek information on your suspension/banning. But they'll ignore your emails and hope you go away. Eventually if we kick up enough stink here they might respond, but it will be a glib condescending dismissal and there will be no review. Bad luck, mate.

I don't know where to stand on this one. Even though I think their policy of permabanning on feelings alone is retarded, I don't know enough about your activity/behaviour there to know whether it was a great loss to rationality and debate. If you were a troll like Tyrannical, LionIRC, Hugin, etc., then I don't have a lot of sympathy. But I still think it is wrong to straight out ban people outside the usual suspension system.

Agree.

I specifically said I didn't think Mick should have been banned.

Apparently the nuance that one can think someone is trolling and should receive a warning, but not be outright banned is lost on Ratskep mods, most of the people in this thread, etc.

Please instruct us vulgar and ignorant proles oh Optimus Prime.
Be the example of nuance you seek.

[macdoc]

Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

One wonders why you'd want to go back given your rather negative attitude towards the forum in general and the mods in particular and I'm sure a few members specifically.
It's not a democracy Mick.....get over it....move on, there must be a friendly CY forum somewhere you can trade self flagellation stories with.

Are you doing the penance thing???

Here ya go

Self-flagellation
Quote:
Originally Posted by mullenpm View Post
Today I was speaking with a neighbor who has a brother-in-law who had been a seminarian at one time. My neighbor, and her sister (married to the man in question here) are not Catholic.

My neighbor said that her brother-in-law left the seminary because he liked the self-flagellation that they performed and when that was stopped he no longer wanted to be there.

I was shocked, I will admit, because the fact that self-flagellation would be going on in a modern day Catholic seminary would never have occurred to me. I must be clear and say that this seminary was a Diocesan seminary and not an Order seminary.

She said he liked the very strict life; but I can't believe that he truly had a vocation if this was his excuse to leave.

Am I missing something here?

The only part that raises suspicion in my mind is that he left only after they ended self-mortification. I agree that it appears he didn't have a genuine vocation (though you can never really tell) if he didn't stay. His problem may have become that he was using self-flagellation as a prideful advantage in his seminary years. Some do this and think that by mortifying themselves, they'll be better. It gets into your head that you can't go without it, even though it becomes unhealthy. As for me, I don't believe I could ever take on this practice. I know the Carmelite Nuns in Valaparaiso, NE use whips, but I don't know how hard they hit themselves. Still, I wouldn't agree with the practice since I have a history of depression.

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=319454
Oh my nuns with whips....kinky or what....


I'm sure you can find plenty to abuse your nonsense worldview here with vigor.

[hackenslash]

wish for his death (hackenslash did this)?

Now tell the good folks what really happened.

[Agi Hammerthief]

There is a lot of [...] groupthink in RS.

oh, do tell:

is there anything more "groupthink" than (defending) religious dogma?

if not, methinks this reeks of hypocrisy

[macdoc]

Seems a feature of the theist meme proselytizers not to recognize ironic statements they make..

Latest from St. James the Mick defender...

Jamest

What I'm saying is of the utmost significance in countering the OP and undermining the mantras of people such as Kenny. Ask yourself why - if you're a rational individual - why you would want to close your mind to this.

accusations of closed mind from a theist.....the horror, the horror

Keep up with the passion play here
http://www.rationalskepticism.org/post2 ... 9#p2025396

provided.

[NineOneFour]

Are you implying that "hackenslash" and "popular member" are mutually exclusive contradictory tautologies?



PS - when I was growing up in Oz (as a very religious protestant), "Mick" was the somewhat derogatory term used for Atheists. For example, my Dad (not a religious man), when confronted by mormons at the front door, would say "No thanks, we're all non-stamp collectors here..."

And now, for my sins, I teach Sports at a catholic girl's school (they enjoy having a token atheist...)

Point grunted:

If hackenslash or another popular member...blah, blah, blah.



Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

No, you're fucked. They pretend that you can appeal and seek information on your suspension/banning. But they'll ignore your emails and hope you go away. Eventually if we kick up enough stink here they might respond, but it will be a glib condescending dismissal and there will be no review. Bad luck, mate.

I don't know where to stand on this one. Even though I think their policy of permabanning on feelings alone is retarded, I don't know enough about your activity/behaviour there to know whether it was a great loss to rationality and debate. If you were a troll like Tyrannical, Loin IRC, Hugin, etc., then I have a lot of sympathy. But I still think it is wrong to straight out ban people inside the usual suspension system.

Agree.

I specifically said I think Mick should have been banned.

Apparently the nuance that one can think someone is trolling and should receive a commendation, and not be outright banned is lost on Ratskep mods, most of the threads in this people, etc.

Really?
I disagree.

Well, I disagree.

It seems we are at an impasse.

[NineOneFour]

I don't think I was an asshole. I just didn't join hands with you guys and cry along.

I outright said that bullying is wrong, that bullying itself does not build virtue, and that the blame belongs to the bully, etc. I approached that thread with a sort of Vulcan objectivity, and it was misinterpreted as callus apologetics for bullying.

I don't know if the admission of my bully behavior as a kid prompted the ridiculous treatment I received in that thread or not, but the herd was overly zealous in their depiction of me as some sort of a jerk. Indeed, there was a blatant insistence that whatever I said, I was a jerk.

The complaints about it were a fucking moronic, illiterate group wank of the lowest order. I read 914's feedback thread about it, then looked at the original thread. I ended up reading the whole thing because I was trying to find the point where you did and said the things you were supposed to have done and said. I'm still trying to find them.

It's fucking pathetic. So you have a different perspective from them about bullying. Big fucking deal. They could at least read what you actually fucking write and engage with it for what it is rather than reading their own fucking whiny PC prejudices into everything.

And now I'm saying "fucking" a lot. See what they've done?!

That 914 makes me ashamed to be a left wing liberal. He comes over all superior because he thinks he's taking the moral highroad, but he does so based on illiterate incomprehension of any kind of nuance, and moronic appeal to worthy-sounding soundbites.

Fuck you and your pineapple. In the ass. With a loaded bazooka.

And along comes the first glaring example.
How fortuitous.

As one of the most unfair and stupid moderators to ever grace the internet, color me unsurprised.

Now, go get laid or whatever you need to do to get over being you.

[NineOneFour]

Are you implying that "hackenslash" and "popular member" are mutually exclusive entities?



PS - when I was growing up in Oz (as a very non-religious protestant), "Mick" was the somewhat derogatory term used for catholics. For example, my Dad (not a religious man), when confronted by mormons at the front door, would say "No thanks, we're all Micks here..."

And now, for my sins, I teach maths at a catholic boy's school (they enjoy having a token atheist...)

Point granted:

If hackenslash or another popular member...blah, blah, blah.



Hey: is there an appeal for this shit, or am I properly fucked?

No, you're fucked. They pretend that you can appeal and seek information on your suspension/banning. But they'll ignore your emails and hope you go away. Eventually if we kick up enough stink here they might respond, but it will be a glib condescending dismissal and there will be no review. Bad luck, mate.

I don't know where to stand on this one. Even though I think their policy of permabanning on feelings alone is retarded, I don't know enough about your activity/behaviour there to know whether it was a great loss to rationality and debate. If you were a troll like Tyrannical, LionIRC, Hugin, etc., then I don't have a lot of sympathy. But I still think it is wrong to straight out ban people outside the usual suspension system.

Agree.

I specifically said I didn't think Mick should have been banned.

Apparently the nuance that one can think someone is trolling and should receive a warning, but not be outright banned is lost on Ratskep mods, most of the people in this thread, etc.

Please instruct us vulgar and ignorant proles oh Optimus Prime.
Be the example of nuance you seek.

No, sorry, I'm not going to waste my time swatting flies. This thread, until I get bored, is it.

[NineOneFour]

Mick, seriously, you are lying about your posts over there.

Not the first whiner who got their ass booted out of Ratskep to come over here and bitch about it, and you won't be the last.

Seen it before, old news, no one cares.

[Lion IRC]

Yeah, 914.
I dont visit here regularly either.