posted on Oct, 28 2009 @ 05:07 PM
reply to post by Enigma Publius
I also remember something similar several years ago, maybe 2003 or 2004 regarding a member being banned. If I remember correctly a particular member
was regularly posting lengthy, detailed, and apparently well annotated replies to various threads which contradicted and ridiculed the topic.
According to my recollection the replies seemed carefully crafted to discourage the threads and disrupt further meaningful exchange. There also
appeared to be a disruptive pattern to the posts.
Not that the above warranted banning by itself, I also recall something being said about the members IP address and that the number of detailed
replies posted in a given time period and the amount of effort required to post said replies within the time frame indicated more than one person was
I did a quick search and could not find anything in the archives which was relevant. Perhaps someone else may remember. Of course, it is possible
that my memory is incorrect. Maybe one of the moderators could help.
I have been a member of this site for many years, and a regular visitor for many more, and I commend both the owners and members for their valuable
and necessary contribution to the knowledge available on the internet.
I also believe in the freedom of speech and the necessity of publishing opposing viewpoints. A spirited debate of important issues will always
involve facts and opinions presented and advocated forcefully, sometimes even fervently and with emotion. A sprinkling of humor and sarcasm is also
useful to provide perspective. What must be guarded against are comments which ridicule and discourage further discussion of ideas or deflect from
the issue at hand.
The T&C of ATS are necessary and well crafted and serve to promote civility and intellectual discussion. One who chooses to ignore them will possibly
find welcome somewhere else.
Over the years, I have observed instances where it appeared that a meritorious thread was being “derailed” by posted replies which did not add to
the issue, but seemed to discredit the ideas and discourage further discussion in an almost systematic manner. It could be individual differences of
opinion or it could be a concerted effort. Not that evidence of a concerted effort would warrant action, but, it might warrant disclosure.