The Banishing of Woodruff?

[BigBallinStalin]

It seems that carpetman brought out what actually lurks beneath Woodruff's personality. The ban is sufficient because the punishment hopefully encourages him to be less caustic. Even if an alleged troll is NOT talking to Woodruff, Woodruff tends to resort to ad hominem attacks.

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

[Symmetry]

It seems that carpetman brought out what actually lurks beneath Woodruff's personality. The ban is sufficient because the punishment hopefully encourages him to be less caustic. Even if an alleged troll is NOT talking to Woodruff, Woodruff tends to resort to ad hominem attacks.

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

Meh, not really dude, as far as I can tell, he was banned for the carpetman stuff, and not for any other reason. Few of us are free from the odd ad hominem, you've done a fair few in your time against my good self, and I've not reported them because I don't want to see you banned. Plus, of course, unlike carpet, I kind of assumed that you weren't looking to get me banned either.

In any case, if this was, as you suggest, a troll account that was set up to reveal the true Woodruff (which bizarrely, you also seem to suggest was apparent), it sounds like it was a reward for a long-standing set of grudges, achieved by cheating, no?

[BigBallinStalin]

It seems that carpetman brought out what actually lurks beneath Woodruff's personality. The ban is sufficient because the punishment hopefully encourages him to be less caustic. Even if an alleged troll is NOT talking to Woodruff, Woodruff tends to resort to ad hominem attacks.

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

Meh, not really dude, as far as I can tell, he was banned for the carpetman stuff, and not for any other reason. Few of us are free from the odd ad hominem, you've done a fair few in your time against my good self, and I've not reported them because I don't want to see you banned. Plus, of course, unlike carpet, I kind of assumed that you weren't looking to get me banned either.

In any case, if this was, as you suggest, a troll account that was set up to reveal the true Woodruff (which bizarrely, you also seem to suggest was apparent), it sounds like it was a reward for a long-standing set of grudges, achieved by cheating, no?

If what you posit is true, then it was clever ninja attack.

[kentington]

Was the owner of the multi banned? That is what I would like to know. Who cares if carpet was banned.

Also, I am more in line with Symmetry on this. If he had it coming then he should have already been banned. But against a multi who was obviously out to piss people off? I would think you would choose to be lenient in this situation and not in the others. Kinda backwards.

I do know what you speak of though BBS. I think it was something of 3-4 pages of him dodging what you were calling him out on and no one else was saying anything or paying attention. But my experience with him was as pleasant as with Symmetry, willing to discuss if both sides remain civil.

[daddy1gringo]

So who was carpetman a multi of?

[luns101]

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

This^

[tkr4lf]

So who was carpetman a multi of?

barackattack, I think.

[Ray Rider]

It seems that carpetman brought out what actually lurks beneath Woodruff's personality. The ban is sufficient because the punishment hopefully encourages him to be less caustic. Even if an alleged troll is NOT talking to Woodruff, Woodruff tends to resort to ad hominem attacks.

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

I don't want anyone to get a ban; that said, I didn't appreciate Woodruff's arrogant and demeaning attitude in most of his posts. Yeah, like Sym said, everyone has at times dipped into ad hominem attacks; but in the case of Woodruff, that was his style all the time. He did have some pretty funny comments at times, however, and sometimes made a good contribution to a debate.

So who was carpetman a multi of?

barackattack, I think.

Seriously? That's a surprise.

[Aradhus]

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

This^

Is a pile of utter fucking stupid garbage.

1, he had just been banned for however long, 3 months I think, returning in december. So how the f*ck is that a long time coming?
2 - If ad hominems and ducking and dodging questions which decimate a part of your argument are necessary criteria for getting banned in here, then just about every one of you fuckers, 'have it coming'.

[BigBallinStalin]

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

This^

Is a pile of utter fucking stupid garbage.

1, he had just been banned for however long, 3 months I think, returning in december. So how the f*ck is that a long time coming?
2 - If ad hominems and ducking and dodging questions which decimate a part of your argument are necessary criteria for getting banned in here, then just about every one of you fuckers, 'have it coming'.

1) He's been abusive for awhile. Most people don't engage in such long mean streaks.
2) Sure, everyone does that, but Woodruff has engaged in it much more frequently than most.

Everyone to some degree is an asshole on the fora, but Woodruff was banned for being an extreme asshole--considering his abusive history. He wasn't banned for dodging questions, which was my response to the claim that Woodruff is "... unfailingly honest." That's not true; he dodges questions when under pressure, but not many notice this. Just sayin'.

[Aradhus]

Well we don't all have your gifted talents when it comes to dishonesty, do we. So while the general listless herd might not know the difference between a thing and the lack of a thing actually beimg thre same thing, we've got you here to guide us.

[BigBallinStalin]

Well we don't all have your gifted talents when it comes to dishonesty, do we. So while the general listless herd might not know the difference between a thing and the lack of a thing actually beimg thre same thing, we've got you here to guide us.

I'm not implying anywhere that I'm some enlightened guide who can lead the masses to the 7th chakra. I'm simply explaining why Woodruff got banned and then defending my reasoning.

If you've got no good counter-arguments, then I guess crossing your arms and resorting to your kind of response is one substitute. It's not an effective substitute, but who cares, right? Some perceive value in insulting others--just like Woodruff, who does that more than most posters.

[Aradhus]

How the f*ck can I have a counter argument when you've presented no evidence to your claims which amount to, having a great talent at spotting things other people can't.

Woodruff got banned for flaming some asshole. I don't know what the f*ck you're talking about but I have a sneaking suspicion (your perception of) his dishonesty in debates around the forum had fuckall to do with him being banned.

[pimpdave]

he dodges questions when under pressure, but not many notice this. Just sayin'.

Plenty of us notice, just don't bother with him or pointing it out anymore.

[pimpdave]

How the f*ck can I have a counter argument when you've presented no evidence to your claims which amount to, having a great talent at spotting things other people can't.

Do you ever read the forum

[Phatscotty]

As far as his honesty goes, I've noticed him duck and dodge. He's great at making logical arguments, but he's good at dodging without many noticing. And if he's pressured, he will resort to "reading comprehension failure" with little to none explanation, or he'll resort to the ad hominem attacks.

We've noticed this about his behavior, so this ban has been a long time coming. It's not just his reaction to carpet man's posts. It's been his reaction in general to people over time which justifies his ban.

This^

He's pretty good at deflecting the dodging onto others too. I think he was the first to gripe on me about dodging questions. I like to think I enjoyed Woodruff on a good day, but there just weren't too many of those I guess.

The word I have always used was "vicious".

[pimpdave]

It's not like he was permanently banned. He'll be back to flip out and call us all "fucking retards" again soon.

And yeah, Phatsco, you dodge so much you should just change your name to Cassius Clay.

[Phatscotty]

It's not like he was permanently banned. He'll be back to flip out and call us all "fucking retards" again soon.

And yeah, Phatsco, you dodge so much you should just change your name to Cassius Clay.

LIES!

[Symmetry]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

[thegreekdog]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

I was not as I was not a moderator when Woodruff was banned.

I'm in the McGill usergroup with those two, yes.

[Symmetry]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

I was not as I was not a moderator when Woodruff was banned.

I'm in the McGill usergroup with those two, yes.

Cheers, have you dealt with any complaints from or against members of your clan?

[thegreekdog]

Quick question for theGreekDog. Were you in any way involved in Woodruff's ban? i note that you're clanmates with carpetman and barrackattack.

I was not as I was not a moderator when Woodruff was banned.

I'm in the McGill usergroup with those two, yes.

Cheers, have you dealt with any complaints from or against members of your clan?

Bullet Proof Bandits? No.

The usergroup McGill University? See question (original answer was yes).

Sorry Symm - Follow up question: What do you mean by "dealt with?"

[BigBallinStalin]

How the f*ck can I have a counter argument when you've presented no evidence to your claims which amount to, having a great talent at spotting things other people can't.

Woodruff got banned for flaming some asshole. I don't know what the f*ck you're talking about but I have a sneaking suspicion (your perception of) his dishonesty in debates around the forum had fuckall to do with him being banned.

BBS, lun101, pimpdave, and Phatscotty support my position. That's a coalition which covers nearly all political, religious, sexual, and geographic orientations. Granted, our coalition may come under fire for not meeting racial quotas, but hey.

[Neoteny]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

[BigBallinStalin]

Neoteny disagrees with you, so f*ck your coalition. I'm always right.

If I gave you a life-time supply of calcium, would you join my coalition?