NationStates Jolt Archive

Are you entirely dim-witted? Calling you a DFL mascot is an insult to Jackasses everywhere...

J. Caldwell is one of the plaintiffs, dumbass.

Notice the bolding mascot boy? She says she is not an IDer, from her own mouth. Perhaps, as others have pointed out and you still don’t understand, because she's probably too much of a fanatic to think ID goes far enough for her, but your are a nitwit and a bald-faced liar who doesn't or can't comprehend simple linguistics.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10004987&postcount=119

I admit I'm not always entirely polite, but this is the entire text of his post (I omitted the article he quoted, but otherwise...). I don't think it's asking a lot for him to make an attempt to address the points of the thread rather than calling people names and telling everyone they don't know how to read or understand English.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10005854&postcount=121

Despite my, as well as other moderators warnings for you to knock off the insults, you continue to snipe at Jocabia and the rest of the people in this thread. This, along with a lot of your previous posts warrant this warning. Perhaps you'll get the idea that this is serious.

Greenlander: Official Warning for Flaming

Entirely right, no arguments here. Had it coming, in fact, you are being generously merciful. Except for that last highlighted part you quoted of mine, that was a returned quote back at him (the bald faced liar part) that one was true, he was being a bald faced liar.

Entirely right, no arguments here. Had it coming, in fact, you are being generously merciful. Except for that last highlighted part you quoted of mine, that was a returned quote back at him (the bald faced liar part) that one was true, he was being a bald faced liar.

It wasn't a returned quote. I called you out when you were misrepresenting facts (including removing the pertinent part of my comment and pretending like I said something other than I did when quoting me), the same facts misrepresented several times after being corrected on it multiple times. You called me several names including a liar when you noticed that I mistakenly said it was her lawyer that said something when it was actually her. And when you noticed it, I admitted it. Lying is intentially misrepresenting the facts. What evidence do you have that I did so rather than typed the wrong person? None. My evidence was that I would have to believe you can tell the difference between the part I bolded and the part you bolded. Regardless, it's not as if liar was all you said or the only insult slung by you to the various people in the thread.

Except for that last highlighted part you quoted of mine, that was a returned quote back at him (the bald faced liar part) that one was true, he was being a bald faced liar.Incorrect and irrelevant.

First, on the point of being incorrect, Jocabia did not call you a "bald-faced liar", so this isn't a "returned quote back at him".

Second, on the point of being irrelevant, if you think that someone else is misrepresenting facts, then state what facts you think are being misrepresented and what you think the facts really are. Calling someone a "liar" is borderline, but not actionable if you can back it up with a logical argument, id est "Premise A.... Premise B.... Premise C.... Inference 1.... Inference 2.... Therefore Person X is lying." Calling someone a "bald-faced liar" is emotionally charging it and constitutes flaming.

If you cannot debate without resporting to namecalling, then do not debate in the NationStates forums.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Game Moderator

Incorrect and irrelevant.

First, on the point of being incorrect, Jocabia did not call you a "bald-faced liar", so this isn't a "returned quote back at him".

Second, on the point of being irrelevant, if you think that someone else is misrepresenting facts, then state what facts you think are being misrepresented and what you think the facts really are. Calling someone a "liar" is borderline, but not actionable if you can back it up with a logical argument, id est "Premise A.... Premise B.... Premise C.... Inference 1.... Inference 2.... Therefore Person X is lying." Calling someone a "bald-faced liar" is emotionally charging it and constitutes flaming.

If you cannot debate without resporting to namecalling, then do not debate in the NationStates forums.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Game Moderator

Listen, I do avoid calling GL names and I would appreciate if he would do so. His constant insults and baiting are unnecessary. Please look at the last few posts of this thread. I don't want it to seem like I'm trying to hide what I have to say. I haven't called him any names. I have only talked about his arguments.

Here's the specific link where he again calls me a 'bald-faced liar'. Of course he also baits me -
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10010507&postcount=104

Fine

You are a bald faced liar again:

*snip*

I usually recognize that right off and tell him so, but there's been some whinny bitching in the mod forum that is threatening to ban me for pointing out what Jacobia is, so, I'm outta here.



But generally you can see that he simply will not debate with baiting and flamebaiting.

Here's an example of the flamebait -
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10009622&postcount=84
*Went to look in your hands to accept my ass back and found that you didn't have my ass at all, you were simply looking for your own ~ here's a map, perhaps Jacobia can help you, I have to ignore his post or else he'll report me in the Moderation forum (again )*

I would like to point out that baiting me after I report him to moderation is typical fair. Example -

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=454543

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10015084&postcount=128

Gentlemen, please...this is not a place to continue bickering. Something happened and it was dealt with. If being called "bald-faced" is the worst insult you recieve on this site, consider yourself lucky. I'm not a mod, but I think it'd simply be easier for you two to avoid each other. Think about it: if you knew each other in real life, I doubt you'd hang out together. Same thing applies to the internet.

Gentlemen, please...this is not a place to continue bickering. Something happened and it was dealt with. If being called "bald-faced" is the worst insult you recieve on this site, consider yourself lucky. I'm not a mod, but I think it'd simply be easier for you two to avoid each other. Think about it: if you knew each other in real life, I doubt you'd hang out together. Same thing applies to the internet.

We're adults and we should be able to act like them. We happen to both be very interested in first amendment rights and marriage rights so we encounter each other a lot. I'm perfectly content to debate with GL if he sticks the debate and avoids the personal attacks and baiting. I don't agree with him, but, if I limited my discussions to those I agree with, the discussion would be boring, limited and would involve VERY few people.

It should not be necessary for any two adults to actively avoid each other. It is also not necessary for an adult to resort to name-calling and/or attempting to bait others. Admittedly, his flames and flamebaiting are nearly always fairly mild, but they are all too common and often they serve to prevent cogent debate. I find a lack of cogent debate or worse the death of it to be far more offensive than any name could possibly be.