Doc Mercer Revisited...

[nimue77]

Hmmmm....so it's not being moderated yet management is worried about doc? I guess management doesnt care about all of the other instances of the same things doc will supposedly be banned for that continue to go onj as the forum is not being moderated.

Since Doc's reinstatement, the forum has been largely left unmoderated, save for one post moved by me at someone's request, and TRS being suspended for 3 days on RobFunk's decision. The spamming and flaming you see in here right now would be moved if the forum were still moderated.

 

[BASEHEAD]

If "spamming, flaming or hijacking" is really such a problem than why has nothing been done to basehead for his raft of recent instances of such things. There are others I could mention too.

lol.....more accusatory conjucture without facts.....geez where have I seen that before.

Yeah Nim....Im sure they were all "editied"....your flames getting dim Nim.

BTW please make sure to check poor innocent punching bag Docs posts before the one you posted here....maybe post them.

 

[DarrylParsons]

How about letting Doc decide his own fate via a "3 strikes you're out" rule, say?

Here I'm thinking about unprovoked name-calling. If someone starts a political thread with nothing personal directed at any posters and Doc makes a post referring to any poster in particular or even rightie posters in general, a mod would come in and post "strike one". Same goes for threads started by Doc that refer to any poster in particular or even rightie posters in general.

Get to strike three and it's an indefinite ban.

If Doc is not the first one in a thread to refer to other posters in a negative light, then he cannot get a strike in that thread no matter what he says about anyone. And if the unprovoked negativity is directed at Doc, then he gets a negative strike. If he gets to strike negative three, then he stays indefinitely and any further emails to mods regarding Doc will get an automatic form-letter response referring to this arrangement. In this case, the complainer will have no choice but to lay the blame on whoever bashed Doc and not on Doc himself.

I think it's only fair to give everyone another chance and let them decide their own fates. If the rules are stated clearly enough, then it will not be the mods or management deciding what happens but the participants themselves, so whichever way it pans out, the Rx cannot be held responsible.

What do y'all say?

Not a single comment about my suggestion, pro or contra?

What's with you guys? Just skipping over any posts that make you think, or what?

 

[teazeman]

Daryll:

Have you ever heard "A ray of false hope" that's what i would call your idea, I like it but it would never work. If everyone here could act like adults we wouldn't need this idea to be brought forward.

 

[SENDITIN]

If Doc agrees to check himself/herself into a mental hospital for evaluation, then he can stay. Anyone who is warped enough to believe that Bush was responsible for sending a missile into the Pentagon needs serious help.

 

[xpanda]

Not a single comment about my suggestion, pro or contra?

What's with you guys? Just skipping over any posts that make you think, or what?

Not at all. Three strikes and you're out is already being applied in this case. Doc has been emailed warnings, had warnings publicly posted, and has been suspended three times (four if you count the banning reversal.) Giving him a three strikes and you're out rule now would be, imo, redundant.

Hello, stranger, btw!

 

[nimue77]

Anyone who thinks that boeings full of kerosense took down WTC 1 & 2 or that WTC 7 came down because there was diesel fuel stored in the buiding are complete idiots.

If Doc agrees to check himself/herself into a mental hospital for evaluation, then he can stay. Anyone who is warped enough to believe that Bush was responsible for sending a missile into the Pentagon needs serious help.

 

[levistep]

Not a single comment about my suggestion, pro or contra?

What's with you guys? Just skipping over any posts that make you think, or what?

Wilheim already tried that with Rightside and Doc. First it was a warning, then post review for 24 hours and then a week ban. They both graduated from that 3 strike school already.

Btw, are you Darryl P at the 2+2 forums?

 

[xpanda]

This isn't about political views.

 

[davidbird]

Daryll, first I saw this post. In general, I like your idea. Unprovoked name calling is just a crutch for weak minds. However, the rules should apply to all, not just Doc. I believe to the mods doc is a closed issue though.

 

[DarrylParsons]

Have you ever heard "A ray of false hope" that's what i would call your idea, I like it but it would never work. If everyone here could act like adults we wouldn't need this idea to be brought forward.

It doesn't matter if no one can act like an adult. The question is, who will be the first to capitulate, ie. act like a non-adult, Doc or his adversaries? We know one of them will eventually do so, so why not put it to the test to see who is stronger (or who is less childish, less weak)??

At least this way the Rx can't be blamed for the outcome and pretty much everyone will have to accept it, no??

 

[D2bets]

This isn't about political views.

How do you know what it is about for the "several" posters that have e-mailed you and Wil complainign about doc. You're darned right it's about his political views. To think anything else is naive.

 

[BASEHEAD]

Darryl....lets harken back to Feb 20 of this year:

http://forum.therx.com/showthread.php?t=351332




Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width=624 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=center>Originally Posted by wilheim
I am getting a sense that this forum is going down the tubes because of all this foolish bickering. I really hate to see that happening and quite frankly am not sure how to rectify the situation.

I am open to suggestions as to how we can get this forum back on track to honest, albeit slightly biased by political leanings, debate..

You guys tell me how to fix this - I promise to listen.



Thanks, wil..
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

BASEHEAD:
How about a penalty box or three strikes and youre out? No one cares about Doc threads (easy to deduce given the number of hits divided by the number of threads started) but its extremely annoying to have my post hijacked by this fucktard.I have yet, after months and months of posting here, to see Doc inject anything worthwhile into someone elses thread.

Why not only allow him to start one thread for his garbage daily and limit his responses to others posts to the subject at hand? If any of his so called supporters really care what he thinks theyll know right where to go.If he decides he wants to push his luck into the penalty box he goes.Or if he ignores the rules three times.....away he goes.

Ive seen this implimented on sports forums to limit all kinds of bullshit.

 

[DarrylParsons]

Not at all. Three strikes and you're out is already being applied in this case. Doc has been emailed warnings, had warnings publicly posted, and has been suspended three times (four if you count the banning reversal.) Giving him a three strikes and you're out rule now would be, imo, redundant.

Hello, stranger, btw!

Hi XP, long time no speak...I guess it's been a while since a common issue came up...

I dunno, if he's already got three strikes against him, then why is he not banned at this moment?

Judging from the poll numbers it would seem the issue is far from clear-cut, don't ya think?

 

[DarrylParsons]

Wilheim already tried that with Rightside and Doc. First it was a warning, then post review for 24 hours and then a week ban. They both graduated from that 3 strike school already.

Btw, are you Darryl P at the 2+2 forums?

Yes indeed that's me

As I mentioned to XP, if it's at this stage with a decent amount of sentiment on both sides, then don't you think it's a two-sided issue that needs some some sort of fair resolution?

 

[DarrylParsons]

Daryll, first I saw this post. In general, I like your idea. Unprovoked name calling is just a crutch for weak minds. However, the rules should apply to all, not just Doc. I believe to the mods doc is a closed issue though.

I don't get it. If it were a closed issue, then why are they putting it to us to help them make a decision?

 

[DarrylParsons]

Darryl....lets harken back to Feb 20 of this year:

http://forum.therx.com/showthread.php?t=351332



OK, cool,so you had thought of this idea before me. Great! That doesn't make it any less of a good idea. Instead, it's a question of details and implementation IMO.

 

[CAPNCRUNCH]

Split the Pol. forum into two rooms one for left leaning threads and one for the right. It would be interesting to see how long it takes the righties (who couldn't even handle Doc on ignore) to come into Doc's threads.

Then we will find out who just wants to start trouble.:nopityA:

This is a great idea and posters can be banned from one or the other exclusively.

 

[xpanda]

How do you know what it is about for the "several" posters that have e-mailed you and Wil complainign about doc. You're darned right it's about his political views. To think anything else is naive.

I know the political leanings of those who sent complaints. I can tell you with 100% certainty that 3/4ths of them support a good chunk of Doc's views. I agree with many of Doc's views, and I want him gone, too. If a poster acted like Doc in any other forum, we would not be having this discussion. Clouding it with accusations of partisanship is easy, I suppose, but it does work both ways.

How many of Doc's supporters, do you suppose, support him for partisan reasons, and not because they think his posting style is A-ok, which is the issue here? If you think, for example, that Blight should be banned for his Doc Mercer is a Moron thread how can you not also think that Doc should be banned for his relentless, months-long attacking of any poster who disagrees with him even a little bit, even those who have defended him and his views? Is it because you politically agree with Doc and oppose Blight?

Find me another poster who attacks so indiscriminately, so often, and to so many people. Please, find me one. Just one.

 

[davidbird]

Daryll, I hope it isn't a closed issue, but especially if a majority vote for banning I do think the mods will be anxious to accept that as final. After all, this is the 2nd Doc poll. There was less than half voting for a permanent ban and here we are voting again.