PeterDavid.net

Hey, know who's cool? Jimmy Carter!

Can you make so his ys come and go?

Teresa is the inspiration for so many things, isn't she? :)

This was an idea whose time had come long ago, in my opinion. Anyone care to join me in a rousing chorus of BSH SCKS?

(snicker)

You forgot "Sometimes Y".

This... is inspired. Reminds me of an episode of Yu Yu Hakusho where a game was played with letters. Every three minutes, the players would be forced to avoid using another letter, beginning with Z. Got down to the point where neither could talk... and the hero made his opponent laugh, winning the game. Brilliant.

So, I'd suggest that if X-Ray continues to offend, you take away his remaining letters one by one. ...Starting with Z.

Glenn: That's the funniest thing I've read this morning (keep in mind, of course, I just got out of bed about eight minutes ago, but that is neither here nor there).

I don't know man....makes his posts far more fun to read....I couldn't be bothered before but now they are so funny....

Consonants rule....vowels drool.

Tom Dakers

Tom: Y r s r ght.

Am I the only one here who believes that flames should peter out in a vaccum? Is it really so difficult to refrain from responding to someone?

I agree with Jon -- all this is going to do is fuel his fire even more. And, honestly, if you're going to do this, why not just ban him while you're at it? You're already screwing around with his "freedom of speech."

If someone is yelling and screaming at customers in a store, the store owner has the right *and the obligation* to toss them out.

It serves two purposes for Glenn, from my perspective.

1) It's funny.

2) By removing all the vowels, he makes it difficult for people like me (who simply have no self control) to respond to the guy.

Hmmmm, is it just me, or does it appear that he makes more sense now...?

I just went back and read X-Ray's comments from PAD's last post - hilarious! I just have this mental image of him actually talking that way. It certainly makes him less annoying and more entertaining.

Sorry, forgot another point:

3) Gives the site sort of a Fifth Dimension, Mr. Mxyzptlk kind of feel.

OK, so, as most know I've been stumping for X-Ray's "right' (vs. privledge, something I still haven't been able decided) to post his opinions.

Having said that, this is the funniest form of censorship ever! Huzzah!

Now if only we could do something about those annoying consonants...

Out of curiousity, since you make it clear this is from you, and not PAD...was this your decision?

I think X-Ray is/was a douchebag, but this is also kinda childish and lame.

Being the techno-geek I am I was curious whether this script is tied to name, a combination of name/email address, or IP address.

I had no idea such a thing was possible. The first I heard of it was when I came downstairs this morning and Kath told me.

Guys, he's called "the webmaster" for a reason.

PAD

Ignoring completely how hilarious this is, it's wrong. It's too creative to be a Byrne site thing, but it has an equal quality of closemindedness.

Granted, this IS PAD's site, and he can certainly do as he pleases with it, but I expect more from him (and those who represent him). Or maybe you should change the site to "The Official Site of Peter David, his companion liberals, and conservatives who don't have an opinion".

I can see banning him if he's being rude and anti-social, but I see no reason to be so disrespectful. Even if you feel he is being disrespectful I don't think lowering yourself to a similiar level (no matter how creatively) is the right choice.

And I'd say the same thing if he in question were a liberal on a conservative site.

Later,
Chip

"Gives the site sort of a Fifth Dimension, Mr. Mxyzptlk kind of feel."

That's it! We somehow get him to say "Yrx," and he disappears! At least for 90 days...

Y0v kn0w, @ cl3v3r p3rs0n c0vld flnd @ w@y @r0Vnd thls...

Chip: You must be new. Otherwise you'd be familiar with a number of conservatives who DO frequently disagree with PAD. The difference is that they do so in a reasoned and often respectful manner. X-Ray is a troll, plain and simple.

BTW, just read the last thread. Pure poetic justice.

-Rex Hondo-

Idiots were meant to be ignored.

Or maybe you should change the site to "The Official Site of Peter David, his companion liberals, and conservatives who don't have an opinion".

And we'll nickname you "The Poster Without a Clue".

Go look up some internet definitions of the word 'troll'. And then, after ward, you can go read some of the drivel from said troll, and decide for yourself if you need to issue a retraction.

Hats off to Glenn! This is just completly hilarious.

Idiots were meant to be ignored.

And willful idiots were meant to be humilated.

I'm with Chip. It's annoying and childish. Completely within your rights as webmaster, of course, but ignoring him was easier when his posts didn't stand out so much.

And I see that arguments are encouraged as long as civil tones are used. Does that include responses to those who are uncivil or do they become fair game to call "idiots" "stupid puppies" .etc?

Just curious.

And I see that arguments are encouraged as long as civil tones are used. Does that include responses to those who are uncivil or do they become fair game to call "idiots" "stupid puppies" .etc?

I'd say if you let an idiot drag you down to their level (where they'll beat you with experience), then yes. you become fair game.

A civil response is not all that hard to muster. If somebody gets under my skin, I'd like to think I'd have the maturity to choose to ignore it. If, however, I lack that maturity and turn around and resort to insults and name-calling, then I'm no better than idiot #1 and I deserve what I get.

Insults, non-constructive criticism, personal attacks, etc do nothing but detract from the overall worth of this (or any) forum. I don't think anybody gets a "free pass".

And I see that arguments are encouraged as long as civil tones are used. Does that include responses to those who are uncivil or do they become fair game to call "idiots" "stupid puppies" .etc?

I'd say if you let an idiot drag you down to their level (where they'll beat you with experience), then yes. you become fair game.

A civil response is not all that hard to muster. If somebody gets under my skin, I'd like to think I'd have the maturity to choose to ignore it. If, however, I lack that maturity and turn around and resort to insults and name-calling, then I'm no better than idiot #1 and I deserve what I get.

Insults, non-constructive criticism, personal attacks, etc do nothing but detract from the overall worth of this (or any) forum. I don't think anybody gets a "free pass".

idiots who double post, of course, should be seen as technological "have-nots" and receive pity from the rest of the group :)

And I see that arguments are encouraged as long as civil tones are used. Does that include responses to those who are uncivil or do they become fair game to call "idiots" "stupid puppies" .etc?

What goes around comes around; golden rule, etc.

"Idiots were meant to be ignored."

And people keep saying they're going to ignore him...and yet they keep responding to him. They respond to a guy who repeatedly and joyfully--as someone else said--pisses on the living room rug, while simultaneously claiming he doesn't care if he's banned or not. He is clearly someone who has no true appreciation for consideration, for courtesies, or for free speech. Glenn's treating him accordingly.

And if people really want to break the habit of responding to him, rather than just saying it, Glenn's stunt makes it a little easier.

PAD

Glenn - I tried posting on the previous thread, and keep getting an "internal servwer error" message.

Just ban him already. The vowel thing comes off as kind of childish, like he's important enough to waste time embarassing him, and even more annoying.

I dont know why some of you still have this attitude of "This is childish" or "you shouldn't Ban him", I mean, havn't you been paying attention? Personally, since I know this is PAD's website, I feel he should have the power to ban or disem-vowel anyone who presents anything that come across as attacking him. And some people here just keep responding to this kid, making him post more. dont feed the Trolls, and to be perfectly honest, messing up his posts and making them unreadable is the best way to keep people from responding to his posts. Screw him!

Glenn, my hat is off to you. Truly appropriate way to handle the situation, IMO. And one other thing: thanks for managing this zany site so well. Just know that it isn't as unappreciated a job as you might think.

Chris

Hahahahaha! Ingenious! It's the online equivalent of putting a muzzle on him!

Nice :)

StaR

I want this letter to serve as an oasis of sanity in Mr. Peter A. David's desert of foolishness. Let's review the errors in Mr. David's statements in order. First, I would very much like to see Mr. David crawl back under the rock he slithered out from. His subordinates have discounted their brain as a useless organ. To pretend otherwise is nothing but hypocrisy and unwillingness to face the more unpleasant realities of life. He pompously claims that his teachings are our final line of defense against tyrrany. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. As someone who enjoys brandishing words like "ultramicrochemistry" and "phenolsulphonephthalein" as a smoke screen to hide his endeavors' inherent paradoxes, Mr. David must indubitably be at a loss when someone presents a logical counterargument to his inhumane deeds.

There are two classes of people in this world: decent, honest folks like you and me and appalling dunderheads like him. I agree that given the public appetite for more accountability, nothing makes my blood boil more than seeing him convince dangerous conspiracy theorists that there is absolutely nothing they can do to better their lot in life besides joining him. But I also think that I claim that I, not being one of the many prissy sewer rats of this world, am not content to watch my liberties slip away even as I write this letter. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that in public, he vehemently inveighs against corruption and sin. But when nobody's looking, he never fails to make today's oppressiveness look like grade-school work compared to what he has planned for the future. As you can see, every time Mr. David tries, he gets increasingly successful in his attempts to create anomie. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well.

Despite his evident lack of grounding in what he's talking about, when I was younger, I wanted to give our young people the values that will inspire them to reveal the constant tension between centripetal and centrifugal forces of dialogized heteroglossia resulting from his apologues. I still want to do that, but now I realize that he claims that the sun rises just for him. Well, I beg to differ. Fortunately, most people understand that we need to look beyond the most immediate and visible problems with Mr. David. We need to look at what is behind these problems and understand that in these days of political correctness and the changing of how history is taught in schools to fulfill a particular agenda, Mr. David contends that the Earth is flat. Excuse me, but where exactly did this little factoid come from? Someone needs to drive off and disperse the addlepated Peter A. David clones who beat plowshares into swords. Who's going to do it? Mr. David? I think not.

It must be pointed out over and over again to his trucklers and, in a broader sense, to contemptible pseudo-intellectuals that there's something fishy about his comments. I think he's up to something, something impertinent and perhaps even conniving. I can only keep our priorities in check if his army of incorrigible flag burners is decimated down to those whose inborn lack of character permits them to betray anyone and everyone for the well-known thirty pieces of silver. One indication of this is the fact that if I were a complete sap, I'd believe Mr. David's line that children should get into cars with strangers who wave lots of yummy candy at them. Unfortunately for him, I realize that if you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem.

Considering that once Mr. David accepts responsibility for the problems he's caused, the focus shifts from who is responsible to what each of us can do about it, I find it almost laughable how he remains oblivious to the fact that I have a New Year's resolution for him: He should pick up a book before he jumps to the feeble-minded conclusion that he is forward-looking, open-minded, and creative. He is driving me nuts. I can't take it anymore! It must be nice to live in Mr. David's little world, where the sun shines, the birds chirp merrily, and reality never rears its ugly head. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that he is, you might say, overly anxious to reduce human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. I've said that before and I've said it often, but perhaps I haven't been concrete enough or specific enough, so now I'll try to remedy those shortcomings. I'll try to be a lot more specific and concrete when I explain that what I wrote just a moment ago is not the paranoid rambling of a cranky wacko. It's a fact. What Mr. David doesn't realize is that those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Of course, if Mr. David had learned anything from history, he'd know that the worst kinds of biased derelicts I've ever seen often take earthworms or similar small animals and impale them on a pin to enjoy watching them twist and writhe as they slowly die. Similarly, Mr. David enjoys watching respectable people twist and writhe whenever he threatens to rifle, pillage, plunder, and loot. He is out to put twisted deviants on the federal payroll. And when we play his game, we become accomplices.

Wretched social outcasts have exerted care always to use high-sounding words like "phototelegraphically" to hide Mr. David's plans to open the floodgates of fascism. And I can say that with a clear conscience, because Mr. David claims that he can substitute breast-beating and schwarmerei for action and honest debate and get away with it. That claim illustrates a serious reasoning fallacy, one that is pandemic in his claims. Then again, someone has been giving Mr. David's brain a very thorough washing, and now Mr. David is trying to do the same to us. Let's just ignore Mr. David and see what he does. He has called innocent children insipid prima donnas to their faces. This was not a momentary aberration or a slip of the tongue, and hence, we can safely say that he is guilty of at least one criminal offense. In addition, Mr. David frequently exhibits less formal criminal behavior, such as deliberate and even gleeful cruelty, explosive behavior, and a burning desire to make my worst nightmares come true. There can be no doubt that if one accepts the framework I've laid out here, it follows that he commonly appoints ineffective people to important positions. He then ensures that these people stay in those positions, because that makes it easy for him to wipe out delicate ecosystems.

I unquestionably assert that nothing would make Mr. David happier than to see me go crazy. Deal with it. I predict that quicker than you can double-check the spelling of "unextinguishableness", people will generally agree that he has a near-legendary lack of common sense, decency, and manners. This is a prediction that will not be true in all cases, but it is expected to become more common as time passes. I don't get it: What meaningless self-inflicted psychological trauma is he going through now? I mean, his attitudes have kept us separated for too long from the love, contributions, and challenges of our brothers and sisters in this wonderful adventure we share together -- life!

Although some quasi-disreputable paper-pushers concede that Mr. David suffers from a pathology of delusion, they invariably deny that it has long been obvious to attentive observers that Mr. David's quips are the direct result of a policy of abandonment and neglect. But did you know that collectivism is a weapon of paternalism? He doesn't want you to know that, because he has a problem not only with civil rights but also with the legal responsibility and accountability as to what is considered appropriate behavior. Let me rephrase that: His list of sins is long and each one deserves more space than I have here. Therefore, rather than describe each one individually, I'll summarize by stating that if I have a bias, it is only against irresponsible bottom-feeders who contravene decency. Inasmuch as I disagree with Mr. David's accusations and find his ad hominem attacks offensive, I am happy to meet Mr. David's speech with more speech and, if necessary, continue this discussion until the truth shines. Let no one say that Mr. David's recommendations are good for the environment, human rights, and baby seals. No, this is pertinacious oligarchism and must be regarded as an attempt to call for ritualistic invocations of needlessly formal rules. To put it another way, perhaps one day we will live in a world where good people are not troubled by fear of shiftless trolls. Until that day arrives, however, we must spread the word that Mr. David has announced his intentions to incite young people to copulate early, often, and indiscriminately. While doing so may earn Mr. David a gold star from the mush-for-brains mandarinism crowd, time cannot change his behavior. Time merely enlarges the field in which Mr. David can, with ever-increasing intensity and thoroughness, cause riots in the streets.

To simplify, I, not being one of the many rapacious, treasonous degenerates of this world, am not trying to save the world -- I gave up that pursuit a long time ago. But I am trying to treat the disease, not the symptoms. Mr. David has never satisfactorily proved his assertion that profits come before people. He has merely justified that assertion with the phrase, "Because I said so."

A trip to your local library would reveal that his inclinations reek of Trotskyism. I use the word "reek", because ever since he decided to stonewall on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest, his consistent, unvarying line has been that he would sooner give up money, fame, power, and happiness than perform a mumpish act. For the most part, Mr. David deserves exemplary punishment. Still, we mustn't let Mr. David strip people of their rights to free expression and individuality. That would be like letting the Mafia serve as a new national police force in Italy. Now that this letter has come to an end, I truly hope you walk away from it realizing that Mr. Peter A. David's bedfellows amount to nothing more than atrabilious sadism enthusiasts riding on the back of a social fungus attacking the body politic.

Is there ANYTHING better than creative retribution?

No. No, there is not. This is akin to the feeling of being in love. :sigh:

Elaine: yes, she is.

To everyone else: it seemed the most equitable solution.

>>>>>Cl@ssˆ1c! !!

>>>>>A1s0 funn¥!!

C0ns3rv@t1v3s!

Rn 4 yr l!v3s!!!!!!

Any chance you might let him keep the vowels, but remove the other 21 letters?

How did 'y' make the cut? Or can you set the filter so that it removes it only sometimes?

Glenn, Great Idea! Thanks for not only making me laugh out loud, literally, but for finally achieving an interesting way of handling this entire situation! Kudoos!!

Michael: still getting the Internal Server Error message?

Hermann: leaving the vowels only makes it impossible to discern any meaning at all. At that point, I'd just ban outright.

Man, that is so sweet.

S0 SW33T!!!

You know, I thought it was funny. But, really, I reconsidered, it's not.

You want him out of here, Glenn/PAD? Set forth rules (that are applied to one and all) about being civil towards each other and what the exact consequences are if a poster does not follow those rules. That way X-Ray's right/privledge of posting here is in his own hands (or fingers, I guess.)

And, hey, PAD Community if PAD/Glenn lets him speak his mind, ignore him if you don't like what he's saying. Be mature.

Glenn: I just got the Internal Server Error message, but the error message is in error. My post actually got sent to the DB, so I'm not sure what the deal is.

"You know, I thought it was funny. But, really, I reconsidered, it's not."

BB: No, it really is funny.

K-nuck: We had our fun. It was funny when I first read Glenn's solution, but X-Ray's humiliation is not the answer.

Don't make me make comparisions between Glenn's actions and those of Hilter! ;-)

As much fun as humiliating X-Ray is to watch, I think that I'd like to request that he either be completely allowed to post or completely banned. This half-measure seems...petty.

Given X-Ray's rude behavior in the past, I'd lean toward the latter, since X-Ray doesn't seem to understand that posting here is a privilege, not a right.

On the other hand, if he were allowed to do full posts again, zipping past him doesn't take THAT much effort.

PAD's board, PAD's rules. I realize that it's PAD's decision, but if our opinions in this matter, then you've had mine.

Thanks.

Man. and I thought he was entertaining before..... I jsut shot pepsi out my nose laughing at him.

Thanks, Mark. "Petty" is exactly the word I couldn't quite come up with. Petty is what this is and I expect more from Glenn and PAD.

This "solution" is silly. Either ban the guy, or ignore him. But this "removing letters" thing is dumb, and stoops to his level.

Michael: okay, I was seeing some of that last night, but am having trouble reproducing the bug reliably. Sigh.

Jason (or was it John?): We have a number of ways of making sure the right person gts dsmvlld.

Honestly, I don't think the action is directed at X-Ray so much as it is directed at morons like me who don't possess the discipline to ignore him. That said, I still think it's funny as hell (and, of course, apologize for my non-Karate Kid-esque discipline).

There's a reason I actually engage trolls, by the by. I fully realize that I will never, ever change the mind of a troll (or even get them to consider an opposing opinion). However, it is entirely possible that I will be able to do that for someone who is either actively engaged in the conversation, or just lurking. I know that he will never change my mind (or get me to consider an opposing opinion), but someone (say James Carter, Warlord of Mars, for instance) might be able to do the same for me.

"Petty" is exactly the word I couldn't quite come up with."

dang it BB. You're like Jiminy Cricket. Yes I guess it is petty. And to tell you the truth, If he keeps on desperately trying to post, A) it is gonna make Glenn look like a censor, and B) it is going to give him an air of nobility to the Newbies, who won't be able to read his old posts anyway. I thought it was funny at first, but now, it is just starting to feel like teasing the fat kid in fourth grade. It is funny at first, but even if he was rude to you, there is only so long you can tease him before you feel like a schmuck. I am agreeing with BB and Luigi on this one.

I'm with Glenn here. I'm totally comfortable being petty.

>Honestly, I don't think the action is directed at X-Ray so much as it is directed at morons like me who don't possess the discipline to ignore him. That said, I still think it's funny as hell (and, of course, apologize for my non-Karate Kid-esque discipline).

K-nuck: I hadn't considered that point. Thanks.

James: I didn't come up with "petty" so I can't take the, uh, ummm.. credit? That'd be Mark Patterson that used it first. But I agree with everything you said.

It would have been amusing as a one time thing but put me down in the category of those who agree that this is petty and way more effort than the guy deserves.

He wants attention. You gave it too him. He wants to be seen as a victim of liberal bullying. Now he can claim it. He wants to believe that his words are driving you all to distraction. And here we are in yet another thread either started explicitly over him or hijacked by him. Hey, when do I get MY thread? BILL MULLIGAN-HANDSOME GUY, something like that.

IGNORE HIM! It's easy! If you can't help but rise to his bait, like a sunfish that not 2 minutes ago just got thrown back in, well, who's fault it that.

Barring the ability to do that, then ban him. If the guy is driving anyone that crazy, ban him. It's your blog. Otherwise he will continue to post the occasional missive, sans vowels, which will mean that some folks with obsessive compulsive tendencies will be obligated to decipher them or at the very least we will have a few dozen people comment about it and it will never ever end. Which is no big deal, thanks to Mr Scroll Button, but if you can do that you can probably just, and I can't emphasize this enough, ignore him.

This is just another reason why PAD should not let Glenn post new threads without PAD's permission. This is just lame.

But you know what WOULD be funny? making it so that all of his stuff is translated into redneck:

"Yall liss'n here. Since Pener David himself is far too haughty ta reply, let me splain it ta YOU!"

"Sayin one ain't "a fan of flag-burnin as a means of protest" is disgraceful. If I wuz ta burn urine trailer down, would urine comment be "I am not a fan of burnin my trailer down"? Of course not. You'd be did-set aguenst it. So yall see, "not bein a fan" is simply a way of grantin tacit approval."

"An' why do yall suppose that Pener David gets so worked up 'bout THIS subject? 'cause it feeds his world-view: Pener David knows all, an' BUSH SUCKS."

"If I wasn't policin this site, an' makin a mockery out of the BUSH SUCKS folks, I ain't got doubt Pener David would have tied BUSH SUCKS inta this thrid."

"Afner all, it's the only political thought he knows!"

"Classic. An' gut splittin'. Ya reckon?"

But you know what WOULD be funny? Having his stuff so that it automatically gets translated into Redneck:

Yall liss'n here. Since Pener David himself is far too haughty ta reply, let me splain it ta YOU!

Sayin one ain't "a fan of flag-burnin as a means of protest" is disgraceful. If I wuz ta burn urine trailer down, would urine comment be "I am not a fan of burnin my trailer down"? Of course not. You'd be did-set aguenst it. So yall see, "not bein a fan" is simply a way of grantin tacit approval.

An' why do yall suppose that Pener David gets so worked up 'bout THIS subject? 'cause it feeds his world-view: Pener David knows all, an' BUSH SUCKS.

If I wasn't policin this site, an' makin a mockery out of the BUSH SUCKS folks, I ain't got doubt Pener David would have tied BUSH SUCKS inta this thrid.

Afner all, it's the only political thought he knows!

Classic. An' gut splittin'. Ya reckon?

Sorry for the double post--I'm getting that error that's an error message. Here's X-Ray as a sweedish chef to recompense:

Seence-a Peter Defeed heemselff is fer tuu hooghty tu reply, let me-a ixpleeen it tu YOOo! Seyeeng oone-a isn't "a fun ooff fleg-boorneeng es a meuns ooff prutest" is deesgreceffool. Iff I vere-a tu boorn yuoor huoose-a doon, vuoold yuoor cumment be-a "I em nut a fun ooff boorneeng my huoose-a doon"? Ooff cuoorse-a nut. Um de hur de hur de hur. Yuoo'd be-a deed-set egeeenst it. Um de hur de hur de hur. Su yuoo see-a, "nut beeeng a fun" is seemply a vey ooff grunteeng teceet epprufel. Und vhy du yuoo sooppuse-a thet Peter Defeed gets su vurked up ebuoot THIS soobject? Becoose-a it feeds hees vurld-feeoo: Peter Defeed knoos ell, und BOoSH SOoCKS. Iff I vesn't puleecing thees seete-a, und mekeeng a muckery oooot ooff zee BOoSH SOoCKS peuple-a, I hefe-a nu duoobt Peter Defeed vuoold hefe-a teeed BOoSH SOoCKS intu thees threed. Bork bork bork! Effter ell, it's zee oonly puleeticel thuooght he-a knoos! Clesseec. Und foonny. Bork bork bork!

Well, I finally have a reason to begin paying attention to these posts again. Thanks for the smile, Glenn.

There's a reason I don't read the comments any more. Well, I did this time because I wanted to see the results of the vowel-less posts, and wow, that is damn amusing.

But the reason I don't read the comments on here is because I can't stand to read the insukting, abrasive comments left by the folks who seem to show up just to object when ever PAD makes a politcal post or comment and they just have to try to show thier displeasure with it the most obnoxious ways. After a while I just wiped my hands and was like "I'm out."

I respect PAD's stand on the first amendment/freedom of speech, mainly because I feel like this is his space and he is free to run it as he pleases, I just wish that the folks that get all obnoxious and loud and rude they just get cut off, yanked, pulled out of the pool, whatever. It just makes the whole experience unpleasant. Would that muzzle some of the dialogue that goes on here? Well, yeah, I guess, but I guess that's why I removed myself from it.

Well, until now. But then again, reading that whole long pot without vowels (well, skimming it) is damn funny. To those that say "Hey, this is childish, you should stop," I simply say it's thier playground and thier rules. If you don't like it, take your toys and go home. Or not. Whatever.

Too late for the "long story short," but I just feel like it's thier site, they can do what they want. If you don't like it, take yourself out of the mix. I find complaining about how they handle the situation akin to going over to someone's house and complaining loudly about how ugly the living room is and how you'd do it better. Yeah, I may wish they'd banninate more people, but they don't want to do that, so I change what I do, not expect or complaing that they aren't doing what I want them to do.

In any case, vowel-less posts are funny. Bravo, Glenn. :)

Geez...sooo many ways to say it now:

BUSH SUCKS!!

BSH SCKS!!!

THE CHILD-PRESIDENT SUCKS!!!

and my new all timey favorite....

BOoSH SOoCKS!!!

you are a genius, Bill.

It might be fun to run it through Snoop Dogg's Shizzolator as well. But then again, I'm easily amused (as this thread shows quite handily).

It's a good start. Now we just need to get rid of the consonants and we'll be rolling!

forgot one (or is it two?)

BUSCH (Kyle and Kurt) Sucks!

Glen, is there a way to create a by-pass that would be the equivilent to a "Block Sender" command that visitors could choose to not to receive posts from whomever they elect to not read. I am reminded of the line McCoy spoke in the old series, "What the Klingon says is unimportant. We do not hear his words."

"BUSCH (Kyle and Kurt) Sucks!"

I'll agree with you if we limit the Busch to the crappy adjunct lager that AB puts out. Oh wait, that's ALL they put out.

Disem-voweled.

The pun alone is worth it!

-K

I may end every sentence today with "Bork bork bork!" at least until my family makes me stop.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Creative and priceless.This works for me its not a total ban. As far as being picked on cause he is not a liberal,there are several posters who while I completely disagree with them are at least civil.Besides they have the Balls to use their own names and not a pseudonym to hide behind.

Well that didn't take long...

Alright, I know I've said this before, but you rock, Bill!

Thanks for giving a fever-ridden guy a chuckle!

Don't know about the handsome part, though... ;)

Bill:

Hilarious, man.

pisses on the living room rug
Not to nitpick, but it's "pisses on the sofa"...
it's just a funnier sounding phrase...say it with me..."Soooooo-Fa"

"BOoSH SOoCKS!!!"

hmmm..boosh socks....Likely not as comfy as my "comfy purple socks"

Kelly:

>Disem-voweled.

>The pun alone is worth it!

In this case, vowel movement seems much more appropriate.

It isn't hard to maintain a decent discourse with people of opposing political viewpoints, even if you'll never find common ground (hell, James and I are just shooting right past each other on the Bad Misdirection thread). But it's loads of fun, and a great mental exercise.

From his behavior in this thread, as well as in the past, it's pretty obvious that X-Ray can't be humiliated, shamed, embarrassed or otherwise made to feel bad about his rectal haberdashery. He's also already proven himself persistent enough that no amount of server-side measures can stop him...go to registration-only and he'll just keep creating false accounts from multiple domains as you ban him, trolls have been doing that on Usenet for ages. The more you try to shut him up, the happier he is.

"rectal haberdashery"

Dammit, Dave. That's now the highlight of my day. Somebody has got a high bar to jump over if they are going to improve on that.

I can't improve on Dave's line, but I wil echo it. Shrouding is really the only way to deal with trolls. Hopefully, he'll get bored once he realizes that the rest us want to have serious discussions instead of flame wars.

whoa! Den, let's not limit ourselves or overstate the legitimacy of much of the discussions that go on here..... but I thoroughly agree with you re: flaming.

It's funny. And that's all I have to say about that.

Speaking of "shrouding," is "The Paper Chase" available on DVD?

This solution is silly.
Brilliant.
Just.
Wonderful.
Funny.
But silly.

Re; Paper chase

Yep

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00008UALL/ref=pd_sxp_f/002-6456478-1002452?v=glance&s=dvd

Glenn: lol... it was John. If you think people who post on here shoot down some of my ideas, you should hear how much grief he gives me from five feet away in the office we share.

Oh, and thanks for answering the question about how you're targeting X-Ray ;-)

It might be fun to run it through Snoop Dogg's Shizzolator as well. But then again, I'm easily amused (as this thread shows quite handily).

Or the Pornolator.

Man, that one is always a riot, although not for use while surfing the 'net at work. :)

After giving it much thought, I've decided Glenn's move isn't petty, but merely this: Poetic justice. Poetic justice and a celebration of free speech.

Why? Because free speech, while it is a right in this country, is a right that much continually be fought for. Every single day.

The idiots who, for instance, support the flag burning amendment don't understand that. They don't comprehend that people like myself who oppose that notion do so not out of hatred for this country, but out of love for what it represents--the right to express yourself.

The subject of this...experiment, if you will...doesn't get that. So now if he wants to express himself here, it's no longer a simple privilege. Now he has to fight for it, just like any true advocate of free speech (which he is not.)

And again, for all those who kept claiming they wanted to ignore him but couldn't help himself...now they get to ask themselves, how much do they REALLY want it?

PAD

Thanks, bbayliss, but I was looking for the series collection.

"And again, for all those who kept claiming they wanted to ignore him but couldn't help himself...now they get to ask themselves, how much do they REALLY want it?"

I don't know about anyone else, but it's worked for me. Welsh is not my native tongue, so I'm completely lost when I see his posts now.

"Speaking of "shrouding," is "The Paper Chase" available on DVD?"

The original film is, yes. The TV series, including the pilot which had the classic "shrouding," is not. At least, not to my knowledge.

PAD

"Welsh is not my native tongue, so I'm completely lost when I see his posts now."

It reminds me of Vulcan.

"It reminds me of Vulcan."

All I know is that either Tom Jones or T'Pau are probably reading those posts now and laughing their asses off.

Well, so we asked, and so we are answered.

PAD's blog, PADs rules.

Fair enough.

Srry, X-Ry. Y'r scrwd, nd t's yr wn dmnd flt.
Try t b cvl nxt tm.

PAD: I don't like it much, but ok. I'm not the one paying the bill for the wesite, well....directly at least.

Glenn,

My post appeared. Sorry I didn't let you know sooner, I was off-line.

--------------------

But you know what WOULD be funny? making it so that all of his stuff is translated into redneck:

Or route his posts through babelfish so they all appear in French.

I'm amused, if only for the pun.

I'd think most of the readers here should share that sentiment, if only because I don't see how it's possible to be a fan of Peter's without enjoying puns.

Talk about rewarding someone's bad behavior. This guy is now famous within the realm of this blog. He was just looking for attention and you've all given it to him beyond his wildest expectations. You've all been played.

"Talk about rewarding someone's bad behavior. This guy is now famous within the realm of this blog. He was just looking for attention and you've all given it to him beyond his wildest expectations. You've all been played."

And you know what? It's still funny.

Bill,

There's a reason I am but the humble student and you the master.

Bork, bork, bork.

I never would have thought of that.

*************************************

Ok, fun's fun. Playtime over. Either give him back his a,e,i,o,u's or ban him outright. This is funny as a one off joke and it does make his posts finally make some kind of sense for a change but it is a lame joke in the long run.

Either believe in free speach enough to let him rant and let those of us who let our weakness get the better of us do our dumb thing from time to time or be the propper home owner and throw out the guy who acts like an @$$ and keeps taking a dump in your pool.

Rewarded?

He's almost universally mocked and ridiculed here yet he keeps coming back for more... you have a VERY strange definition of reward....

LOL. Good one, love it.

This is just hilarious! (And so are Bill's versions ... although I had a harder time reading the Swedish Chef version than the vowelless ones!)

And this is still erring on the side of free speech, and only banning as a last resort. Wouldn't it be nice if this could be done to people who came into our physical homes and refused to stop yelling endless, witless insults at us?

PAD:
"After giving it much thought, I've decided Glenn's move isn't petty, but merely this: Poetic justice. Poetic justice and a celebration of free speech."

OK, I'm confused. How is taking what someone else wrote, and changing it (before it's seen by others) a celebration of free speech?

I'm not attempting to accept or condem troll rantings, but it sure doesn't seem like free speech to me if this person isn't allowed to speak without it being altered.

"OK, I'm confused. How is taking what someone else wrote, and changing it (before it's seen by others) a celebration of free speech?"

Did you actually read my entire post in which I answered that in the very next sentence?

The disenvoweled one didn't appreciate the fact that he had untrammeled free speech privileges here. In fact, he flat out proclaimed he wouldn't care if he were banned. His stated reason for being here was to "lambaste" the site's host. That's not simply voicing an opinion; that's targeted harassment. So now he has curtailed privileges...just as he would see happen to, for instance, those who want to maintain the right to burn a flag in protest. Free speech is no longer the gift he took for granted; it's the right he has to fight for, same as the CBLDF, the ACLU, and many others fight for free speech rights all the time. He gets to see life from the side of those he holds in contempt.

I think it's fitting.

PAD

Wouldn't it be nice if this could be done to people who came into our physical homes and refused to stop yelling endless, witless insults at us?

Who are you letting in your doors? I can't say that I have ever had someone do that in my house.

same as the CBLDF, the ACLU, and many others fight for free speech rights all the time.

Let's be honest, the CBLDF rarely fights for free speech, they mainly fight to get someone who did something stupid off or they ride the coattails of the ACLU.

And the ACLU is not fighting for free speech all of the time, sometimes it is just petty agendas that are being fought for.

Great Idea. Let us see how long x-ray will even bother to post on this site.

Great Idea. Let us see how long x-ray will even bother to post on this site.

Much as I love the praise I cannot take credit for the redneck or swedish chef translations: they are from various sites on the web where you can paste in stuff and get it translated into funny stuff.

Of course, one definition of funny is being able to repeat funny stuff that funnier people have said, so, in that spirit, praise away.

"Let's be honest, the CBLDF rarely fights for free speech, they mainly fight to get someone who did something stupid off or they ride the coattails of the ACLU."

How about I'll be honest, and you'll be wrong. Unless, of course, you count "something stupid" as going into the comic industry at all. I swear, I simply can't comprehend the hostility some comics fans feel toward an organization that has the simple mandate of trying to protect the public's rights to buy, sell, and read comics.

"And the ACLU is not fighting for free speech all of the time, sometimes it is just petty agendas that are being fought for."

Damn you, you petty Bill of Rights you, with your stupid, petty rights and stuff.

And, of course, if you want to try and twist my casual use of "all the time," meaning with regularity, into "all of the time," which means 24/7 and isn't what I said, feel free. That, of course, is a blatant lie, but I suspect the ACLU might defend your right to say it...

PAD

"ACLU is not fighting for free speech all of the time"

Hey, they are the only ones fighting though. When you only got one guard, you don't complain if he occasional guards the bank down the street do you? So they have petty agendas. So what? they are still willing to go to the mattresses when it counts.

Genius. Pure Genius. Taking the troll's blatantly idiotic statements and turning them into even more blatantly idiotic statements - I wish I could have thought of that. Now if only there was a way to point out idiots in our everyday lives as easily. (I know Bill Engvall came up with the "Here's Your Sign" concept where all the stupid people would be forced to wear signs pointing themselves out, but I haven't seen anybody wearing theirs. Maybe we could give our little goofball here the first one.)

Either ban him or let him post. Otherwise it comes across as whining--"Stop picking on me or I'm going to take my vowels and go home"

If you'd like, Dave, perhaps we can offer him the opportunity to buy his vowels, like on "Wheel of Fortune." That'd be cool. Five hundred bucks for every vowel. $2500 into the tip jar gets him back all five vowels.

Naaaah.

PAD

To all who are upset that x-ray lost his vowels, I'll give him some of mine.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
oooooooooooooooooooooooo
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

If you'd like, Dave, perhaps we can offer him the opportunity to buy his vowels, like on "Wheel of Fortune." That'd be cool. Five hundred bucks for every vowel. $2500 into the tip jar gets him back all five vowels.

Naaaah.

Speak for yourself, buddy. I could use the cash.

Well, I dunno. It's PAD's site, and he has the right to do whatever he wants with it: It's essentially his "home" on the Web, and anybody who abuses the privilege of being a guest deserves whatever's coming to him. I tried explaining that to X-Ray once, but, as I should have expected, it went over his/her head.

But still ... I don't know. I get PAD's argument that this move puts X-Ray in the position of those whose rights are disregarded -- those whose rights he would see disregarded had he the power -- but it also seems to fuel the martyrdom complex folks like him/her seem to have (despite running all branches of government at present).

I chose to respond to X-Ray from time to time, civilly. I didn't expect to change his/her mind, though miracles can happen; but I found it useful as a means of working through my own various thoughts. As in why is the flag amendment a bad idea? Because once you monkey with the First Amendment to allow exceptions, it becomes completely malleable and, eventually, means nothing. (That may or may not have gone over X-Ray's head; he chose not to respond to it but instead responded to ancillery comments in my post.) Ultimately, I chose to just have fun with him. He responded to one of my comments with "God, you're obtuse," so I made sure to use the word "obtuse" in each and every subsequent comment, and gently turn some of his tactics against him. I get the impression that he's not as dumb as he appears -- he even stated straight out that he's deliberately brusque, simply to be provocative -- and his lengthy post on this thread looks like it'd actually make some discernable points if it, like, had vowels and stuff. I don't quite see what X-Ray gains from it, but then I'm kind of obtuse.

Trolls' real danger is when they get us to sink to their level. The two best moves are to ignore them, as PAD advised, or engage them civilly, as I and some others tried to do (though, OK, I got a bit snarky toward the end). Responding to him in kind just feeds the martyrdom complex. It's better to be, well, better than him.

But still: It's PAD's site; Glenn maintains it; and ultimately it's their baby -- my rambling thoughts are irrelevant. In a perverse sort of way, I'm going to miss X-Ray a tiny, tiny bit (in a Frank-Burns-on-M*A*S*H kind of way) -- but then I'm not the one who had to endure repeatedly being called a liar by him.

So I've just said nothing in five paragraphs. (Six, now.) So what else is new? :-)

I dunno ... it's PAD's site, and his right to do whatever he wants with it. And X-Ray was indeed abusing his privilege. It just seems like de-voweling him just feeds the martyr complex that people like him (or her ... why do I automatically assume X-Ray's male?) tend to have, despite controlling all branches of government.

I interacted with him, more or less civilly (though I got a bit snarky toward the end). I figure it's best to be cordial even despite his nastiness, or to ignore him as PAD advised. Sinking to his level in the tenor of responses just tended to .. once again ... feed the martyr complex.

In a perverse kind of way, I'll kind of miss X-Ray. (Had a bit of fun with him, too, gleefully labeling myself as "obtuse" after he flung it my way as an insult.) But then, I'm not the one who had to deal with routinely being called a liar by him on every thread. So I can't really argue with what's happened to X-Ray. The karma that got him wasn't quite instant. Close enough, though.

Sorry, all. I didn't know my first post went through, so I paraphrased it and shot it through again. Sigh.

Well, this is certainly a novel way of dealing with the problem!

I think there may be a better way. If there is a program or script available to do this, then there must be a method of publishing identities of all those posting on the site. For example, when I make my posts, I am required to put in a name and e-mail address. Perhaps this could be modified in some way so that the site would determine where the postings came from (IP, then get the registration of that IP automatically providing the name of the owner), or could be made to require that each contributor identify themselves not just by a nickname but by their true identity.

This to me seems reasonable. My biggest problem with this individual is that he or she could hide behind a cloak of anonymity. Strip that away and I think the problem will take care of itself. Or who knows? Maybe he or she will actually make some useful and cohesive comments and take part in a decent discourse on the subjects raised on this site without being abusive and ignorant? (I can dream.....)

Y'know what? Wouldn't it be funny if this clown was the same Phillip Shropshire who was annoying Teresa a few years ago?

"I get the impression that he's not as dumb as he appears -- he even stated straight out that he's deliberately brusque, simply to be provocative -- and his lengthy post on this thread looks like it'd actually make some discernable points if it, like, had vowels and stuff."

I read it in its inexpurgated form and am reasonably sure he didn't write it. It reads more like a William F. Buckley tirade and makes accusations about me that have absolutely nothing to do with anything I wrote. I think he lifted it from somewhere and did a cut-and-paste to drop my name in, replacing the actual subject.

PAD

Why does anyone give a rats a$$ about this chump and his "free speech" rights? He's been rude to the owner of the site, rude to his supporters, and just running off at his mouth like he'sa got something to say, and its just verbal quasi-political vomit. Keep him Vowel deprived, and lets move on here people!

Maybe because believing in free speech means standing up for even speech you disagree with and the right to say things that you yourself wouldn't. I think that X-Ray is a world class twit. I also believe that he has every right to show the world how stupid and uninformed he really is.

Granted, PAD has every right to deny him a forum to vent on or show his @$$ to the world. But editing all his posts to this level is silly. Either believe in the concept of free speech and let him make a daily jackass out of himself or believe in the concept of this being a private site with ground rules and ban him outright.

This middle ground game stinks too much of, "look at what I say (free speech) and not what I do." I would have more respect for the action of banning him then this child's game.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean that anyone you go to has to publish your words, let alone on your terms. This site, being PAD's, means he publishes what he wants, how he wants. Censorship would be if a third party came along and told PAD what & how to publish.

To put it another way, there have been times when something PAD wrote for Marvel was changed before it was published. Did PAD complain about freedom of speech? No, because he's 'playing in someone else's yard', and they have the final say about what appears. If he doesn't like it, he can take his stories elsewhere. Same thing applies here.

I agree. I said much the same in the bottom two thirds of my post. I'm just pointing out that I would have a wee bit more respect for PAD and Glenn right now if they were to just ban the twit outright (since they don't want him around and he refuses to post anything that isn't flat out stupid and rude at this point) rather then saying that they won't ban him because everybody has the right to free speech and then turning all his posts into (even moreso then they often are) nonsense.

Do Pad and Glenn have the right to mess with the posts here? Sure. It's their rules and they're calling the shots because it is their site. It's their home. And because of that they can ban him outright and it has nothing to do with stopping anyones free speech rights. They're not banning somebody for coming over to the house and having a friendly debate here. They would be banning somebody who just wants to show up and take a dump on the living room floor and call it debate.

X-Ray showed again and again that he would just rant and, if slapped around a bit with a few facts, would just change his postings to snide name calling and stupidity (even if it was sometimes fun to see how fast you could burst his bubble of believing he knew what he was talking about.) PAD has shown that adult debate against his points or views have a place here and have had for a long time now. X-ray has shown that he has no knowledge of what adult debate is or means. No one who posts here would think the lesser of PAD for banning the guy. But this just comes off as silly, a bit petty and below what I thought were PAD's and Glenn's standards here.

I would give him back his A, E, I, O & U's or just ban him. But it's PAD's call. I'm just throwing my two cents in.

You know, I am going to miss x-ray. I am not going to miss his asinity, but I will miss the debates. Not the ones he was in, but that he started. Knuckles and I have had two debates on subjects started by him, and I believe there were others. It was simple really. He posts imflammatory crap, and then someone replies to the reply...and bingo, you got a debate going. Still, perhaps some new conservative will come along...one who is polite, and makes sense.

Nice. In a single elegant stroke you solve all your problems with him AND make him sound more a blathering idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing, than he already is.

To everyone who thinks the move was lame, I can only offer this in defense: I've been a regular reader (and sometime participant) here for a little over a year, now, and there have been very, very few trolls, compared with what you'd see on similar websites. This I like. There've been even fewer trolls who get to the point where they become obnoxious enough to justify discussing in and of themselves, and even fewer to actually be shrouded, disemvowelled, or outright banned. This I like even more. Said three (by my count) were summarily dealt with after and ONLY after numerous and repeated offenses, including but not limited to racism, slander (or is it libel online?), and VERY personal verbal attacks on PAD and his family.

This tells me that PAD is a very tolerant man, one who is far, far more so than most other people running a blog these days. I've seen people of all political stripes repeatedly disagree with PAD on any number of topics, often in an extremely uncivil manner, yet not get banned.

Why? I can't speak for PAD, but I feel that it's because there's a big difference between having a discussion or debate and shouting obscenities at the rafters. I, for one, have no problem booting, banning, or taking liberties with the people who get in the way of that... it's the price you pay for being an obstructionist shithead. Especially when EVERYBODY and their mother has given said shithead every possible chance to climb out of the grave he was digging for himself.

Just one guy's opinion.

OK, so what's gonna happen with him already? This vowel stuff is just as someone said, silly. And it's extra work for Glenn. Betcha you know who gets a kick out of that too.

He can buy vowels with CBLDF donations. $1/vowel. The letter "A" (as respect to PAD) would be $5/use. But reasonable prices to encourage further vowel purchases.

The ultimate irony in all of this is that we were all supposed to be ignoring the troll. Well, not only are we not ignoring him (and I'm as guilty as the next person in this), we have a whole furshlugginer thread devoted to debating the merits of disemvowelling him, (disembowelling him?), letting him on, off. in between. Yeesh! This guy is having a field day with us!

No offense intended anyone, but if you think this yotz would give even one measely cent let alone $1 for a vowel, I mean come ON.....

I think this "vowel movement" is a pretty brilliant solution, actually.

I sometimes start reading posts without looking at who wrote them. This makes his posts stand out clearly, and it's a lot easier to skip this guy's particular brand of tripe. And yet he's technically not deprived of his ability to post here.

Got him on a technicality...gotta love it...

Sorry Peter, but your banning of you-know-who's use of certain vowels just makes his replies more intelligible. Doh!

After reading through the bowel movements I got to wondering if X-ray is really Todd McF. or John B. Then I remembered that Todd doesn't like writing, and John, well if he isn't going to put any effort into his art, why would he put any effort into a post?

Having googled some of the more verbose and discernable phrases from X-ray's above rant, I can safely say that several of the statements appear on multiple websites with the same exact phrasing. He did NOT actually take the time to write it.

Upon further review, it looks like he used this site to generate his rant. Way to go, X-ray. When I have a legitimate complaint, I take the time to actually think one through.

Say, did yotz-boy take weekend off, or are we really rid of him? Anyway, Happy 4th everyone!

I understand the frustration with X-Ray, and could understand the necessity of banning him, but might not editing him in this way just inflame him to claim that anything he says which seems idiotic is just a matter of a deliberate modification by PAD and Glenn? It isn't hard to maintain the high ground with tone-deaf fools, but this may be more a matter of snarky fun than any kind of wisdom.

The Left is always first to censor. Go figure.

The Left is always first to censor. Go figure.

Ignorance on display for all to see. Congrats.

But, yeah, I'd love to see a blog run by Ann Coulter.

Anybody left of Jerry Falwell would be banned from that site.

Ian S. says:

>The Left is always first. Go!

I agree 100%!

*Sorry, couldn't pass it up.*

"The Left is always first to censor. Go figure."

X-ray? That you pal?

Seriously folks, could you read what he posted before you come in here and open your yaps about "Censorship?" What he said in here was slanderous, libelious, and just plain rude, and he WASN'T censored, he had his vowels cut out. He can post an many comments as he likes anytime. Further, (and if you had READ this thread you would have picked up on this) nost of us disagreed with it. Mr. David supported it, but hell, if someone had been that rude to me, I would have tracked down where he lived and punched him in the nose. Third, this is a PRIVATE blog. We are allowed to post here by the good graces of Mr. David. Fourth, he allows people to be as conservative or as liberal as they wish to be, as long as they are polite. Fifth, he has encouraged debate, as well as conservative posters (Such as Iowa Jim) by responding to their posts and even holding lengthy debates with them. Sixth, he is willing to put aside partisan politics for a principle. (see Chilling Effects, where he said that he would not like to see journalists give up their sources, even when that source looked to be Karl Rove.) So, all you accomplished is making yourself look stupid and fly in the face of mountains of evidence.

"I'd love to see a blog run by Ann Coulter.
Anybody left of Jerry Falwell would be banned from that site."

Jerry Falwell? Hell, anyone left of Michael Savage would be toast!

he WASN'T censored, he had his vowels cut out.

Then, in essence if not in actuality, he was!

Not allowing him to write complete words is a form of censoring.

I have no problem with banning some unwanted person from a site, but this is just ridiculous.

This was just another stupid Glenn idea.

"Then, in essence if not in actuality, he was!"

n0 dud3!! h@v3n't y0v 3v3r b33n 0n @ny 0th3r w3bs1t3s?

I mean it ain't exactly hard to get yr point acrss, evn w/o using mst lttrs.

Capiche?

his problem was that he liked insulting people while it was easy, but when the going got tough, the wimp just quit. If he was really so dedicated to "Policing the website, he could have done what I did at the begining of this message. Or he could have gone and gotten a different e-mail aderess. But he didn't. So far. If he had been banned altogether, it would be censoring. if he had cut out the objectionable bits, that would be censoring. Leaving his posts almost as legible to anyone who wants to read them: hell, thats just funny. And all you people who complain that it is juvenile: I presume you all hate the Three Stooges, The Marx Brothers, the Little Rascals, Laurel and Hardy, Abbot and Costello, and every other group or movie that uses any kind of pratfall or juvenile humor. Admit it. It is funny, and though I disagree with it I see the irony and humor in it. Also, Glenn said that if he could give a case to get his vowels back, he would.

QED: he hasn't. the troll is gone. for the moment at least...

Wll, rspctfll, thnk glnn's d s nt gd n. f y cn ndrstnd mch f wht jst sd, y r bttr t ths thn m. Y prbbl w'nt knw tht thnk Ptr Dvd hs, strngl ngh, md vr gd sns n nmbr f pstngs ths wk. h wll: H wll gt b wtht knwng t.

ot allowing him to write complete words is a form of censoring.

Last I checked, PAD was not a government agency.

Thus, he is not censoring, he is merely exercising his rights as moderator and owner of this forum.

I didn't say that PAD was a government agency, nor did I say that he couldn't do whatever he wants on his website.

But, the government is not the only ones who censor and since not letting someone's full statements be shown is a form of censorship, that is what was done. I did not say that it can't be done but just that it was stupid and that it is a form of censorship.

Know I'm getting to this thread late, but I have to agree with Luigi and others that this is silly. It is also ironic that someone who states repeatedly his support for the First Amendment, even with speech which they may disagree with...would basically muzzle a guy because he is saying things you disagree with.
Also, PAD, the whole "poetic justice" thing is beneath you. X-Ray got so obnoxious I actually agreed with Bladestar on something when he stated he was a "pathetic f---ing child". He disagreed with a form of free speech you feel should be protected, so you feel he should "know what it feels like". It is this kind of thinking that has fueled ethnic, religious and general hatred for centuries.
Taken to an extreme, ridiculous extension, this argument could lead to someone saying, "Hey, PAD likes public housing and the poor so much, let's take a dump in his backyard". (this actually happened to my uncle when a Section 8 family moved in next door). "Because, then, you know, he'll KNOW HOW IT FEELS.
This is your site. You can do whatever you damn well please with it. I just think it takes away from the example you usually set with the First Amendment and makes you seem a bit petty, especially when others have bashed entire groups of people you disagreed with, others use profanity, a certain liberal poster has called Christians "sub-human" and other such discourse has gone on, and you say nothing. Not even a "Keep it civil, guys". But someone who can easily be ignored is basically banned and one of the reasons is because he not only got your goat, but others here of all stripes decided to respond to him? Such behavior is beneath you, PAD. It really is.

"It isn't hard to maintain the high ground with tone-deaf fools, but this may be more a matter of snarky fun than any kind of wisdom."

Can't it be both?

"It is also ironic that someone who states repeatedly his support for the First Amendment, even with speech which they may disagree with...would basically muzzle a guy because he is saying things you disagree with."

That's bullshit on a huge scale, Jerome, and you know damn well it's bullshit. If I muzzled someone solely because he was saying things I disagreed with, you'd have been gone months ago and I wouldn't have shed a tear.

The idiot in question made it repeatedly clear that he was not interested in discussion, in debate, or even in simply expressing an opinion. He was here purely to attack me, and flat out stated he didn't give a damn if he were banned. He had no appreciation for courtesies extended to him...courtesies that I was extending when other people on this board were begging me to get rid of him. And y'know what? If you don't appreciate free speech, it gets taken away from you. That's the lesson Glenn endeavored to drive home to him. Which he probably didn't get, but again...no tears here.

PAD

I find all this umbrage directed at protecting the free speech rights of someone who has no interest in protecting free speech to be touching. And his "right to free speech" hasn't been removed. He just needs to decide how badly he wants his shit-stirring voice to be heard. He wasn't interested in dialog, he was interested in causing trouble. Peter and Glenn went out of their way to accomodate him. And now, he's going to have to go out of his way to accomodate himself. Is it really such a hardship to actually have to work a little to get your voice to be heard?

Well, wouldn'tya know it? Ann Coulter does indeed have what appears to be a blog or at least a "chatroom", which can be found at:

http://www.anncoulter.com/phpBB2/

.....for those who wish to know.....

Freedom of speech, per the Bill of Rights, guarantees one to have the right to express ideas and views, in public, without fear of retribution or restriction from the government. It does not, however, guarantee one unlimited or unrestricted access to any location or forum in order to express those ideas and views. I won’t further mangle the “shouting fire in a theater” example that’s been a staple of numerous other threads here, but here’s one anyone should be able to relate to: if someone comes into your neighborhood at 4 a.m. and begins reciting a lengthy dissertation proving that George W. Bush is the Anti-Christ, you won’t lay in your bed, smile, and think, “That’s nice – there’s a citizen exercising his right to free speech.” No, you call the cops to have his ass hauled off for disturbing the peace.

It’s been rightly stated by several others here that PAD’s site is his private forum and he can rightfully set any rules that he wants to control entry or discourse. Yet, he allows anyone to freely enter without having to pay a fee or reveal any identifying information about themselves, making it tantamount to a public venue. He throws out a topic and says, “Discuss amongst yourselves, and I’ll put in two-cents every now and then when I have time.” He does this with the understanding that several participants will become heated and angered due to certain topics, even to the point of attacking him personally or threatening to boycott his works or employers. Though I can’t speak for PAD as to exactly why he offers up topics that he knows full well will draw fire upon himself, having read and occasionally participated in this blog for several years now, I surmised from the beginning that he’s willing to suffer a few figurative bricks thrown at him as a price for setting up exchanges that allow people on either side of a fence to express opinions, offer little known information, or just vent as a means for everyone to have access to a wide-range of ideas concerning the topic. He knows full well that he won’t change any hard-line opinions on any particular subject, but I’m sure that everyone who participates regularly has learned much that they wouldn’t have known otherwise – I know I have.

In the case of X-Ray, it’s hard for me to believe that anyone who’s been here a good while thinks that the reason PAD and Glenn are screwing up his text is because they think he has no right to express himself, given what they have put up with over the years. Personally, I think he did cross line a while back when he declared that he was “policing” this site, trying to elevate himself to a level above the other participants here. I’ve seen trolls on many other sites, and, depending on how just disruptive they are, they’re dealt with in a variety of ways, including “shrouding”, text-jumbling, or out-and-out banning, at the discretion of the site owner. I don’t think there’s any one absolute method to deal with such idiots, but of course, the other participants here free to express how they feel X-Ray should be dealt with, just as PAD and Glenn have the right to make the ultimate decision on what to do about him. As I said earlier, no one has an absolute guarantee to have a forum to express themselves, but if one is truly serious in having his opinions put forth, he’ll do so in a manner in which people will be prone to listen. X-Ray in no way made it clear that he wants to have any meaningful exchanges with anyone, he just wants to lurk and lash out in ways which I’m sure he thinks are witty and righteous, but ultimately just sink into obtuse bullying. If anyone here thinks that X-Ray should be allowed to keep posting here, continue to say so, not so that Glenn and PAD will let him rant on as before, but so that maybe, just maybe, if he knows there are people here who want to have coherent discussions with him, he’ll reciprocate in a way in which we won’t have to wonder how long he’s been off his meds.

L.H., I tried to engage X-R y early on. It became clear after only a few posts (it was actually clear prior to my attempt) that he had no interest in any actual debate or exchange of ideas. His goal, pure and simple was to attempt to disrupt this community by engaging in the bloggers equivilent of the 4 am diatribe. Since it's easy for me to skip over his posts, I don't really care one way or another whether he's banned, restricted in his posts, or what have you...but he does take up bandwidth, and I've no problem with Glenn/PAD (not that they need/want my opinion or vote on this) taking action to remove or encourage him to go elsewhere.

You want a site that ACTUALLY censors its posts? Try www.proudtobecanadian.ca. They actually WORSHIP Ann Coulter, and if you say anything that isn't prostrating yourself in front of an idol of her, you get BANNED.

I first registered for the forum because there WASN'T A SINGLE DISSENTING REPLY OR POST. Iposted a couple of times, and quickly found out why this was so. ALL posts are vetted by moderators before going up. A moderate friend of mine had to try 8 times to get a post published, and the one time he did was when he agreed with every damn thing said. It's less of a discussion forum more of an idealogical masturbation venue.

"You want a site that ACTUALLY censors its posts? Try www.proudtobecanadian.ca. They actually WORSHIP Ann Coulter, and if you say anything that isn't prostrating yourself in front of an idol of her, you get BANNED."

You know what we should ALL do? Go register on Coulters "Chat" site, http://www.anncoulter.com/phpBB2/, and just be the Voices of reason. All of us. We could take it over if we did it at the dead of night. It would be hilarious. And the best part is, we could be all polite, and make them look like idiots.

(Of course, I have been known to do things like call into G. Gordon Liddy's show. And bring up Nixon. That was more fun than should be leagally allowed.)

Try www.proudtobecanadian.ca. They actually WORSHIP Ann Coulter,

Isn't that about as bad an oxymoron as "Microsoft Works"? Or just plain contradictory?

I mean, why would any proud Canadian like Coulter, much less worship her?

"I mean, why would any proud Canadian like Coulter, much less worship her?"

Half of the site's regular posters are American.

The tagline of the site is "proudly conservative".

The major thing is, the people on it are NOT proud to be Canadian. Were Joel Johannson (the site's master) able to cede the entirety of Canada to the personal estate of G. W. Bush, he would do so without pause.

I just feel like pointing out, s/he undoubtedly will go on to the other sites s/he does proudly trumpeting his/her "martyr" status. I like the idea (just because of how much of a complete asshole s/he was), but just pointing out this might be kind of used as ego masturbation; saying, "See! I was right!"

I expect PAD knows censorship when he sees it. Many others posting here seem to think censorship somehow isn't censorship if it isn't being done by the government. That's about as bright as the people, usually particularly radical activists for the less advantaged, who proclaim that it isn't possible to be prejudiced or biased if one is not part of the oppressor class. That is stupid: All it takes to be prejudiced or biased is to form prejudices and have biases. All it takes to constitute censorship is to censor. What is being done concerning X-Ray seems completely permissible, but perhaps ill-considered, as this is a private site on which everyone posts only at PAD's sufferance. If it is ill-considered, that is because the "disenvowelment" creates an additional means for an otherwise objectionable jackass to proclaim his victimhood at the hands of PAD - which he is sure to relish doing. Saying, "Enough! I don't have to read any more of this drivel. You're hereby banned, X-Ray." would give far less of this opportunity, and seem less like an action taken only because PAD and Glenn have the power and ego to do so. PAD said above that it can be both wisdom and snarky fun to take the disenvowelment step. We have to disagree: I don't think it is wise.