Friday, December 30, 2005

Regarding What Being "Banned" Means On This Blog

Scroll down to the GREEN box for a list of people/IDs that are banned.

Most people would interpret being "banned" from a blog as meaning that no further comments will be accepted. That is NOT how I have decided to run my blog, however.

The following is from my "Mission Statement & Blog Commenting Rules" commentary from 2/7/2006 (this blog's first post).

I reserve the right to publish or not publish any comment. This includes publishing comments from people who are banned. If I ban you, then allow through a comment later, this does not mean you aren't banned! Banned individuals will remain banned (which means most of your comments will likely NOT be published) until/unless I lift the ban. Comments being published (if the banned individual decides to keep submitting comments) do NOT mean the ban has been lifted. It ONLY means I've decided to let that particular comment through.

The reason I decided to write this post is because I wanted to make this point clear. I banned the individual who uses the ID TOM. Later, I allowed some TOM comments through (published them).

As a result of this, TOM indicated to me that, in his opinion, he was not banned. This was in the context of him asserting that it reflected badly on me because I've been banned from a few blogs, while he (in his mind) has been banned from none.

TOM: Banned? You post my comments, RN posts my comments, I am not banned anywhere you butt f**king fa**ot. (6/04/2016 AT 11:59am).

Note that the censored words were censored by me. This is one of the reasons that TOM is banned (excessive foul language). He is also banned because he started spamming my blog with similar comments on a regular basis. I published some, but for the majority of them I clicked "Spam" and Blogger moved them into the Spam folder.

This, btw, is the PRIMARY reason for enacting bans. And it's likely the ONLY reason I'll ever ban anyone. People spamming me with profane and idiotic comments. I'm not going to bother banning anyone if they make a nuisance of themselves for awhile but then go away. You'll only get banned if you make a MAJOR nuisance of yourself and do it over a prolonged period of time.

Steve was the first individual to do this. Swearing, name calling, idiocy, never (or almost never) being on topic, and homophobia. Although I have not received a comment from the Steve ID in a long time (He did send me MANY for several months). Although I strongly suspect that Steve was another ID that belongs to TOM.

What follows is an example of a comment that caused me to ban Steve.

Steve: I just found out you are a bottom boy butt f**king gay boy, figures. (1/26/2016 AT 5:27pm).

Note that (in addition to censoring Steve) the homophobia. This is why I concluded that the Steve ID and the TOM ID are both controlled by the same person. There is more evidence than the many homophobic posts by both (and I did start writing a post laying out the evidence), but I abandoned it. Because I haven't received a TOM or Steve comment for awhile, so why bother.

I did get a TOM comment a few days ago, but I sent it to Spam and haven't gotten any more. If he starts bothering me again I might have to finish my commentary on him. Right now I think it's not going to happen. Unless some Blogger I know reads this and says they would like to see it (unlikely).

The 3rd ID that is banned is Luke.

Luke: Since you insist on stealing my posts, I'll post them on your thread and make it easy for you. [post from Luke's blog titled "The Clinton Machine"]. (7/27/2016 AT 5:43pm).

I pasted Luke's comment into Word, and "The Clinton Machine" clocks in at 440 words. Now, have I seen the ID "Luke" before? I don't recall. I do know, however, that this is the 1st time that he's commented on my blog. Or the 1st time he's commented in a LONG time (maybe he commented years ago, but I don't recall). Whatever the case, I have no frigging clue what the hell he's talking about with the "since you insist on stealing my posts".

I've never stolen any of Luke's posts. I did ask Luke for a link that would prove his accusation, but he refused to provide one. And, when I told him "I have zero interest in stealing any of that", he called me "f**king liar".

Then he proceeded to send me every new commentary from his blog (via the commenting system) under the pretense of doing it "so you don't have to steal them".

Weird, right? I'm not sure what's going on with Luke. All I know is that I've never stolen any of his posts. Weirder yet, is that Luke has accused multiple bloggers of "stealing" his posts. On my blog he said (in addition to accusing me) that I should check Shaw's blog for his posts (a reference to Progressive Eruptions).

He also accused Pamela D. Hart of The Oracular Opinion, and she promptly banned him. Which I probably should have done. As opposed to engaging him (asking him for proof of his accusations multiple times. Proof he never provided).

Which I'm guessing is his gambit. Act like a jackass (swear and make absurd accusations) just to see how long the blog host will tolerate him. Must be how he gets his jollies. Who knows.

Which brings me to the list of banned IDs. How many actual people we're talking about here is anyone's guess. It might be three individuals, or the 3 IDs may be only 1 person. IMO the IDs are owned by either 1 or 2 people (2 being my best guess).

Banned Blogger IDs

Luke, AKA Luke Spencer. Luke Spencer is his Google Plus name. I know this because he commented on my Google Plus page using his GP profile (his comment on my GP page was another commentary from his blog). I deleted his comment and blocked him.

Steve. A Rational Nation detractor who accused people of "Jew hate". Note that the person behind the "Steve" account changed the name on the account to "Luke" (DSD #33).

TOM AKA TOM (WordPress account). This is an individual who used to post commentaries on his WordPress blog Stay A While. TOM's MO was to accuse other bloggers of attacking him (because he expressed disappointment with President Obama). First he feuded with Rational Nation, then Sue, then others (including myself) who he claimed were guilty of Jew hate.

This commentary was published on 8/9/2016 and updated on 9/29/2016.

Image: Steve (the only one among those who are currently banned) actually threatened me, saying "I will have to make life hard for you in blog land" (9/3/2013). He never followed through, however. Or maybe he did and I just didn't notice. Note that I only have the comment as an image because I removed the comment instead of sending it to spam. I wish I had kept it, but there's nothing I can do about it now. It's gone. FYI, Steve did not apologize. I was yanking his chain.

SWTD #-1

1 comment:

  1. Ran across a comment from Steve about a "surprise". Is this surprise how he was going to make life bad for me in blogland? Was the "surprise" that he'd wait 3 years, change the name on the account to "Luke", then return with absurd accusations regarding me plagiarizing him? Because, if it was, his surprise was dumb and didn't make life in blogland bad for me.

    Steve: You won't either, unless you apologize to me for falsely accusing me of being the anon at 101's blog.
    Keep watching. I'm planing a surprise for you for being such a lying SHITHEAD (9/05/2013 6:32 PM).

    The anon I was accusing him of being (and which he almost certainly was), commented on Truth101's blog many times (in response to the commentary What Defines A Shithead). Contrary to what Truth101 wrote, Steve AKA Luke is surely WAY more of a shithead than me (which is what Truth AKA Joe Hagstrom was wrongly accusing me of being).


Comment moderation is not currently in effect. Your comment will appear immediately. I do not, however, allow Anonymous comments. Anyone wishing to comment MUST have a Blogger account.