(August 2, 2013 at 10:21 am)Godschild Wrote:

---

You acted as though I didn't know, I did before I logged out that night.
That last post shows I knew something was up and I was finished with PP. I knew someone here, who I didn't know, was being a trickster and as soon as I figured it out I alerted Fr0d0 so we could shut down the Christians from arguing with PP. That's all I'm saying.

---

apo Wrote:That's nice, GC, but it misses the point of what I was trying to say. I occasionally have suspicions that a person is arguing in bad faith, being disingenuous, or manipulative or whatever. In such cases, them being a sock puppet or not being a sock puppet doesn't really affect how I need to deal with them, nor does it change what options are open to me.

I agree with you, that's what I did as you pointed out, but one being a sock is always disingenuous IMO. In an open forum as this one is, a sock takes away valuable time and disrupts. I'm not upset with what happen and still do not believe it started out as an action against me. No one could have known I would respond to PP at any time, but when I did, I believe things were deliberate. PP may have been enjoying it but, at this point my time was being wasted, not only mine but everyone involved, to me this was the unacceptable part, and I warned Fr0d0 so that it would not continue.

apo Wrote:If PP had not turned out to be a sock, or the moderators hadn't found out — you'd have had to deal with him using the ordinary tools of discourse. Aside from examples where socks are used to gang up on people, which this may be a case of, the account being a sock puppet doesn't give them special powers over you that any other ordinary user doesn't have.

You're correct, but I hate to deal in 'ifs', they are not the reality of a situation, I would rather deal with what's at hand, speculation IMO brings in misdirection to a situation like this and could disrupt the real things that need to be dealt with.
I'm not sure it was intended to be a way to gang up, BWS did not interact in the conversations with PP if I remember correctly. The ganging up comes when others get involved because someone starts to aggravate a situation and being a sock makes them feel a sense of freedom to do so, though I find some here do it well without being a sock.

apo Wrote:People seem to recoil as if a member using a sock puppet means that the sock owner is taking advantage of the people they're interacting with, and my point is, aside from ganging up or using them as shills, it doesn't provide them any real opportunities that any other non-sock member doesn't have. (Matter of fact, you make my point for me, as you were already using normal social processes to deal with the situation by "alerting" other Christians of your suspicions.)

Like I said above I believe they can feel a freedom to take advantage if the opportunity arises. I can't be sure that was the intention here, but it became the result and in the end that's the reality and that is what has to be dealt with. I think it's much more difficult to take advantage of a person when one has to account for their action. I felt that BWS was taking advantage in this situation but, not just me others also. Like I said all's well now and I have no hard feelings about the situation, time to move on, but not to forget the lesson.

(August 2, 2013 at 11:34 pm)Godschild Wrote: In an open forum as this one is, a sock takes away valuable time and disrupts.

I'm going to be the first to ask what everyone is now dying to know... What do you actually consider to be valuable time, and how is exactly what you do here a good use of said time?

GC Wrote:The ganging up comes when others get involved because someone starts to aggravate a situation and being a sock makes them feel a sense of freedom to do so, though I find some here do it well without being a sock.

Only a sockpuppet can accomplish this?

---

:Channels PeterPriesthood:

And don't think you've seen the last of me. I will be always be around to stomp on false assumptions about an incomplete Holy Babble.

:Ends Channeling:

Compared to meatspace, i am a sock. Guess I'm naive, but saying 'horseshit' as Captain Colostomy or as my alter ego Major Douchebag seems, well, inconsequential.

Existing omnibus clauses in TOS notwithstanding. (Which clarification makes or breaks the case here...specifically intent).

(August 3, 2013 at 12:55 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote:

(August 2, 2013 at 11:34 pm)Godschild Wrote: In an open forum as this one is, a sock takes away valuable time and disrupts.

I'm going to be the first to ask what everyone is now dying to know... What do you actually consider to be valuable time, and how is exactly what you do here a good use of said time?

GC Wrote:The ganging up comes when others get involved because someone starts to aggravate a situation and being a sock makes them feel a sense of freedom to do so, though I find some here do it well without being a sock.

Only a sockpuppet can accomplish this?

---

:Channels PeterPriesthood:

And don't think you've seen the last of me. I will be always be around to stomp on false assumptions about an incomplete Holy Babble.

:Ends Channeling:

This is not your conversation stay out.

(August 3, 2013 at 1:13 am)Godschild Wrote: This is not your conversation stay out.

:Channels PeterPriesthood:

BWS invited me, and as you're being a party pooper, I recommend you go pray about your attitude and ask God for a more positive outlook on the situation. Besides...I would've thought you'd appreciate talking to another theist over going in circles over what the atheists say.

:Ends Channeling:

---

Also, there is no forum rule against channeling alter-egos, as long as they don't take up two accounts on one IP address.

No, it's an answer to ITChick's OP on aggressive atheist, I pointed out someone who's butting into a conversation who's intent is to derail it.

(August 3, 2013 at 1:30 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Also, there is no forum rule against channeling alter-egos, as long as they don't take up two accounts on one IP address.

Schizophrenia: a serious mental disorder with hilarious abuse potential.

*channels the Queen Mother*

"We approve".

*End channel*

(August 3, 2013 at 1:13 am)Godschild Wrote: This is not your conversation stay out.

GC, you're riding on the goodwill generated by what some perceive as unfair treatment. Don't blow it Dubya style by being an arsehole. As you yourself pointed out, this is an open forum. You've been here long enough to know how it works. If you want a private conversation without others earwigging and barging in, do it via PM not in a live open thread.

**channels Kenneth Williams**

Stop messing about! Ooh, Matron!

**end channelling**

(August 3, 2013 at 1:50 am)Captain Colostomy Wrote:

(August 3, 2013 at 1:30 am)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Also, there is no forum rule against channeling alter-egos, as long as they don't take up two accounts on one IP address.

Schizophrenia: a serious mental disorder with hilarious abuse potential.

WTF do you think Schizophrenia is?