Gun Control & RKBA

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)

25. IIRC, the post in question was this one:

Thu Nov 22, 2012, 01:16 PM

Nov 2012

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117284156

and (again, IIRC) it was in response to a similar post (by an anti and which I now can't find) asking if gun owners were responsible for the actions of criminals.

I read the first post as accusatory/insinuatory, and rDigitals response as satire, but YMMV.

On that basis, I'd vote for re-instatement. While a cooling-off period was probably a good idea, a permenant block is un-neccesary and not warranted. Responding to provocation should require a much higher bar for a block than the original provocation.

I'll admit that I may not be unbiased. I've been known to get titchy when being accused of being a criminal, and an enabler/abetter of criminals.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

### (Closed) Discussion to create a process to un-ban members ### [View all] krispos42 Nov 2012 OP

You mean blocking, not banning. yardwork Nov 2012 #1

Oh I didn't know there was a difference. underthematrix Nov 2012 #3

Huge difference. yardwork Nov 2012 #18

I think this is an excellent idea. I would love for peeps to underthematrix Nov 2012 #2

The biggest lie is saying the holocaust would have been avoided if Jews became monsters graham4anything Nov 2012 #4

Trying to hijack the thread again? glacierbay Nov 2012 #6

I am not a group member as I never signed up. So it's not my place to yea or nay graham4anything Nov 2012 #9

You can still say yea or nay w/o being a group member glacierbay Nov 2012 #10

I don't believe in censorship, so that would be a bring the poster back vote graham4anything Nov 2012 #11

And that's your right to argue the message. nt. glacierbay Nov 2012 #12

There is no "group" or any "sign up". PavePusher Nov 2012 #24

You sign up when you post here. nt rrneck Nov 2012 #26

So reply when someone says otherwise 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #13

You say, "The biggest lie is saying the holocaust would have been avoided if Jews became monsters" AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #19

Huh? I am arguing the post not the person. And I would not censor anyone. graham4anything Nov 2012 #20

rDigital is the subject of the OP. Your post #4 is either related or unrelated to rDigital. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #29

"saying the holocaust would have been avoided if Jews became monsters" PavePusher Nov 2012 #23

Is this the thread to discuss rDigital's rehabilitation? JustABozoOnThisBus Nov 2012 #5

It's to create the process of reinstatement... krispos42 Nov 2012 #89

My vote and opinion is that there should be no formalized standards, rules, procedures, petronius Nov 2012 #7

so then, are you saying that all previously blocked DUers should be reinstated? Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #43

Yes. I think we all have the tools to personalize our own DU experiences, and if petronius Nov 2012 #48

follow up question, if I may Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #49

No, I think it makes more sense to discuss Group stuff within the particular Group petronius Nov 2012 #50

so, if One is unhappy with what goes on here One should be able to start a thread about it rather Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #51

I think that would be preferable, yes... (nt) petronius Nov 2012 #56

Absolutely tortoise1956 Nov 2012 #84

I think that he did go over the line with his thread glacierbay Nov 2012 #8

If he was wrong then surely open debate is the answer 4th law of robotics Nov 2012 #14

Nope glacierbay Nov 2012 #15

Agreed. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #21

His was just a single offense. Let him back. N/T GreenStormCloud Nov 2012 #16

The lead host of a group has considerable if not autocratic power rrneck Nov 2012 #17

Track their behavior in general, in other forums and groups DonP Nov 2012 #22

IIRC, the post in question was this one: PavePusher Nov 2012 #25

Could it be this one? AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #30

Correct.... PavePusher Nov 2012 #33

Thanks for the additional links. n/t AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #39

Hogwash fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #58

That post was clearly satire tularetom Nov 2012 #31

Given the timing and context of another post (identified at #30), I agree. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #32

has rdigital said anything to indicate that he no longer agrees with Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #27

He may still agree with it glacierbay Nov 2012 #28

Respectfully, I don't know exactly what "rightwing nonsense" that WStupidity is referring to so AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #37

I Don't Think Either One Needs to Apologize for How They Feel fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #60

Hoyt has not stopped making unfounded associations/accusations about gun owners... PavePusher Nov 2012 #34

Hoyt is not be recalled for exile. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #80

Hoyt has made it very clear that he's not going to stop his nonsense glacierbay Nov 2012 #82

Hoyt said much worse things gejohnston Nov 2012 #83

In contrast to your claim, rDigital never indicated that he agreed with the rw nonsense. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #35

Even if what you say is true fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #62

Um that is simply untrue. Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #74

What you say is not only unresponsive but it is veritably untrue. Those who look can see this. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #75

rDigital made a broad brush attack of virulent anti-semitic racism... Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #36

No he did not. You cannot point to where he "made a broad brush attack of virulent anti-semitic AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #38

If this was the question.. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #44

Your accusation does not follow from the lead sentence in the OP. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #52

At the risk of getting in deep shit, tortoise1956 Nov 2012 #85

Got a link rrneck Nov 2012 #40

According to the OP, this was the questions. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #46

This has been debunked. See #52. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #54

I saw no implication of antisemitism in the OP in question. rrneck Nov 2012 #66

Some fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #70

While the terms rrneck Nov 2012 #71

I Understand That fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #72

And a happy Thanksgiving to you. rrneck Nov 2012 #73

Here's a little help: PavePusher Nov 2012 #41

This was the question. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2012 #47

This has been debunked. See #52. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #53

Bring Him Back fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #42

You said, "I can understand that a reasonable person would conclude the ban was justifiable ..." AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #55

Huh? fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #57

If you don't understand, AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #59

Yes fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #64

Now I understand. You are the one who posted AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #61

No One Is Stopping You From Responding fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #63

vote to reinstate rdigital - Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #45

Why don't we have means to ban for time periods? ileus Nov 2012 #65

We do krispos42 Nov 2012 #90

Just to outline my thinking discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #67

Agree fightthegoodfightnow Nov 2012 #68

Happy Thanksgiving to you as well :) discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #69

The ONLY people I'd vote to block or ban snot Nov 2012 #76

How can you tell? nt rrneck Nov 2012 #77

Obvious - they get PPR'd petronius Nov 2012 #78

I agree; that's the problem. snot Nov 2012 #87

Three strikes rule. Remmah2 Nov 2012 #79

In general, I like the plan, and Digital should be reinstated. Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #81

Either bring him back, I believe that he has honerably served his sentence. oneshooter Nov 2012 #86

so. whats the buzz? tell me whats happening. Tuesday Afternoon Nov 2012 #88

Locking krispos42 Nov 2012 #91