Remove the option to post as anonymous

Re:

Your new status here as copy editor is not going well. "From you," as in, coming from you. As in, it is ridiculous that this is coming from the woman who spends her life insulting people on this forum, as was proven earlier. Proof, as in quotations, not as in, "I secretly know who's making those anonymous posts I don't like, and will bloviate about it endlessly."

Anonymous posts are all approved by moderators. How many of your insults, quoted earlier, do you think would have received moderator approval if they'd been submitted anonymously? I'm thinking zero.

P.S. Gotten "your" vs "you're" straightened out yet?


That was a horrible sentence. Your writing is subpar. I think 'you' would have been a better choice.


If you weren't such a social misfit you would mirror Iona Mink's style of debate. But you don't know what debate is. It is all a monologue with you. You talk AT people, not with them. You have no conversational skills whatsoever. Iona, however, uses logic, reason, and gentle probing to get to the heart of a position. She makes one think. All you do is put people on the defense. Your anger makes you an ineffective debater. You let your emotions get in the way. She doesn't. She remains calm, cool and collect. You are like a child having a temper tantrum. You scream. She chats. I can't count how many times she has had me re-thinking my position or changing it altogether. Sound, gracious, considerate discussion works. Hostile attacks and trolling never works. You just put people on the defense. Ask yourself what your goal is? To make me see the light or to abuse me? If it is to make me see the errors in my thinking, then you are going about things the wrong way. You need tact. Something you clearly lack. Rethink your approach. Your message is not getting through.
 
Last edited:
Re:

Exactly. :lbf:

But I also think that people are entitled to present whatever front they choose. If they want to have multiple accounts, personalities etc why not? It does irk me when posters are 'outed' by moderators. Everyone is entitled to their secrets.

Some sites only allow one account per person. Are we even allowed multiple accounts here? I have no clue. I do know of two people who alternate between at least two different names. Their reasons for doing so do not seem to be to deceive anyone, however.
 
Last edited:
Re:

Some sites only allow one account per person. Are we even allowed multiple accounts here? I have no clue. I do know of two people who alternate between at least two different nameas. That I know it makes it less annoying.

How can sites tell if it is the same person? From the IP? What if there is two people in the household who would like an account? I guess you can have a multiple accounts providing they are linked to different email addresses. I would say a good example of this is Viva and NHNS but I think they we're members first. Brummie certainly has two accounts.

I also realise I am a bit of a hypocrite with my 'everyone is entitled to their secrets' line. Especially on those occasions when I turn my hand to being Miss Marple and try to reveal former contributors with feeble attempts at deciphering writing styles. Oops. :doh:
 
Re:

How can sites tell if it is the same person? From the IP? What if there is two people in the household who would like an account? I guess you can have a multiple accounts providing they are linked to different email addresses. I would say a good example of this is Viva and NHNS but I think they we're members first. Brummie certainly has two accounts.

I also realise I am a bit of a hypocrite with my 'everyone is entitled to their secrets' line. Especially on those occasions when I turn my hand to being Miss Marple and try to reveal former contributors with feeble attempts at deciphering writing styles. Oops. :doh:

Grandma's got her crystal ball out again. Miss Marple you ain't. FAIL.
 
Re:

How can sites tell if it is the same person? From the IP? What if there is two people in the household who would like an account? I guess you can have a multiple accounts providing they are linked to different email addresses. I would say a good example of this is Viva and NHNS but I think they we're members first. Brummie certainly has two accounts.

Well, I meant do they allow it even when they know one is doing it? Meaning, having multiple accounts for one user (not household) does not violate any rules. I don't think there IS a rule against it. I just assumed it would not be allowed but technically it may be OK. Back in 2004, before the current format, people were posting under a new user name for ever post. Then stealing others' user names. Not just in chat but out in the forums. It was funny when the IPs were made visible to all. All the trolls were outed. I almost peed my pants. They had no warning ahead of time. The lights just went on all of a sudden. You would have loved it. Or were you also around back then?

Brummie, yes. And I take it we both know what they are. :p

I also realise I am a bit of a hypocrite with my 'everyone is entitled to their secrets' line. Especially on those occasions when I turn my hand to being Miss Marple and try to reveal former contributors with feeble attempts at deciphering writing styles. Oops. :doh:

Well, maybe that is the appeal. You like playing detective. Makes it more challenging and interesting perhaps when you have to use skills to figure out who is who. Maybe some NEED multiple accounts. Maybe some NEED to post anonymously. They say you are as sick as your secrets. I tend to agree.
 
Re:

Exactly. :lbf:

But I also think that people are entitled to present whatever front they choose. If they want to have multiple accounts, personalities etc why not? It does irk me when posters are 'outed' by moderators. Everyone is entitled to their secrets.

Can you see a contradiction? Nobody is 'outed' by moderators as this isn't run by NSA/GCHQ. The only thing that moderators can scan is what I.P address a comment/I.D is linked to. Only the truly gormless would imagine that's a reliable guide to real-life identitites. Ditto emails. Ditto proxy I.D's. This isn't 2003, anyone who wants to has moved way beyond such primitive cloaking. Anyone can invent a name/nick it from their school year book & create an email, ryv. This is turning into the Jim Croce thread again: a bunch of delusional misfits imagining that anyone outside of their minds gives a toss about who they are/or anyone else is. This is the internet.

Meanwhile, in response to the thread topic: it would be useful to know that further replies from an 'anonymous' comment are from the same entity. That does NOT need any detail on their I.P/email/blood type. All it needs is that each 'anonymous' comment is password protected by the originator so that further replies from this entity need the same password and thus can be clearly seen as valid, not from some ridiculous troll jumping on the thread. Anyone typing an anonymous comment should have to enter a password for that comment and use it for any future replies on that comment. Simple. If it doesn't exist as a plug in/add on on vBulletin, then it's a gap. It's not important anyway as there is absolutely no requirement to respond to 'anonymous' comments, other than to wind up the assholes who make them. Perhaps 1% of 'anonymous' replies need to be shielded from the terror of a totally fake screen-name linked to a totally fake email linked to a real/fake/hybrid real-life identity. FFS. This isn't even the scam of Social Media yet people go on as if it's a security threat to western civilisation. Get a grip.
 
Last edited:
Re:

Well, I meant do they allow it even when they know one is doing it? Meaning, having multiple accounts for one user (not household) does not violate any rules. I don't think there IS a rule against it. I just assumed it would not be allowed but technically it may be OK. Back in 2004, before the current format, people were posting under a new user name for ever post. Then stealing others' user names. Not just in chat but out in the forums. It was funny when the IPs were made visible to all. All the trolls were outed. I almost peed my pants. They had no warning ahead of time. The lights just went on all of a sudden. You would have loved it. Or were you also around back then?

Brummie, yes. And I take it we both know what they are. :p



Well, maybe that is the appeal. You like playing detective. Makes it more challenging and interesting perhaps when you have to use skills to figure out who is who. Maybe some NEED multiple accounts. Maybe some NEED to post anonymously. They say you are as sick as your secrets. I tend to agree.

no, you just think you do. But thanks for playing!
 
Ask yourself what your goal is? To make me see the light or to abuse me?

Obviously, and as I've said in the past: the latter. But that's insofar as I can be said to be addressing you at all. As I've also said before, I'm addressing everyone else who suffers through your awful behavior here. Every overweight person, every person from a trying background, every person who cringes to see someone engage in the most adolescent posturing at an age when post people are secure in their identities; every person pained by seeing an astonishingly illogical, hypocritical, subliterate monster lecture others on logic, morality, and language usage daily--some days hourly.

To make you see the light? One more time: I am not going to be your tutor. No one here should fall into that trap. Because you can't pay us, in any way. You bring nothing to the table, in any transaction. You're a parasite. You want to use others as stepping stones, and as sources of "affirmation" of your delusional self-image.

As for your remarks on social misfits, etc, these simply illustrate your usual, high school, queen bee mentality, now recognized by almost everyone here. You're pretty much copying and pasting lately. Fine. If it makes you feel productive.

As for your remarks on who can and can't write well, these might mean something if they came from someone who understands the difference between "you're" and "your," and who doesn't think that using a colon (rather than a "full stop," Dame Realitybites) is the equivalent of wearing a monocle. You aren't a reader, you aren't a writer, and anyone who's even a little bit of the former can tell. I would tell you to knock it off, but anyone can also see by now that you have no capacity to observe yourself, to recognize the truth in any criticisms, to alter your behavior--ever.

I have no idea why someone as apparently reasonable as Iona is civil with you. I suppose she's lonely, or enjoys your compliments, or both. You have no "in" with anyone unless they're vulnerable in these ways. I would hope that anyone can recognize your process eventually.

Condescension is not a shortcut to intelligence. And if you'd ever had any shot at being intelligent--and this, by the way, is what everyone is thinking about you lately--you'd have something to show for it by now. Show, vs tell: that's how real qualities, rather than imagined ones, are communicated.

You're on this site to enact a fantasy of who you wish you were. People who are being themselves experience this as the equivalent of making small talk with someone in a Halloween costume.

Enough tutoring for now--ack! I fell for it. Have a great weekend on www.morrissey-solo.com.
 
Re:

Can you see a contradiction? Nobody is 'outed' by moderators as this isn't run by NSA/GCHQ. The only thing that moderators can scan is what I.P address a comment/I.D is linked to. Only the truly gormless would imagine that's a reliable guide to real-life identitites. Ditto emails. Ditto proxy I.D's. This isn't 2003, anyone who wants to has moved way beyond such primitive cloaking. Anyone can invent a name/nick it from their school year book & create an email, ryv. This is turning into the Jim Croce thread again: a bunch of delusional misfits imagining that anyone outside of their minds gives a toss about who they are/or anyone else is. This is the internet.

Meanwhile, in response to the thread topic: it would be useful to know that further replies from an 'anonymous' comment are from the same entity. That does NOT need any detail on their I.P/email/blood type. All it needs is that each 'anonymous' comment is password protected by the originator so that further replies from this entity need the same password and thus can be clearly seen as valid, not from some ridiculous troll jumping on the thread. Anyone typing an anonymous comment should have to enter a password for that comment and use it for any future replies on that comment. Simple. If it doesn't exist as a plug in/add on on vBulletin, then it's a gap. It's not important anyway as there is absolutely no requirement to respond to 'anonymous' comments, other than to wind up the assholes who make them. Perhaps 1% of 'anonymous' replies need to be shielded from the terror of a totally fake screen-name linked to a totally fake email linked to a real/fake/hybrid real-life identity. FFS. This isn't even the scam of Social Media yet people go on as if it's a security threat to western civilisation. Get a grip.

The problem with the Anonymous moniker is that is goes againt all other channels of communication and rules of interatcing that we all do IRL. Even on the phone we have clues to differentiate one person from another. We have their voice.

Message board interacting is problematic because we are given no visual or auditory clues to differentiate one anon from another anon. We are pattern seeking animals. We like rules, boundaries, and guidelines. It's in our genetic makeup. The problem is not in the use of fake names, proxies, fake emails, or hybrid names. It is in not having a clear 'identity' to work with. Do people have multiple IDs in real life? Sure they don different hats for different roles. But their core personality remains the same. With anons there is no discernible core. I think it is a real handicap to effective and rewarding discussions--not an asset. It is archaic. As you stated, "This isn't even the scam of Social Media yet people go on as if it's a security threat to western civilisation. Get a grip." There is no legitimate reason to keep anonymous posting around for so called privacy/security reasons.

- - - Updated - - -

no, you just think you do. But thanks for playing!

Only two posters on here can, and do, write like you. If this other poster is not you, then you have competition, my dear. :p
 
I have no idea why someone as apparently reasonable as Iona is civil with you. I suppose she's lonely, or enjoys your compliments, or both. You have no "in" with anyone unless they're vulnerable in these ways. I would hope that anyone can recognize your process eventually.

Oi! I am, on the whole, civil to nearly everyone these days - even to you, dear anonymous. I need no reason to behave thusly. My life is just better that way.
 
Last edited:
Re:

The problem with the Anonymous moniker is that is goes againt all other channels of communication and rules of interatcing that we all do IRL. Even on the phone we have clues to differentiate one person from another. We have their voice.

Message board interacting is problematic because we are given no visual or auditory clues to differentiate one anon from another anon. We are pattern seeking animals. We like rules, boundaries, and guidelines. It's in our genetic makeup. The problem is not in the use of fake names, proxies, fake emails, or hybrid names. It is in not having a clear 'identity' to work with. Do people have multiple IDs in real life? Sure they don different hats for different roles. But their core personality remains the same. With anons there is no discernible core. I think it is a real handicap to effective and rewarding discussions--not an asset. It is archaic. As you stated, "This isn't even the scam of Social Media yet people go on as if it's a security threat to western civilisation. Get a grip." There is no legitimate reason to keep anonymous posting around for so called privacy/security reasons.

- - - Updated - - -



Only two posters on here can, and do, write like you. If this other poster is not you, then you have competition, my dear. :p

There is no problem with 'anonymous' comments in isolation, but there is a problem in maintaining a conversation over time as anyone else can jump in and claim to be the original 'anonymous'. Hence my rather elegant 'password' solution.

You appear to be incredibly confused about what you are doing on this board. You veer from a supposedly 'authentic' real-life narrative under your supposed birth name and that of 'realitybites' which you also imagine/claim/insist is 'authentic'. There is absolutely no reason why anyone else should accept these claims.

Yes, people do have multiple personalities in real life as can be seen during arguments/in bars/in offices. The whole idea of a singular authentic narrative personality is very C19/20th! People might think they know who is behind a screen name but unless they are prepared to pay for billboards and a lengthy press/police/courtroom expose, it's all rather silly. This 'Jim Croce' you've invested so much time in may/may not be the person he claimed to be. Other than making yourself appear absolutely bonkers, there's really no way of proving either way.

I'm confused as to why you protest about real/imaginary trolls yet continue to willfully blur your supposed online/offline personas here. You appear to be inviting such trolls into your world and also to be granting them powers which they simply don't have. Imagine your worst nightmare: if such a 'troll' turns up at your house/contacts your employer/stands outside a Morrissey concert with a placard denouncing you (next to CG denouncing KY as 49,etc), what's an appropriate sensible reaction? To protest? To demand they stop. Or to LOL! And call for a mental health team to get the poor delusional 'troll' to a place of safety. The more you imagine that any real/imaginary troll has any effective power over you, the more problems you are generating for some internal drama which may be important to you (and any troll) but is of zero interest to any functioning adult in the real world either online or offline. Trolls can only make the leap (jump the shark) from online to real life if you choose to believe they can. Other than the overtly psychotic, who on earth would risk their entire personal credibility and reputation to do such a thing? What, exactly, is the imagined reward? In an era when 14 year old girl in Rotterdam is arrested for a joke tweet to American Airlines, do you seriously think there are still people who think they can parlay 'anonymous' threats on a an amusing web forum into real life?

http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/yourcom...ting-terrorism-joke-at-american-airlines.html

If you choose to feed the trolls (real/imagined) then you must be getting something out of their attention. Any serious threat can easily be neutralised by the FBI/NSA/GCHQ etc. If someone turns up on your FB/Twitter/outside your home denouncing you because of your comments on this forum, do you seriously imagine anyone else would cares or regard it as impacting on your reputation rather than the troll's mental instability? You are not being 'trolled', but it seems you find an enormous engine of motivation and reward in imagining that this is happening.

It may be Sharon/Mozambiguous or 'the others'. Who knows. Or cares. All that stuff was fun before Snowden, now it's become darker. There's certainly an interesting debate to be had over online authenticity/unreliable narrator/taking the piss tropes, but I can't see that happening here! Relax, enjoy this for what it is and don't make dramas out of 'anonymous' comments, other than to note the technical frustration of replying. As I have done.
 
Re:

I don't see the numbers, who else really wants this feature that is going to add these extra characters to every single post displayed in the forum? I think the negative aspects you might be referring to are the potential privacy issues even if it is encrypted.

If it was implemented a little cleaner and doesn't involved a lot of man hours in getting it to work, it would be more appealing but for now I would rather work on other priorities.

I think the entire issue is about one person thinking every anonymous that says something she doesn't like is the same person. Could you just tell her that is not the case? Then we can move on. Or just cancel anonymous posting. Either way the most efficient thing is to make a decision and declare it settled.

There are grumbles from other posters that don't like anonymous posts, also. I'm not saying what you should choose. You'd be doing some people a favor by removing their option to post. But I do think you ought to make a decision and put it to rest.
 
Obviously, and as I've said in the past: the latter. But that's insofar as I can be said to be addressing you at all. As I've also said before, I'm addressing everyone else who suffers through your awful behavior here. Every overweight person, every person from a trying background, every person who cringes to see someone engage in the most adolescent posturing at an age when post people are secure in their identities; every person pained by seeing an astonishingly illogical, hypocritical, subliterate monster lecture others on logic, morality, and language usage daily--some days hourly.

To make you see the light? One more time: I am not going to be your tutor. No one here should fall into that trap. Because you can't pay us, in any way. You bring nothing to the table, in any transaction. You're a parasite. You want to use others as stepping stones, and as sources of "affirmation" of your delusional self-image.

As for your remarks on social misfits, etc, these simply illustrate your usual, high school, queen bee mentality, now recognized by almost everyone here. You're pretty much copying and pasting lately. Fine. If it makes you feel productive.

As for your remarks on who can and can't write well, these might mean something if they came from someone who understands the difference between "you're" and "your," and who doesn't think that using a colon (rather than a "full stop," Dame Realitybites) is the equivalent of wearing a monocle. You aren't a reader, you aren't a writer, and anyone who's even a little bit of the former can tell. I would tell you to knock it off, but anyone can also see by now that you have no capacity to observe yourself, to recognize the truth in any criticisms, to alter your behavior--ever.

I have no idea why someone as apparently reasonable as Iona is civil with you. I suppose she's lonely, or enjoys your compliments, or both. You have no "in" with anyone unless they're vulnerable in these ways. I would hope that anyone can recognize your process eventually.

Condescension is not a shortcut to intelligence. And if you'd ever had any shot at being intelligent--and this, by the way, is what everyone is thinking about you lately--you'd have something to show for it by now. Show, vs tell: that's how real qualities, rather than imagined ones, are communicated.

You're on this site to enact a fantasy of who you wish you were. People who are being themselves experience this as the equivalent of making small talk with someone in a Halloween costume.

Enough tutoring for now--ack! I fell for it. Have a great weekend on www.morrissey-solo.com.


DAVE, you have a god complex; you're a self-righteous person who thinks it is his divine mission--duty--to cleanse the forum of a person who is not a part of the group think. Someone who pokes fun of overweight people. Someone who thinks people who believe in god have FBEs. Boo hoo. Too bad. I am here to stay. And I will continue to say what I feel and think whether you like it or not. Even if you find my words and attitude to be offensive and condescending. Grow a freaking spine. No wonder you abhor alpha males. You clearly are not one yourself. You, however, are a hypersensitive fool who takes offense to anything and anyone who says things that don't fit your carefully constructed world view. And I am closed-minded? Think about it. Who is trying to change whom? You can be all you want to be. Think the way you like. I might not agree. But I am not going to stalk and harass you, onsite and offsite, or anyone else in order to bully them into toeing the PC line. You are crossing normal lines of decency and taking me and this online interacting/posting stuff WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. WAY, WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. Posters come and go. But not you. Dave. You are here because you have nowhere else to go. Why can't you post under a registered user name? Because you were banned two years ago. And can only post anonymously. If you had your way, you would still be posting as Dave. Do you realize how many people hate you on Solo and hated you on MM as well? You are regarded as a Troll. Not a real or kind person. A troll. A troll. A troll. Nothing more. You have been abusing and harassing me since 2004. This is sick. Sick. Sick. Get help!

The fact that you admit you are attempting to abuse a person makes you a monster in my book. A self-righteous psychopath with a god complex. Look kids, we have a live one. So rare to find. You should be locked up. Your vigilantism is dangerous to normal people everywhere. Pet Troll is a misnomer. Your moniker should be Nancy Grace Wannabe.
 
Last edited:
Re:

I already made a decision long ago, but I am not closed off to making changes. I've given some reasons why I don't think the latest suggestions would be that effective. If the use case for this is the confusion of one user interacting with anonymous people, the solution is to either stop interacting or vice versa, or the anonymous people can register.

The anonymous posts are more valuable during times such as the tour when there is a lot going on and the comments are focused on the actual topics of the threads.

I think the entire issue is about one person thinking every anonymous that says something she doesn't like is the same person. Could you just tell her that is not the case? Then we can move on. Or just cancel anonymous posting. Either way the most efficient thing is to make a decision and declare it settled.

There are grumbles from other posters that don't like anonymous posts, also. I'm not saying what you should choose. You'd be doing some people a favor by removing their option to post. But I do think you ought to make a decision and put it to rest.
 
DAVE, you have a god complex; you're a self-righteous person who thinks it is his divine mission--duty--to cleanse the forum of a person who is not a part of the group think. Someone who pokes fun of overweight people. Someone who thinks people who believe in god have FBEs. Boo hoo. Too bad. I am here to stay. And I will continue to say what I feel and think whether you like it or not. Even if you find my words and attitude to be offensive and condescending. Grow a freaking spine. No wonder you abhor alpha males. You clearly are not one yourself. You, however, are a hypersensitive fool who takes offense to anything and anyone who says things that don't fit your carefully constructed world view. And I am closed-minded? Think about it. Who is trying to change whom? You can be all you want to be. Think the way you like. I might not agree. But I am not going to stalk and harass you, onsite and offsite, or anyone else in order to bully them into toeing the PC line. You are crossing normal lines of decency and taking me and this online interacting/posting stuff WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. WAY, WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. Posters come and go. But not you. Dave. You are here because you have nowhere else to go. Why can't you post under a registered user name? Because you were banned two years ago. And can only post anonymously. If you had your way, you would still be posting as Dave. Do you realize how many people hate you on Solo and hated you on MM as well? You are regarded as a Troll. Not a real or kind person. A troll. A troll. A troll. Nothing more. You have been abusing and harassing me since 2004. This is sick. Sick. Sick. Get help!

That fact that you admit you are attempting to abuse a person makes you a monster in my book. A self-righteous psychopath with a god complex. Look kids, we have a live one. So rare to find. You should be locked up. Your vigilantism is dangerous to normal people everywhere. Pet Troll is a misnomer. Your moniker should be Nancy Grace Wannabe.

"Hello Dave! Is that Dave?"
"I'm sorry?"
"Is that Dave?"
"Oh, no, I think you've got the wrong house!"
"Ok, is Dave there?"
"No, there's no-one called Dave here"
"Dave, my wife would like to use your toilet"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkiix0aveRk
 
Re:

I already made a decision long ago, but I am not closed off to making changes. I've given some reasons why I don't think the latest suggestions would be that effective. If the use case for this is the confusion of one user interacting with anonymous people, the solution is to either stop interacting or vice versa, or the anonymous people can register.

The anonymous posts are more valuable during times such as the tour when there is a lot going on and the comments are focused on the actual topics of the threads.

Ask yourself what your goal is? To make me see the light or to abuse me?

Obviously, and as I've said in the past: the latter. But that's insofar as I can be said to be addressing you at all.

He couldn't abuse/stalk me if he couldn't post anonymously. His posts could be tracked. It would be obvious he was systematically harassing me and he would be banned. He admitted to stalking me when he was posting as Tulip. And thus, was banned. When he posts anonymously, he can't be banned. He can continue to do it. And it looks like many are trolling me, when in fact, it is one unhinged individual obsessed with me.
 
Last edited:
Re:

He couldn't abuse/stalk me if he couldn't post anonymously. His posts could be tracked. It would be obvious he was systematically harassing me and he would be banned. He admitted to stalking me when he posting as Tulip. He thus, he was banned. When he posts anonymously, he can't be banned. He can continue to do it. And it looks like many are trolling me, when in fact, it is one unhinged individual obsessed with me.

Why don't you just ignore DAVE? Why do you give any power/authority/recognition to DAVE? What are you getting out of this drama? Thought experiment: if you ignore DAVE, how does he have any power in your world? Why do you give such power/credibility to 'anonymous' comments? Srsly. Why?
 
Re:

For a second, don't you think it's a bit selfish to ask to change an entire system that's been built up over many years because you have a problem with one person? The posts that are getting through are not violations as far as I am concerned. If these posts are that dangerous, go to the authorities and I'll be glad to help them out. Otherwise, as suggested previously by myself and others, ignore them.

He couldn't abuse/stalk me if he couldn't post anonymously. His posts could be tracked. It would be obvious he was systematically harassing me and he would be banned. He admitted to stalking me when he was posting as Tulip. And thus, was banned. When he posts anonymously, he can't be banned. He can continue to do it. And it looks like many are trolling me, when in fact, it is one unhinged individual obsessed with me.
 
Re:

Why don't you just ignore DAVE? Why do you give any power/authority/recognition to DAVE? What are you getting out of this drama? Thought experiment: if you ignore DAVE, how does he have any power in your world? Why do you give such power/credibility to 'anonymous' comments? Srsly. Why?

You are right. Ignore all anonymous troll posts from Dave. Ignore all anonymous troll posts from Dave. Ignore all anonymous troll posts from Dave.

I will try my best. He has no real power, of course not. Just an irritant like a fly buzzing in my ear when I am trying to enjoy my time posting here.
 
Wrong about everything

DAVE, you have a god complex; you're a self-righteous person who thinks it is his divine mission--duty--to cleanse the forum of a person who is not a part of the group think. Someone who pokes fun of overweight people. Someone who thinks people who believe in god have FBEs. Boo hoo. Too bad. I am here to stay. And I will continue to say what I feel and think whether you like it or not. Even if you find my words and attitude to be offensive and condescending. Grow a freaking spine. No wonder you abhor alpha males. You clearly are not one yourself. You, however, are a hypersensitive fool who takes offense to anything and anyone who says things that don't fit your carefully constructed world view. And I am closed-minded? Think about it. Who is trying to change whom? You can be all you want to be. Think the way you like. I might not agree. But I am not going to stalk and harass you, onsite and offsite, or anyone else in order to bully them into toeing the PC line. You are crossing normal lines of decency and taking me and this online interacting/posting stuff WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. WAY, WAY TOO FREAKING SERIOUSLY. Posters come and go. But not you. Dave. You are here because you have nowhere else to go. Why can't you post under a registered user name? Because you were banned two years ago. And can only post anonymously. If you had your way, you would still be posting as Dave. Do you realize how many people hate you on Solo and hated you on MM as well? You are regarded as a Troll. Not a real or kind person. A troll. A troll. A troll. Nothing more. You have been abusing and harassing me since 2004. This is sick. Sick. Sick. Get help!

The fact that you admit you are attempting to abuse a person makes you a monster in my book. A self-righteous psychopath with a god complex. Look kids, we have a live one. So rare to find. You should be locked up. Your vigilantism is dangerous to normal people everywhere. Pet Troll is a misnomer. Your moniker should be Nancy Grace Wannabe.

I'm not Dave.

(Just like I wasn't Viva.)

(Just like I wasn't TBT.)

Dave isn't no1uno.

I'm not making all of the anonymous posts that criticize you.

F.

B.

E.
 
Back
Top Bottom