He is so stupid conservatives say he is a liberal mole to make them look stupid.

has been hilarious at times to behold.

Last edited Tue Dec 15, 2015, 09:33 PM - Edit history (1)

He's a fucking candy ass who is too chicken shit to visit here.

He'll get banned here as a returning troll, so it would be a waste of time.

Go on, trumad, go kick some ass. We all know you can, you've told us so.

You're "edgy"

I believe it says he is R.A. Ganoush. It's right there in the heading.

Or you for that matter.

Am I supposed to be crushed or something that I have been beneath your royal countenance all this time?

I'm a nobody on DU because the mighty trumad has never sent his beneficent gaze in my direction?

I don't know how I can go on.

n/t

Most likely his Mom found out he was using her computer.

this thread:

He was deliberately seeking a time out...so I voted to leave, just to fuck with him. It was sustained, 5-2.

Kon, for all his trolling, will actually engage and debate rationally, if you approach him civilly. And yes, I was surprised as hell to have that happen...

who posts to annoy liberals. He makes no effort to be 'rational', or civil, so what would be the point in trying with him?

But you are encouraging them to game the jury system further. Mountain Dew has now demonstrated how a weak alert reason can throw off the less intelligent jury members from the actual reason a trolling thread should be hidden (in this case, calling Shredded Hedly 'an ass', because SH showed Konservative wrong in another thread), and now they'll use similar tactics when they feel like it. The collective IQ displayed in Discussionst posts will plummet further, and you'll be left with a load of Beavis and Butthead impersonators to talk to there.

But as for your claim that he makes no effort to be rational or civil, I've personally had exchanges with him that demonstrate otherwise. /shrug

FWIW, I almost never vote frivolously on juries. In fact, I make it a point to exclude any consideration of personalities, past posting tendencies, etc., from my decision process, voting on the merits of the post itself, and nothing else. This time, however, there was a clearly frivolous intent to the post and to the notion of getting banned for it. So I responded in an equally frivolous manner...and no apologies for that. I'll PM him about it, in fact...and he knows I'm a liberal. I doubt there will be a problem...

Not to put too fine a point on it, for all its warts, DI has way, way less of a stick up its ass than DU.

The question you need to ask yourself is: are you supportive of Konservative insulting Discussionists (which will almost certainly be any liberals there), because that is having 'less of a stick up it ass' than hiding the insults?

Is the point of Discussionist to be somewhere where everyone insults each other if they feel like it?

I made the exception this time because, again, the post is clearly frivolous in intent.

Moreover, a quick perusal of SH's posts on DI reveals a metric shit-ton of insults, condescension, and snark. That normally wouldn't make any difference to me, but in this context (see above...), I elected to let it stand. Tit for tat, as it were... Once more: no regret, no apologies. My conscience regarding responsible adjudication is clear.

I could probably gin up a pissing match with him if I wanted to...and apparently, we're expected to do so in order to be "good DU'ers." LOL. See above, re: stick-based suppositories.

But there were factors at play that changed my evaluation in this case. For all that he may actually have that view of SH, the insults were obviously included specifically to get the post hidden. It was more important (and entertaining) to me to mess with Kon by refusing to play along by hiding it than it was to redress an insult to someone that dishes out no small amount of the same (albeit in more subtly-couched terms).

Insulting the intelligence of the jurors is utter bullshit. Every person over there is attacked constantly by the DUer that that OP mocks. Why would they vote to hide it?

which seems strange if you think they attack everyone on the board constantly. I don't know which DUer they are anyway.

I don't know that Shredded Hedly is a DUer. I like that member, though. I'm certain s/he can handle being called an asshole.

See the sub-thread starting here: http://www.discussionist.com/1015663782#post11

This was my point: people have been fooled by Mountain Dew's alert saying it's about trumad, when it's about Shredded Hedly.

and his comments show how he wanted it to fail, to 'innoculate' the OP. He has a message for you, for that matter, pointing out why it was him: http://www.discussionist.com/1016155602#post2

You could decide he made it all up and carefully constructed the alert results to look believable, I suppose, but you don't think much of his capabilities.

No, I'm not Hedly. But the "don't go on the internet is you don't like getting insulted" attitude is how you end up with a YouTube comments section - just a place dominated by those who can spray the playground taunts the fastest.

Konservative is probably the most gregarious of the righties over there. We argue and snark each other but I never feel like there's real malice from him.

There are very few people I genuinely dislike over there. You can go from one thread where you're insulting each other to another where you're in complete agreement and not hold a grudge over it.

It's a fun board. You just can't be thin skinned.

He's all right.