|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 137 OF 453 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-17-20 | | diceman: <perfidious: <saffuna: <I agree it would be right to return the Rogoff page back to chess and @#$% down the politics.> Pretty convenient of <big pawn> to pick this exact moment to want to get politics off that page. The biggest, most aggressive Trump fan on this site....> It has long been a psychological puzzle why, given the advantages he claims to possess ad nauseam, <bumptious the prolix> feels the need to control CG and its content; after all, he offered to buy a slough of premium memberships a few years ago if the Rogovian miasma were cleaned up, in accordance with his desires.> The winners, winning.
Whaaaa, whaaa, whaaa!
<saffuna:
I invite people to read the current Rogoff page and decide for themselves whether we are leftist extremists.> Did Robert KKK Byrd wear his hood in the Senate? Lets go to Chicago's inner-city morgues and see if you're an extremist. (Mr. truth/integrity can't seem to find Chicago) |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | Big Pawn: < diceman: <perfidious: <saffuna: <I agree it would be right to return the Rogoff page back to chess and @#$% down the politics.> Pretty convenient of <big pawn> to pick this exact moment to want to get politics off that page. The biggest, most aggressive Trump fan on this site....> >What does <Softtuna> think he's going to accomplish by lying like this? Years ago I was advocating for deleting the Rogoff page and returning it back to a chess player page. I've even discussed it with him. From 2016:
<100 Free accounts is what I'm thinking, but not for you <jim>, you can pay your own fair share.#delete <rogoff> page and all contents in it.> Kenneth S Rogoff (kibitz #214878) |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | perfidious: The examples cited by <zed> are by no means isolated, either, yet posters such as the one to which those snippets are attributed runs whingeing to <mommy admin>, same as <jussie kudzu>, whenever one of his ideological 'enemies' comes near to giving as good as they get. Their hypocrisy is appalling in its scope. |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | saffuna: <What does <Softtuna> think he's going to accomplish by lying like this?> The desire to eliminate political discussion on Rogoff has popped up off and on for years, but has increased noticeably since the rightwingers' unbeatable hero was in fact defeated in the election. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: I would like to note that <big pawn> is not responding to my post, but what another person re-posted from my post. He has me on ignore. So he doesn't really know what I wrote.
I repeat my request that the ignore function be defined more strictly. If a poster has another on ignore, then he/she should not be permitted to respond to the second poster. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | perfidious: <saffuna>, with all respect, actually I disagree with that proposition; if such posters as the one named are allowed to spread their lies, libels and calumnies knowing they will not be facing any sort of response, it may well encourage their behaviour, which is already de trop. Case in point: I note that <suboptimal> has presumed to address me on this page. Whether or not I respond should be <my> choice, not controlled by others. Why should he (or anyone else) be allowed to lie, exaggerate or misrepresent without fear of response or potential retribution? |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | Check It Out: <saffuna> You mean like: "If you place another poster on ignore you shall not respond to, talk about, mention by name, or refer to, that poster." Get serious, that's not feasible. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: I mean not respond to what the person on ignore posts. It would be difficult/impossible to enforce, I agree. But at least it could be part of the guideline. I am so tired of having people respond to a snippet of a post of mine, without seeing the context. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: <perf><...with all respect, actually I disagree with that proposition; if such posters as the one named are allowed to spread their lies, libels and calumnies knowing they will not be facing any sort of response, it may well encourage their behaviour, which is already de trop.> You misunderstand. I can respond to anyone who has me on ignore. That has been clarified by <susan> on this page. |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | Ybr: <realdumptrump><Moving discussions to a private forum (like <bippy>'s nFSZ, aka, the Catholic Defamation League) isn't the solution either...> Hahaha! Catholic defamation league ! My heart goes to <optimal play> ! The price that he has to pay for the joy of bashing 'godless libs ' in <free speech zone > ! Hahaha just saying :) cheers :) |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | Ybr: <realdumptrump: To be sure, the fundamental problem is that open discussion gets misappropriated for pure abuse, such as this...
<Of course, the evil, wicked, moralless, depraved, disgusting, libs here don't care.> Kenneth S Rogoff (kibitz #451285) <Of course, the godless, despicable, horrible, wicked, evil, disgusting pieces of human filth here don't care about that.> Kenneth S Rogoff (kibitz #451286) Someone once inquired about examples of hate-speech here on <CG>. Well, there ya go. The above weren't examples of parody, or sarcasm, but unguarded true opinions held by the poster, a purportedly well-respected elder statesman of <CG>. Forgive me, but I think not>
Hahaha but <ohiochessfan> does look like a saint if you compare with the abuses (including racist abuses) hurled by the other elite posters of the gang - <big pawn> , <keyser soze> ....i am still awed at the way <nisjesram> put a stop to those abuses...what a genius ..hahaha just saying :) cheers :) |
|
Nov-17-20
| | perfidious: <saffuna....You misunderstand....> My dear sir, I have made a career of misunderstanding. |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | diceman: <saffuna: I would like to note that <big pawn> is not responding to my post, but what another person re-posted from my post. He has me on ignore. So he doesn't really know what I wrote.> Did you go "in-between-his ears" to see if he peeked? (Yes, saffuna has those mad skills)
<I repeat my request that the ignore function be defined more strictly. If a poster has another on ignore, then he/she should not be permitted to respond to the second poster.> If you can't handle it, you should put him on ignore. |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | Susan Freeman: < If you can't handle it, you should put him on ignore.>
Now you’re thinkin 😊👍 |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | Keyser Soze: <Saffuna> still whining about people who <ignores> him? Swell
heh heh heh |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: I am wishing that people who put me on ignore actually ignore me. Of course we know anything goes on the Rogoff page, and administrators are fine with it. For example: <the brown bastard is back.Hey Indian scum. You can't trash on my forum anymore. And I'm reporting you to adm. You were banned and gotta stay that way curry boy.> |
|
Nov-17-20
| | Susan Freeman: We are closing it down.
I have to get Sargon to help |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: Just say the word and I will no longer post about politics on that page. I just ask that you assure that others stop as well. |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | Big Pawn: <Susan Freeman: We are closing it down.
I have to get Sargon to help>
About time. I was wondering if you were going to make a decision and actually take action. < Susan Freeman: < If you can't handle it, you should put him on ignore.> Now you’re thinking > This could only be response to one poster - the <tuna>. Is he here in the support forum crying about the people who have him on ignore? Unbelievable. Tell that 70 year old man to grow up, grow a pair and get on with life. <Susan>, I hope you seriously considered my suggestion about creating a page for the Snowflakes. Remember, I suggested the <Snowflake Lounge>? In the meanwhile, my forum, the Free Speech Zone (Non PC) is open to everyone, even the libs. I have a very short list of people on ignore who can't post there, but they are only the known trolls. It's like a favor to the community here. Glad to see the <Rogoff> page going down. Just imagine, it's about half a million troll posts from one end to the other. Almost all of it pure garbage, truth be told. Life is fair.
Life is good. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: <This could only be response to one poster - the <tuna>. Is he here in the support forum crying about the people who have him on ignore? Unbelievable. Tell that 70 year old man to grow up, grow a pair and get on with life.> I am getting on just fine, now that <big pawn>'s omnipotent Great Alpha Male has been defeated decisively. A bit of hypocrisy from <big pawn> though. He has posted on Rogoff thousands of tines usibg at least eifgr different usernames. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: <Life is fair.
Life is good.>
Yes. Trump has lost. |
|
Nov-17-20
| | saffuna: <In the meanwhile, my forum, the Free Speech Zone (Non PC) is open to everyone, even the libs. I have a very short list of people on ignore who can't post there, but they are only the known trolls. > Then it's not open to everyone, is it?
Any person who challenges or debunks the rightwing core on that page gets banned. They can't stand to have their lies called out. |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | realdumptrump: < <SF> We are closing it down.
I have to get Sargon to help>
See, <CG> does have a hard-right bias. Time to shut down Rogoff = Trump was defeated. . |
|
Nov-17-20
 | | chancho: Hopefully "closing it down" is moving it somewhere else, but if not, it's all good. |
|
| Nov-17-20 | | realdumptrump: Susan, you really should sell <CG>, and allow Daniel's legarcy to live or die on it's own. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 137 OF 453 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
