Here is a situation I haven't come across before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I smell Borderline Personality Disorder in these trolls.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.


You just made yourself a troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

Hi there - way to ASSume. I'm the one who didn't disagree with disclosing a place of employment. I am not the one who posted the above. Get it straight if you're going to weigh in and snipe!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

4 person office here. I said you didn't know the meaning of irony and your stupid mayo post was not ironic (or entertaining). You returned with "it was ironic, but the irony was just lost on you." I returned with a definition of irony, demonstrating that your post was not ironic. A sidenote, surely, but still, how exactly is that backpedaling? While I am educating you, here's another morsel of knowledge for you: Your first amendment rights concern themselves with the U.S. Government and public institutions, not what you may say on a privately owned website. You're a bored weirdo and I'm not sure what's weirder, that you have tried to make this some sort of East Coast / West Coast battle that nobody but you cares about or the fact that you think your civil liberties are being trampled. Here's your primer on first amendment law, numnuts. It's from wikipedia, so that should make it nice and easy for you to understand.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Although the First Amendment only explicitly applies to the Congress, the Supreme Court has interpreted it as applying to the executive and judicial branches. Additionally, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the limitations of the First Amendment to each state, including any local government within a state.

While Jeff may in fact be the law, the man, the police, or the warden of this forum, your first amendment rights do not apply. Keep coming back to get your ass handed to you, though. You're bested every time you post, why do you keep coming back for more?

[Anonymous]

"While Jeff may in fact be the law, the man, the police, or the warden of this forum, your first amendment rights do not apply. Keep coming back to get your ass handed to you, though. You're bested every time you post, why do you keep coming back for more? "

Brilliant. I also got a chuckle out of the burgeoning east coast/west coast rivarly. I started a thread with "Bring it bitches. . ." but thought better of it. Banker might knock me out with her copy of the Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

4 person office here. I said you didn't know the meaning of irony and your stupid mayo post was not ironic (or entertaining). You returned with "it was ironic, but the irony was just lost on you." I returned with a definition of irony, demonstrating that your post was not ironic. A sidenote, surely, but still, how exactly is that backpedaling? While I am educating you, here's another morsel of knowledge for you: Your first amendment rights concern themselves with the U.S. Government and ublic institutions, not what you may say on a privately owned website. You're a bored weirdo and I'm not sure what's weirder, that you have tried to make this some sort of East Coast / West Coast battle that nobody but you cares about or the fact that you think your civil liberties are being trampled. Here's your primer on first amendment law, numnuts. It's from wikipedia, so that should make it nice and easy for you to understand.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Although the First Amendment only explicitly applies to the Congress, the Supreme Court has interpreted it as applying to the executive and judicial branches. Additionally, in the 20th century, the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the limitations of the First Amendment to each state, including any local government within a state.

While Jeff may in fact be the law, the man, the police, or the warden of this forum, your first amendment rights do not apply. Keep coming back to get your ass handed to you, though. You're bested every time you post, why do you keep coming back for more?

Completely new poster here-While I can't say I agree with either side 100%-I can say that The Banker presented herself very methodically and intelligently. I do not think the poster was handed their ass, as stated above, every single time this person posted. I do not consider telling users of this site to fuck off , a good idea of being "bested".
That is all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I smell Borderline Personality Disorder in these trolls.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.


You just made yourself a troll.

Then I withdraw my post because I certainly don't want to provoke or upset anyone... I'm just fed up with the trolls on here and on other posts I've read tonight.

[Anonymous]

I think banker is doing wonderfully. I might think she is a little overly obsessed, but she has valid points and articulates them very well. She is one of the most worthy debators I have ever seen posting here.

No one has handed her her ass.although she has dished out pleanty of ass with her responses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think banker is doing wonderfully. I might think she is a little overly obsessed, but she has valid points and articulates them very well. She is one of the most worthy debators I have ever seen posting here.

No one has handed her her ass.although she has dished out pleanty of ass with her responses.

She's dishing out ass alright! In fact some might say this farty assed poster is letting SBDs all over this forum. Four person office here. LOL on the "one of the most worthy debators I have ever seen posting here" call. I don't think sock puppeting or invoking protected speech clauses on a private parenting website to be valuable discourse, but perhaps I just define that differently than you.

BTW, who thinks this recent rash of support for our west coast friend is either banker, mayonaise, or one of their lackeys in disguise? She's probably using a hide your IP device now to further the sock puppeting.

Either that, or maybe psycho PATHETIC LIAR nanny is now posting in support of banker! They should start their own forum called DC Annoying Trolls.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely fascinating-an OP about some mom being solicited for Avon turned into a civil rights issue between some person from LA or Hollywood and the website administrator who many folks regularly on here from the DC metro area sort of consider the Dalai Lama-myself among the throngs. Jeff, while I've heard you speak, agreed with most of what you have to say and have always considered you a voice of reason, such display of emotion seems uncharacteristic and frankly, exciting-up until this silly thread you have been my Barack Obama-level headed, never too left or too right(not politically but editorially), makes great copy in terms of your family status, able to appoint great people to help you with your duties, able to stay out of the fray in terms of bigotry, personal opinion and PPD and yet this one thing seemed to get your goat-are these offenders from the WC people you went to high school with and didn't get along? Whatever, just seeing you getting your get up over this nonsense, well, frankly, it's turning me on. My apologies to Maria, but would you object to me sending you my Facebook picture?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

You must be joking. You have me confused with someone else. I never, ever said I didn't agree with Jeff mentioning banker's employment. I never even mentioned it. I didn't care either way. I'm the poster that said I love Jeff and what he stands for. He has a right to do what he wants. It' s his site, so I don't know who your referring to when you talk about me backtracking but get your facts straight. I just called banker out for correcting my spelling when she tries to come across like she is not a troublemaker. Your probably an unhappy person and I get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

You must be joking. You have me confused with someone else. I never, ever said I didn't agree with Jeff mentioning banker's employment. I never even mentioned it. I didn't care either way. I'm the poster that said I love Jeff and what he stands for. He has a right to do what he wants. It' s his site, so I don't know who your referring to when you talk about me backtracking but get your facts straight. I just called banker out for correcting my spelling when she tries to come across like she is not a troublemaker. Your probably an unhappy person and I get it.

Yes, she got you mixed up with me. This is four person office. I initially said I didn't like mentioning the name. But that was the ONLY thing I was in agreement with this freakshop over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely fascinating-an OP about some mom being solicited for Avon turned into a civil rights issue between some person from LA or Hollywood and the website administrator who many folks regularly on here from the DC metro area sort of consider the Dalai Lama-myself among the throngs. Jeff, while I've heard you speak, agreed with most of what you have to say and have always considered you a voice of reason, such display of emotion seems uncharacteristic and frankly, exciting-up until this silly thread you have been my Barack Obama-level headed, never too left or too right(not politically but editorially), makes great copy in terms of your family status, able to appoint great people to help you with your duties, able to stay out of the fray in terms of bigotry, personal opinion and PPD and yet this one thing seemed to get your goat-are these offenders from the WC people you went to high school with and didn't get along? Whatever, just seeing you getting your get up over this nonsense, well, frankly, it's turning me on. My apologies to Maria, but would you object to me sending you my Facebook picture?

LoL...this slayed me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

You must be joking. You have me confused with someone else. I never, ever said I didn't agree with Jeff mentioning banker's employment. I never even mentioned it. I didn't care either way. I'm the poster that said I love Jeff and what he stands for. He has a right to do what he wants. It' s his site, so I don't know who your referring to when you talk about me backtracking but get your facts straight. I just called banker out for correcting my spelling when she tries to come across like she is not a troublemaker. Your probably an unhappy person and I get it.

Ah, now we're finally back in familiar territory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

You must be joking. You have me confused with someone else. I never, ever said I didn't agree with Jeff mentioning banker's employment. I never even mentioned it. I didn't care either way. I'm the poster that said I love Jeff and what he stands for. He has a right to do what he wants. It' s his site, so I don't know who your referring to when you talk about me backtracking but get your facts straight. I just called banker out for correcting my spelling when she tries to come across like she is not a troublemaker. Your probably an unhappy person and I get it.

Ah, now we're finally back in familiar territory.

Not sure I get familiar territory response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bank tycoon here. It's me, jsteele, but on a different IP. Irony poster...you seem pretty confident that my mayo post doesn't fit that first definition of irony. Makes perfect sense to me but clearly, it has upset you enough to attempt to attack me in your juvenile way.Thanks for your input and your backpedalling.

1st Amendment expert...firstly, learn how to spell "amendment". That's twice now you've gotten it wrong so don't blame it on a typo. Secondly, you werent saying anything about facing the consequences. You were saying the 1st Amendment has limits. That's not one of the "limits" in the amendment. I'm not claiming that what I said was any way protected by it. I'm only pointing out that your dear site admin claims to give great reverence to it but really doesn't back that up in action. It's understandable that you'd feel protective of him. He's what you're used to and he'll be here long after I'm gone. That doesn't mean he's a great site admin. While he does post some really insightful and well-thought out things (see, I can give a compliment when it is due), he can also act impulsively and and inconsistently. All I've asked for is some insight into what constitutes the difference between snark and inappropriate and Ive yet to see one. I also have yet to see one single reason why my input is second class because it comes from the west coast, despite repeated requests for both. Are all east coasters this evasive?

jsteele, nobody but yourself had access to that info. Do not even pretend that was anything other than a veiled threat. You STILL refuse to see that there was no conspiracy here. Just one friend giving another a headsup about a topic in a forum. It was NOT an attempt to disrupt the site. If that were the aim, do you think I'd present such an east target? I'd be all over this site causing problems but I'm not and I have not. But Im coming to the conclusion (via my
thick skull) that no amount of persuasion is going to get you to be more judicious in how you discipline or instruct your users. It is indistinct and I think you like it that way. It's your site, though. This has definitely gone on too long.

I'm the one you were correcting about the spelling. Wow. You have just taken away any credibility you might have had in illustrating your point about not wanting to nitpick or get off topic. Instead of listening to someone's explanation, you decide to correct my spelling. You don't comprehend very well. You didn't get Jeff's points or mine, because your too busy have this "my shit don't stink attitude". Once again, do you do any work I hope my bankers are not spending all day on parenting sites. How bout pleasing your boss, and do something constructive. Once again. I will explain it again, Jeff owns the site, and if someone is out of line, which you have proven you are, he can do what he wants. I went back to reread how you entered this thread and I can understand what in the world you thought you might be adding. Your whole attitude was to shit on someone's concern, even if you didn't find it a real concern. You probably don't get along with many people around you and need to find sites like these to get people to listen to you if even for a few minutes. By the way, I thought you said good by along time ago.

Not the banker. But, way to backtrack or go back on what you said. You first didn't agree with Jeff posting the place of bankers employment, but now you say it's okay. Interesting.

You must be joking. You have me confused with someone else. I never, ever said I didn't agree with Jeff mentioning banker's employment. I never even mentioned it. I didn't care either way. I'm the poster that said I love Jeff and what he stands for. He has a right to do what he wants. It' s his site, so I don't know who your referring to when you talk about me backtracking but get your facts straight. I just called banker out for correcting my spelling when she tries to come across like she is not a troublemaker. Your probably an unhappy person and I get it.

Ah, now we're finally back in familiar territory.

Not sure I get familiar territory response.

Not the poster who made the remark, but I think the poster means that the backtracker poster once again needs some spelling corrections.