Okay, ready to go now, heartbreak and all.
First, let me get a bit of professional suicide out of the way here. I have always believe that ideas are worth standing up and fighting for if those ideas can serve to improve one's community, state or country.
When I found The Cocklebur just over two years ago, I honestly believe it was just such an idea, crazy though some thought it was, that Nick Charalambous had come up with: A community forum under the umbrella of the local daily newspaper where local leaders, movers and shakers, could exchange other ideas, good and bad, and debate the relative merits and demerits of those ideas.
Since then, this forum has fostered a lot of goodwill and, whether its critics want to admit it or not, has contributed to progress in the Anderson community. Sadly, though, it has also turned into a conduit of hatred and negativitity.
I personally have two real regrets - disappointments over that.
First, to the extent that I may have contributed to that downwar spiral - to that coarsening of the public discourse to the point that many posters who were regulars no longer post here - I apologize to all.
Second - and this goes back my belief in fighting for what you believe in - I am disappointed in Nick and, to whatever extent he has has been involved in Nick's recent decisions to kill (yes, that will be the ultimate result unless there's a Plan B in place), Butch. I am disappointed because, having met both of them, I thought they were fighters, too.
I was wrong, apparently. When the going gets tough, the tough aren't supposed to say, "To hell with it."
Okay, got that out of my system. Moving on now.
On August 21, Nick took the "unprecedented" step (he said) of putting four members in what amounted to timeout for a week. Those four were Prevail, Rino, Mr. Hankey the Damned Yankee and Zn. Three have since returned; Zn may have, but I haven't seen a post from him yet in that name.
Of the three who have returned, two - Hankey and Prevail - are still whining about their treatment and wondering who turned them in, with Hankey having gone so far as to have SSHM (perhaps the same person) whine openly for him. One - Rino - apparently has accepted the punishmet and has returned, although I noticed earlier tonightl that he and Prevail continue their pissing contest that started on the AIM news site and Straight Talk and bled over to The Cocklebur.
On the morning of August 21 (going back to the evening of the 20th, actually) and on up into the afternoon, Prevail, Rino and Zn engaged in one of the most decadent discussions I have ever witnessed. And, yes, I engaged them in conversation during that time. Most of what was said that was so offensive to so many of us who were there that morning was deleted when Nick removed an entire threat.
However, concurrent with that worst thread were several other threads where those three carried their on juvenile idiocy. You can track those down by date if you want to. But I'll refer you for now to the threat "New Site Design Announcement from Nick" that can be found on about the third or fourth page of the main index of posts.
On that thread, a number of posters were pleading for help from Nick to put an end to Rino and Prevail's (and, to a lesser extent, Zn's) flame war. Among those posts you will find the following:
Oops! I'm not the cavalry, Petunia, especially since the "thumbs up/thumbs down" feature seems to be out of commission and I can't even state an opinion on anybody's post.
What I meant was that both Nick and Butch have been online frequently this morning. I'm sure they're reviewing what's going on here, and I trust their judgment. As I see it, there are three choices:
1. Do nothing. Let the flamers (Rino, Prevail, Zn, Hankey) continue to spout their venom unchallenged, in which case The Cocklebur will become an afterthought when civil debate becomes impossible.
2. Ban those flamers and any of those who refuse to understand that FREE SPEECH does have limits and doesn't really carry a whole lot of weight other than that philosophical respect the owners of the board want to ascribe to it.
3. Swallow really hard and start removing posts that are obscene, profane, or which represent nothing more than personal feuds between one or more bloggers that have nothing to do with the issues.
Of those three, I suspect Nick doesn't have time to engage in No. 3 (that's our job, if and when we get the "thumbs up/thumbs down" option back.
No. 1 isn't really an option, unless The Cocklebur is on the way out anyway and somebody's looking for a reason. I sincerely hope that's not the case, but one never knows.
That leaves Option 2. We'll see what happens, I guess.
-jdtippett
Now, in hindsight, I probably shouldn't have mentioned Hankey in that post, because HE WAS IN NO WAY INVOLVED IN THE EVENTS OF THAT MORNING. His name slipped in largely because of his continual taunting of Stan Welch in previous posts (and, by the way, Welch, under whatever his screenname du jour is, is also a flamer of this highest order.)
There was also an e-mail exchange between me and Nick that morning - two of them, actually - but unlike some on here,I consider those to be none of anybody's business but mine and Nick's.
The bottom line here is this, Prevail. You started a new thread ealier today called "Banned - Part 1" or something like that where you accused Nick of banning you for your OPINIONS and you pointed a finger at the "left side" of this blog as having you banned. I am not on the "left side" of this blog, kind sir, but it is quite probable that I am the one who got you, and Rino, and Zn and (oops) Hankey banned.
In fact, it may surprise you, Prevail, and you, Rino, and you, Zn, that many of us on BOTH sides of the political spectrum think you're all three assholes. It has nothing to do with your opinions. It has to do with your civility, or lack thereof.
Now, I could have mentioned others that morning whose sole intent seems to be to disrupt the chat and turn bloggers against one another for sport. For example:
Stan Welch (Dunebuggy, Friedgreenmater, whatever name he's posting under) - Stan, like me calls himself a journalist. At one time earliy in my Cocklebur career, I thought it would be cool to work with him, possibly on some cooperative in-depth stories like the superb job he did on the Tri-Counties Landfill he did three years ago. But I've seen his handiwork on this forum. I no longer think he has an objective bone in his body. And I wouldn't even think of risking my reputation on a joint byline with him. Some of us have pride. He has only arrogance.
SSHM - Speaking of arrogance, the screenname itself is condescending. His posts are even more so. Disagree with him? Why, you must be an idiot. How DARE anybody disagree with His Royal Genius? (SSHM may have more screen names - John Cleese, White Plains Drifter, who knows - and, if those aren't alter-egos, at least they're cut from the same bolt of cloth.)
Republikin (Constituent, Amy, maybe a dozen other names) - Comes onto The Cocklebur in full attack mode, then gets her panties in a wad and cries foul when anybody responds in kind. But after being unfairly attacked by Stan Welch, I really didn't blame her. Nevertheless, in any verbal contest between her and Stan Welch, there needs to be an adult stepping up to call a truce. Unfortunately, with those two, there wasn't one in sight.
Hankey - I know I've already mentioned him, unfortunately, but this deserves to be said. Hankey is (now, hopefully, was) one of the worst at taunting other bloggers, particularly Stan Welch or anybody he thought was Stan Welch with his "L'il Stanley" routine. I'll be honest with you, though. Like Nick, I am amused by some of his bombs. What I'm not amused by is his style of make-believe illiteracy. Either he is, indeed, "Mr. Hankey the Damned Yankee" and is mocking the stereotype of us Southerners, or he's a Southerner who's mocking Yankees. One way or another, though, in a culture where we struggle mightily to educate our kids to they can become productive members of society, there is nothing amusing about anybody mocking illiteracy.
And, as Forrest Gump said, "That's about all I got to say about that."
Now, I'll wrap this up with a discussion of free speech. First, Noeline, I think that of all the posts I read after Nick put the offenders in timeout, I was most disappointed by yours. I know you're a bit ditzy at times, but I would have thought that you, at least, understand that "free speech" is not unlimited especially on a private blog.
There cannot be a discussion without limits. Political debates have moderators. Forums like this one need moderators. Excessive profanity, "flaming", taunting, slander, personal attacks against other bloggers and their families - all have to be reined in of fair debate is going to be possible.
It's always been obvious that many of us have strong political disagreements. Hell, PAPPY and I, or Andrew and I, can get down and dirty in our discussions sometimes. BUT IT'S NOT PERSONAL. Andrew was subjected to some of the most vicious attacks on here I've ever seen. I don't know if that's why he stopped posting, but maybe. (Hankey still talks about "Hammie" even when AHammett hasn't posted in days.)
It is probably too late to save The Cocklebur, since Nick has, sadly, given up without a halfway decent fight. That means he has let his critics, like Welch, win. I do admire him, sort of, for cutting his losses and retreating. But perhaps the reason I'm so disappointed in him is the difference in our cultures. I have alwaysthought of him as a George Washington type, a founder. I may have overestimated. He's seems to be more of a Gen. Cornwallis type.
But, again, don't blame him for banning those four bloggers. He was under pressure to "do something" - and I'm the one who gave him the suggestion of what to do. He'll never tell you that, because I'm sure he didn't want to throw JDTippett under the short bus that Prevail and Rino are still riding on every day. It's a matter of honor among friends.
But I'll throw myself under that bus and take the burden off of him, even if it makes no difference at all at this point. Without the support of Nick and AIM, this forum is toast. And if he doesn't think it's worth fighting for ... well, I'm a practical man. But I do wish he'd reconsider.
Goodbye. Good luck. Happy blogging...
