You did call me a Wilson sock at one point.
Sounds like Wilson and a certain other poster may be one and the same....
In this thread:
https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/58dab4d7a280c900115d3187/8-simple-rules?reply=58dacacca280c900115d3209
Lest I be accused of lying too. It's a silly little comment, but why even throw such accusations out there willy-nilly?
"Most of those I did accuse turned out to be trolls and had their posts deleted."
Most. What about the ones that weren't trolls? Are those considered collateral damage?
Thank you for answering those three questions. But what about these other two, the important ones:
What is this achieving? What is the end game here?
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the situation with Barclays has been going on long before she wished you dead, hasn't it. As I said, it's reached the point of spamming, and I'm really working hard not to use a stronger word here.
I *can* not read the responses, just as you can not read Barclays responses. See how that applies to various people and situations. If all she wants is attention, why give her that?
Now to more general befuddlements: What are we doing, if we're jumping on new posters because they've asked a question, or because the number next to their user name is small? The bickering has moved to Jim's threads for god's sake! This is ridiculous.
I am not exempt. I participated in the whole Arvin thing and I post my share of OT comments. But come on, man, don't you think this is getting a little out of hand?
Edited because the formatting bug still isn't fixed.
reply
share
napsdufroid (2077)
7 years ago
First off, that comment didn't apply to you. The other poster I was referring to was ben. Sorry, Mina. You're wrong there.
"What about the ones that weren't trolls? Are those considered collateral damage?"
The very few who weren't proved that early on.
"What is this achieving? What is the end game here?"
No end game. Every time the psychopath lies or pulls its usual shit, it's gonna get called out.
"As I said, it's reached the point of spamming"
In your opinion. Actually it hasn't
"just as you can not read Barclays responses. See how that applies to various people and situations. If all she wants is attention, why give her that?"
When I'm called out, I'm gonna respond. When it's an obvious lie to garner sympathy, I'm gonna respond. I'm not the one giving it most of the attention by sympathizing with it.
"if we're jumping on new posters because they've asked a question, or because the number next to their user name is small?"
Again, depends on the question. You-know-who used all kinds of tacks, largely either putting down the site or starting out normal, then outing himself. The psychopath's very first post, which it has conveniently deleted, was about trolling. Others will remember. It also made a number of posts/comments putting down the site. And let's not forget the constant lashing out at anyone who criticizes it. Sorry, that's troll behavior.
" The bickering has moved to Jim's threads for god's sake! "
And who took it there, Mina? With a call-out post, no less? Again, no, I'm not gonna let that go unresponded to.
reply
share
TexasJack (12516)
7 years ago
"As I said, it's reached the point of spamming"
In your opinion. Actually it hasn't
It really has. You're still going on and on about a single post that was deleted a week ago. You're "trolling" (to use your favorite word) all over these boards by responding to her posts and trying to bait her into an argument. Just like you've done in the past with MovieManCin and GuitarKing and who knows how many others.
reply
share
napsdufroid (2077)
7 years ago
You weren't the one wished dead. Not trying to bait it into anything. I really don't care if it responds. Just going to out every lie and Bs story it posts from now on.
As dar as GK and movieboy go, you call it baiting. I call it responding to zombies. And when one makes a statement about something insisting it's fact, particularly in what's happening in the world, they should be able to prove it instead of just repeating it.
reply
share
MinaVladimir (4081)
7 years ago
"First off, that comment didn't apply to you."
I was wrong. I apologise.
"The very few who weren't proved that early on."
So, yes, they were collateral damage, and you're cool with attacking innocent posters? Or no, they were trolls as well, but never proven to actually be ones?
"No end game. Every time the psychopath lies or pulls its usual shit, it's gonna get called out."
If you don't have an end game, this is pretty much virtual masturbation. For you to be attacking and following her around to such an extent you have to be working towards something. Getting her banned, driving her off the site, making her change her behaviour... You still haven't answered the remaining question. What is this achieving?
"In your opinion. Actually it hasn't"
In your opinion. Actually, it has.
"When I'm called out, I'm gonna respond. When it's an obvious lie to garner sympathy, I'm gonna respond. I'm not the one giving it most of the attention by sympathizing with it."
No, you're the one giving her most of the attention by constantly engaging in her negativism and constantly baiting her. Isn't that what you do with alleged trolls to make them out themselves? To make them blow up the whole board? Yet she still remains /4 months now/, and all those socks and trolls are banned post heist.
"Again, depends on the question. You-know-who used all kinds of tacks,..."
So just to be safe we're going to attack any new posters. Just to be safe, for safety's sake.
"... Sorry, that's troll behavior."
The issue here isn't what Barclays is doing. The issue is what you're doing. Which is creating artificial drama.
"And who took it there, Mina?"
So she made a post about you harassing her. Maybe if you stopped engaging she wouldn't be able to make such accusations, and kind of have a point.
My suggestion is, you either come up with something more substantial on her, or you give it a rest. We don't need to be constantly told what she's doing. We are here, and we see it.
reply
share
napsdufroid (2077)
7 years ago
Sorry, calling someone out for wishing you dead, then saying it's no big deal is not creating artificial drama. Whining about being lonely/hating men, accusing people of conspiring against it, lashing out at almost everyone, creating lies... THAT'S creating artificial drama. So the issue is indeed what the psychopath is doing.
"So just to be safe we're going to attack any new posters"
Never said that, did I? It's not hard to tell the trolls from the actual posters.
"We are here, and we see it."
You may see it, but it apparently doesn't make a dent with many. What's more substantial than pointing out its nastiness, hypocrisy, anger, bullshit, and constant lying? But even you still choose to sympathize with it.
I'm not going to go into more specifics, because it's already been proven the mods here don't treat everyone equally.
As I said, if the posts bug you, don't read them.
reply
share
MinaVladimir (4081)
7 years ago
Nah, the issue is still what you're doing. You've been on her before she wished you dead. Not only her mind. And we're all just the little froggies, stuck, in the pot you've been stirring.
If people like you didn't jump on any post that was off, these people would have no incentive to make any more of them.
If it doesn't make a dent with many, maybe it isn't the problem you think it is. Further more, you've never met a nasty person IRL? Do you follow _them_ around, shouting "Liar!" after them in the supermarket?
The Mods would treat you equally, if you provide proof for an actual infringement. Not two bickering children, locked in a "He said, She said". They might be slow and disorganised, but they get there eventually.
I would avoid the posts, if only I knew where they'd pop up. You two are like the Spanish Inquisition. But not as fun.
reply
share
napsdufroid (2077)
7 years ago
Really? You mean the way they let certain posters get away with pretty much everything? The way they give some posters bans and some a wrist-slap? Don't take my word alone; there's plenty of evidence here they do just that.
You always have the option to scroll past.
reply
share
MinaVladimir (4081)
7 years ago
Have you seen Arvin lately?
reply
share
napsdufroid (2077)
7 years ago
Nope. Not the first time he's disappeared. Not a ban. He always pulls his horns in when he's proven wrong on here.
And I have a question for you. You have no problem criticizing me. Why not apply that to the psychopath who was nasty to the OP here for absolutely no reason? Didn't see you taking it to task for that; asking it what it was hoping to accomplish by being a rude AH. Go try that for a while and let me know how it works out for you.
reply
share
Catbookss (13664)
7 years ago
Naps, you know I like you, but you're creating SO MUCH drama. Most everyone is tired of it. All we want is to have fun and for this to be the friendly, congenial place it once was.
Barclays is not a psychopath. She's not the nicest poster here, for sure, but not only has she proven to me (and apparently others) by now she's not you-know-who, but also not an actual troll.
Think back to how all of this started. It was unfortunate timing that Barclays signed up and started posting right after a huge falderal with He Who Shall Not Be Named.
You suspected her, I suspected her, and she had every right to be put on the defensive from being falsely accused.
You have been *relentlessly* attacking her, keeping the fires of this stupid drama alive. She didn't even respond to you for months. No doubt because she really *did* have you on ignore, as well as me, just like she said she did, because she hasn't replied to any of my posts either.
Just STOP, for god's sake! You're not accomplishing anything except unnecessary drama. I think you enjoy fighting :/
reply
share
MinaVladimir (4081)
7 years ago
Ban or no, he ain't here.
Because I'm not a fish, hence I can't be baited into arguments? Also, I'd be a hypocrite if I engaged when I'm advising you not to.
reply
share