A Note Of Thanks!

We blog members are sometimes critical of the blog owner, but sometimes gratitude is in order. In this case, it is to say “Thanks!” to Dana for following Ropelight’s advice and flushing the toilet, sending the two turds (Trolls) down the sewer where they belong. No more “Idiot”, “Liar”, “When’s your book deal coming?” or the ever-annoying “Citation please!”. This place is finally civil again.

Of course, it could be argued that having some liberals around to argue with would spice things up, and maybe drive up message traffic. But the lament has always been: “Where can we find liberals who will discuss issues without constantly launching off on personal attacks?” It could be none such exist, that left wingers are just too angry and puffed up with self-importance to ever engage conservatives in a civil manner. Or, to paraphrase an illustration from Kevin Smith’s movie Chasing Amy, imagine the following scenario:

You have four people standing in a room, and in the middle of them is a $100 bill. They are:

1. Santa Claus
2. The Easter Bunny
3. A nice, civil liberal eager to debate issues
4. A vicious left wing troll just looking for a fight.

So, who gets the $100 bill?

6 Comments

  1. Santa does, because even the vicious left winger understands, once confronted with the true existence of Santa Claus, that score is being kept concerning whether he’s naughty or nice. And since liberals hate carbon emissions, getting a lump of coal in their stockings is a horrible, horrible present! :)

  2. Actually, it’s the vicious left wing troll just looking for a fight who gets the money. That’s because the other three don’t exist!

  3. There will be others who will serve as hosts for these psychological and moral parasites now that Dana’s has refused, but that is their look out. Some, like Vox Day will catch on pretty quickly and then drive the knife home without much hesitation. Others may never do so.

    Dana gave Troll Tolerance in the name of a community ideal, a shot. For years. How many years should it take to prove a point?

    Dana’s ideal was that civility in a voluntary “community” could be made to work un-policed due to the voluntary nature of the association and the existence natural standards of decency and honor which would eventually shame a repeat transgressor into reformation.

    But the needy troll’s [essentially the modern liberal's] moral ideal is diametrically opposed: a presumption by the shameless of unconditional community and unending obligation on the part of others, no matter how obnoxious or harmful or offensive or antithetical the troll’s association proves to be to those others.

    In tolerating the intolerable one merely realizes or makes manifest the troll’s vision of, and for, human life and relationships.

Comments are closed.