Re: Why lock?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with the lock because the point has been discussed over and over and over many times with nothing new being added to the argument.
[/ QUOTE ]
Because this is a standard the politics forum consistently adheres to?
The entire discussion was ludicrous, from RedBeans crusade to the ridiculous justifications some Paul supporters made, but I think it's obvious what happened: RedBean pissed off this forum, which is little more than an arm of the Ron Paul campaign at this point, and one (or a few) of those pissed off Paul advocates probably PMed iron...and iron, who's mission in Politics mostly involves trying to satisfy the mob, did what he was told and brought the temp-ban hammer on RedBean. I may be completely wrong -- Iron says it was his decision -- but I doubt it. It was clearly his decision, but like I said, I'm willing to wager iron had 5+ PMs/Notify Moderator messages from angry Paul campaigners, which prompted him to take action.
Either way, "engaging in repetitive and fruitless discussions" and "hammering a point home" have never, ever been a moderating standard the Politics forum has been subject to. That it was applied here is, as I said, likely indicative of the fact that RedBean's form of crusading pissed off this forum's vocal, starry-eyed Paul supporting members.
[/ QUOTE ]
In the "Watch Out" thread, I saw RedBean's behavior as disingenuous.
Regardless of the myriad examples that were presented that demonstrated Dr. Paul's criticism of racism, RedBean seemed to always retort something to the effect of "but that doesn't change the fact that he's a racist."
That borders on taunting, IMO (much like referring to those with particular political beliefs as "starry-eyed" could be construed as taunting.)
And for the record, I didn't send any PM's to iron; I exercised my right to ignore RedBean once I realized that he was being unreasonable.
|