Ban Jimbo?

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks

Ban Jimbo?

No
14
26%
Yes
37
70%
Footy
2
4%
 
Total votes: 53

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 14032
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Sneelock » 25 Aug 2021, 23:58

toomanyhatz wrote:
I've been told he also posts in the Word Association Thread, but I never go there so I can't attest to the veracity of that.


not nearly often enough!
uggy poopy doody.

User avatar
Samoan
Posts: 11530
Joined: 28 May 2008, 10:22
Location: The Glad Tidings Mission Hall

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Samoan » 26 Aug 2021, 10:08

der Freiherr wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:And cheers to Prof for coming up with the 'compromise,' but I'm thinking it's five months later and it seems pretty clear - to me, at least - that it's not working.


Perhaps you missed all the people saying that they never saw his posts anymore or didn’t even know he was still here. Are other people posting down there? My life is too short to look, but it’s an out of the way place and there’s no need to ever look at it.


Quite and I find Prof's compromise (I fail to see why you chose to spell it 'compromise') works fine and Thanks to him for his hard work.

The person unhappy with it is You.
Nonsense to the aggressiveness, I've seen more aggression on the my little pony message board......I mean I was told.

User avatar
The Prof
Trading coffee in Abyssinia
Posts: 46192
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby The Prof » 26 Aug 2021, 11:55

I know we're not a board about conspiracy theories, and I know we're not here to provide a place for him to spout nonsense and I'm disappointed that, when threatened with banning, he never tempers posting or does anything other than spread (mostly) misinformation. but all the same AFAIK he might as well as not be here because I never make the clicks to go and see what's he's posting recently.

User avatar
C
Robust
Posts: 66292
Joined: 22 Jul 2003, 19:06

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby C » 26 Aug 2021, 13:33

Where does he post?

I have no idea

Still, I never read his posts anyway.

That's a choice I have and can make



.
John aka Josh wrote:
C wrote:Covid....?!

nah, strictly corvids and to a lesser degree Corbyns.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 26 Aug 2021, 16:29

So - Jimbo's best defense is that he 'might as well not be here.'

Well now he's not.

You want a kicker? On this thread that HE started, that I revived, there was one additional vote added overnight.

It was for banning.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?

User avatar
The Prof
Trading coffee in Abyssinia
Posts: 46192
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 18:32
Location: A Metropolis of Discontent

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby The Prof » 26 Aug 2021, 16:36

toomanyhatz wrote:So - Jimbo's best defense is that he 'might as well not be here.'



He got me a nice Secret Santa present one year which I still use regularly.

User avatar
Mike Boom
Posts: 3800
Joined: 02 Sep 2005, 03:49

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Mike Boom » 26 Aug 2021, 16:42

The point is not that you don't HAVE to click on it or thats its easy to avoid, the point is that this is board is knowingly hosting anti vaccine mis information and conspiracy theory bs. Its there for the rest of the world to see whether you personally click on it or not.
I personally find it distasteful for this music board to be associated with that sort of crap.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 26 Aug 2021, 16:56

Mike Boom wrote:The point is not that you don't HAVE to click on it or thats its easy to avoid, the point is that this is board is knowingly hosting anti vaccine mis information and conspiracy theory bs. Its there for the rest of the world to see whether you personally click on it or not.
I personally find it distasteful for this music board to be associated with that sort of crap.


And that's the bottom line for me.

I gave everybody here ample opportunity to say 'this board is a better experience for me with him here than it is without him.'

Not one person did.

A few people managed to berate me for my decision to 'pull the trigger' or whatever you want to call it. That's fine, have at it. That was one of the things that made it take so long - the fact that I didn't want to be berated over it. But honestly, I don't care at this point.

Yep, the problem is that I have no self-control, and can't resist responding to him. So my decision is a completely selfish one, about removing that temptation. I had an opportunity to improve my own board experience, and regardless of the desire of others, I took it.

Or, alternately, a bunch of people - a vast majority of those posting here - agreed that we were better off without him. And that he probably was too for that matter.

Either works for me.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?

User avatar
Lord Rother
Posts: 8467
Joined: 11 Feb 2009, 11:54
Location: breaking the legs of the bastard that got me framed

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Lord Rother » 26 Aug 2021, 20:18

Thank you Hatz.

User avatar
Flower
Posts: 9962
Joined: 05 Mar 2009, 22:22
Location: Unlisted

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Flower » 26 Aug 2021, 22:05

toomanyhatz wrote:

A few people managed to berate me for my decision to 'pull the trigger' or whatever you want to call it. That's fine, have at it. That was one of the things that made it take so long - the fact that I didn't want to be berated over it. But honestly, I don't care at this point.


I've not read one post where anyone was berating you. Yes some people offered an opinion that was different than your opinion but that isn't berating.

Yep, the problem is that I have no self-control, and can't resist responding to him. So my decision is a completely selfish one, about removing that temptation. I had an opportunity to improve my own board experience, and regardless of the desire of others, I took it.


So, you are the problem. Seems a bit self serving to me.

Or, alternately, a bunch of people - a vast majority of those posting here - agreed that we were better off without him. And that he probably was too for that matter.

Either works for me.


If either way works for you, why make an issue?

Btw ~ If Jimbo is a troll ... YOU are serving him a feast.
If love could've saved you, you would've lived forever.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 26 Aug 2021, 22:10

:lol: :lol:

Oh my god, and I thought Jimbo was the champion point-misser! That's world class.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 3644
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43
Location: The north side of my town faces east, and the east faces south

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Rorschach » 27 Aug 2021, 08:13

toomanyhatz wrote:
Mike Boom wrote:The point is not that you don't HAVE to click on it or thats its easy to avoid, the point is that this is board is knowingly hosting anti vaccine mis information and conspiracy theory bs. Its there for the rest of the world to see whether you personally click on it or not.
I personally find it distasteful for this music board to be associated with that sort of crap.


And that's the bottom line for me.


And me.

In fact, creating Jimboland worked for me in that I could easily ignore it, or have a go if I wanted to. But, yes, we were in effect enabling the potential spread of dangerous (the the point of being deadly) misinformation.
Ultimately I think it's wrong to give tacit consent to the spread of these ideas, and saying that it was easy to ignore is missing the wider point.
Bugger off.

User avatar
der Freiherr
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 44824
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby der Freiherr » 27 Aug 2021, 09:32

Rorschach wrote:In fact, creating Jimboland worked for me in that I could easily ignore it, or have a go if I wanted to. But, yes, we were in effect enabling the potential spread of dangerous (the the point of being deadly) misinformation.
Ultimately I think it's wrong to give tacit consent to the spread of these ideas, and saying that it was easy to ignore is missing the wider point.


Hatz said Jimboland wasn’t “working.”

That is not true if the intention was to isolate Jimbo’s foolishness somewhere out of the way. It works very well.

He might’ve just come out and said, “look, I want to ban Jimbo. BCB shouldn’t play host to his nonsense.” That’s different. In a another time, I might’ve mustered the energy to make an argument against that but I really don’t care anymore.
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
fange
100% fangetastic
Posts: 13781
Joined: 20 Jan 2010, 11:30
Location: 香港

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby fange » 27 Aug 2021, 10:42

toomanyhatz wrote:
You want a kicker? On this thread that HE started, that I revived, there was one additional vote added overnight.

It was for banning.


That was me.

I haven't been down to the special section for him, but for mine that isn't the point. I agree with what Mike B is saying - having him posting the stuff he has over the last few years hasn't sat well with me.

This is my opinion.
Jonny Spencer wrote:
fange wrote:I've got my quad pants on and i'm ready for some Cock.


By CHRIST you're a man after my own sideways sausage, Ange!

User avatar
Rorschach
Posts: 3644
Joined: 02 Jun 2008, 12:43
Location: The north side of my town faces east, and the east faces south

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Rorschach » 27 Aug 2021, 11:24

der Freiherr wrote:
Rorschach wrote:In fact, creating Jimboland worked for me in that I could easily ignore it, or have a go if I wanted to. But, yes, we were in effect enabling the potential spread of dangerous (the the point of being deadly) misinformation.
Ultimately I think it's wrong to give tacit consent to the spread of these ideas, and saying that it was easy to ignore is missing the wider point.


… if the intention was to isolate Jimbo’s foolishness somewhere out of the way. It works very well.


I hope I made clear that I just agreed with that.

der Freiherr wrote:Hatz said Jimboland wasn’t “working.”...

...He might’ve just come out and said, “look, I want to ban Jimbo. BCB shouldn’t play host to his nonsense.” That’s different. In a another time, I might’ve mustered the energy to make an argument against that but I really don’t care anymore.


When Hatz started the echo chamber thread, his first argument/question in his first post was:


Hatz wrote:1) do we really want to provide an outlet for this? .


And in his next post:

Hatz wrote:What I have reached is a point where I no longer wish to be part of providing him a platform to continue posting misinformation.


Of course, there is more context to these comments and he did also talk about Jimbo’s effect on the board internally but he did, from the beginning, say these things and that’s what I responded to.

I’m sorry you don’t care enough to answer these points because I’m always interested to hear what you have to say on such matters.
Bugger off.

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 43261
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Charlie O. » 27 Aug 2021, 18:02

der Freiherr wrote:Hatz said Jimboland wasn’t “working.”

That is not true if the intention was to isolate Jimbo’s foolishness somewhere out of the way. It works very well.

It works if you read BCB section-by-section. My BCB bookmark takes me to "Active topics" (and I assume I'm not the only one). The establishment of Jimboland has had no effect for those of us who do this, or who like Hatz go straight to "New posts".
Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 27 Aug 2021, 18:34

Or 'your posts' which would then take any of us who'd ever responded there, even if they'd hidden Jimbo, as I had, directly to his doorstep.

I certainly wasn't trying to criticize prof in any way for coming up with the idea. It 'worked' as far as what it was meant to do. I just didn't reckon for the fact that it would make no difference whatsoever in his posting. I assumed that he would eventually give up.

I find it amusing (and perhaps a little disingenuous) that there seems to be a few people here still intent on suggesting that the entirety of the problem is that I responded to him. Again I suggest that those people check out the last ten pages or so of the thread. The only difference between people responding and not responding seems to be that the less any of us responded, the more (and the more outrageous mistruths) he'd post. The intent was to ghettoize him, the result was to motivate him.

So basically, it comes down to this:

I gave everybody here ample opportunity to say 'this board is a better experience for me with him here than it is without him.'

Not one person did.


The fact that that was self-serving too is simply a happy coincidence. What I quote above is the whole of my motivation.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 27 Aug 2021, 18:41

That and my obvious deep-seeded need to be vindictive. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?

User avatar
Deebank
Resonator
Posts: 24394
Joined: 10 Oct 2003, 13:47
Location: Ina beautiful place out in the country

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby Deebank » 28 Aug 2021, 08:16

toomanyhatz wrote:That and my obvious deep-seeded need to be vindictive. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:




Is that a dig? Well, fair enough I suppose.

I get the argument that 'we' don't want to be a conduit for Jimbo's QAnon brand of batshit disinformation but no one - and I mean that literally - comes on to an obscure music forum to browse its darkest recesses seeking out medical advice about the pandemic. I don't see the danger here if that's the argument.
I've been talking about writing a book - 25 years of TEFL - for a few years now. I've got it in me.

Paid anghofio fod dy galon yn y chwyldro

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 29726
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Ban Jimbo?

Postby toomanyhatz » 28 Aug 2021, 08:39

Deebank wrote:
toomanyhatz wrote:That and my obvious deep-seeded need to be vindictive. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:




Is that a dig? Well, fair enough I suppose.

I get the argument that 'we' don't want to be a conduit for Jimbo's QAnon brand of batshit disinformation but no one - and I mean that literally - comes on to an obscure music forum to browse its darkest recesses seeking out medical advice about the pandemic. I don't see the danger here if that's the argument.


Not really a dig at anyone, just trying to be good-humored about it and maybe even poking a little fun at myself. You're not the only one that suggested the idea, anyway.

And yeah, as I said on the thread plenty of times, I wasn't so much worried that someone here would buy into his bs because I know we're all smarter than that. In reality it was no more than a small annoyance, but a) it was dominating things and b) I couldn't come up with any positives about it continuing (and neither could anyone else, it seems).

I know I take on a defensive posture here sometimes, but I'm really not feeling put upon about it, particularly. Feeling pretty good about things, in fact.
Footy wrote:
The Who / Jimi Hendrix Experience Saville Theatre, London Jan '67
. Got Jimi's autograph after the show and went on to see him several times that year


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017* 2018 2020!! 2022?