Friday, April 24, 2009

Definition of a Crybaby

Normally I wouldn't waste a moment of my time posting about an anonymous blog stalker, but I can't let this pass.

We have the infamous anonymous coward known as "anonone" who spews sweeping monomaniacal borderline-exterminationist garbage around the Delaware blogosphere, and who in past comments has falsely accused me, for example, of supporting the Bush administration to the point of saying I somehow 'aided war criminals', amongst other various distortions about me personally.

Of all those with whom I politically or ideologically disagree around the Delaware blogosphere, no matter how strenuously we might argue, none except this particularly nasty troll has ever made such ridiculous and false accusations.

Even those with whom I have had the most heated exchanges or personal friction are honest enough to admit, for example, that I have consistently and vigorously displayed nothing but contempt and condemnation, in the blogosphere and even on public airwaves, over the outrages of Bush, Cheney, their hatchet men, and their neocon warmonger fellow travelers, for example.

This self-important anonymous coward has also made a habit of accusing my and Delaware Libertarian's good friend Mike Matthews and his fellow Down With Absolutes bloggers of racism, amongst other hysterical and ridiculous slurs.

Crazy as it is, given his/her troll status, this "anonone" is the first to cry foul when his wittle sense of propriety in the blogosphere (i.e. that we tolerate and entertain her/his twisted accusations and personalized falsehoods) is somehow if those of us who put out time and effort running a blog and presenting content somehow owe this anonymous troll some type of deference, as he/she hides behind their special little moniker.

Well, guess what? Bulls**t on that.

Like some around the blogosphere I don't buy that any of us is obliged, for any reason, to tolerate the likes of anyone with a trolling track record like "anonone", much less allow our blogs to become his/her forum to make personal attacks and antagonize other commenters or bloggers.

Yesterday when this "anonone" reduced the comments on a post about cold fusion into distorted broad-brush accusations and outright name-calling, in particular calling me a "hypocrite" and "crybaby", I had enough. For the first time in my life I moderated someone's comment (i.e. deleted it). More than anything, it was to send a message to this person that I am drawing the line.

Of course since this "anonone" feels the world owes him/her, he/she immediately went crying to a blog quite friendly to his/her ideology and admittedly quite tolerant of personalized flame wars, for better or worse.

Ironically it is a blog in which some of the moderators admittedly have deleted comments they didn't like and even banned commenters (though it is rare) as is their right, the exercise of which I have never questioned.

This "anonone" childishly leapt to hijack a thread there (as if anyone there necessarily cares what goes on over here or what I do on this blog) to cry like a baby that his comment was quashed :

"Hey, I had a comment deleted by Tyler Nixon over at Delaware Libertarian today.

He accused me of “quite nasty and way over-the-top vitriol.” I basically responded by writing that all anyone had to do was read his Obama posts if they wanted to read “quite nasty and way over-the-top vitriol."

I think he must have got mad when I said that he was a crybaby who liked to dish it out but couldn’t take it in return.

It was in the thread on “cold fusion.” I thought that I was quite polite, actually.

Those crazy Libertarians!"

If such a pathetically self-indulgent comment and the ethos behind it aren't the perfect definition of a "crybaby" I honestly don't know what would be.

Now of course this person thinks that they are being clever in doing this, kind of like a 2nd-grader running off to teacher to snitch, but disguising it as though just commenting on the weather....("Now please please please, teach, tell me what a good boy/girl I am!!").

Well, once again, bulls**t on that. This "anonone" person has previously stalked me (or any mention of me) around the blogosphere, instigating and laying false accusations directly and implicity. I engaged this troll in countless instances and was fine with all the give-and-take.

But this blog has become as much a result of my efforts and energy as Steve and others here and I will be damned if I will tolerate someone of this ilk bringing their personal accusations and anonymous attacks to any post I write.

I have already seen enough bile thrown at my friend, Mike Matthews, who aptly notes that he and the vast majority of Delaware blog commenters have the balls to sign their own name to accusations and attacks, should they happen to engage in any. Many pseudonymous commenters, despite being unknown to many casual readers, are nonetheless personally known to some or all other bloggers in "real life".

"Anonone" has quite quite indignantly and jealously guarded his/her pseudonymity, outlandishly accusing real people by name, but never having the stones to allow for scrutiny or verification of his/her many self-serving claims such as : "I have more than a dozen articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals." It is quite ironic that in nearly the same breath as this claim, this "anonone" pointed out that 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'. (Apparently for everyone but "anonone", of course).

I am all about securing anonymity as a means to protect political or ideological content, but not as cheap cover to make personalized attacks on other commenters/bloggers, while never being personally held to account for one's own claims, or actions, or life, for that matter.

So hear this, anonone : you are banned from commenting in any of my posts from here forward. Your comments will not be accepted by me under any circumstance.

In keeping with my freedom (yes, quite libertarian) to determine who or what is appropriate in comments on my posts here, I am done tolerating this particular internet troll's insidious nonsense and anonymous asshattery.

Commenting is not a right, it is a privilege that "anonone" abused one too many times.

So, as famously said by my good friend Dana Garrett, with whom I once had many heated blog battles and personal arguments (as real friends do) : "Put that in your pipe and smoke it."

Delaware Libertarian godfather Steve does not necessarily agree with me on the moderation of posts; but in libertarian fashion he accepts that my posts are my intellectual property, and that I am free to deal with them however I choose. He does not endorse my action and has his own policy, as stated previously.

This is my decision and mine alone. I can say with 100% certainty that "anonone" is the only person who will ever be subject to such a blanket ban by me on any content I post and, at that, I doubt it will be permanent. I never believe anyone totally irredeemable. Despite the caricature of me that might be conjured by "anonone" or those like him/her, whether from my musings in the blogs or my political advocacy, I am a very forgiving person.

But we all have limits. At the heart of this is how much I detest the personal vitriol I have seen thrown around the blogosphere, not merely at public figures or over public issues but at each other. Too many of us have trouble backing down from a fight (or just recognizing when it is a useless pissing match) I readily admit I have been guilty of...when instigated.

In the case of "anonone", I am simply pre-empting any more of this instigation. I already completely withdrew long ago from ever engaging this person on other blogs. Since then I have only engaged them here, if at all, when they showed up to comment.

If I thought asking "anonone" to steer clear of my posts would be sufficient, I would do so. But since this person is largely an internet phantom, I have no means to do so privately.

So this is the result, like it or not.

Now...back to real life...


Delaware Watch said...

Good move, Tyler.

Delaware Dem said...

I just find it ironic. When we at DL first moderated a comment that we felt crossed a line (not because we didn't like it, as you say), we were excoriated throughout the DE blogosphere for being against free speech. Maybe not you Tyler, but many others.

And now you, Mike Matthews, and Dana Pico have deleted comments. And the lack of outrage is defeaning.

I don't know about the details of (nor do I care to) anonone's battles with you or Mike Matthews. And I don't care if you deleted a comment or not, for that is your business. I just hate the double standard and false outrage everyone else has towards DL. It is tiresome.

Tyler Nixon said...

FTR, DD, I have never bought into this mythical blog "principle" some have expressed about not moderating comments as we see fit, like it or not.

I never, ever criticized or even commented on anyone who did, at your blog or elsewhere.

It may not seem fair to the person being moderated, but as far as I am concerned (and I know your blog has the same position) : TS.

I know Dana (Garrett) has always reserved this right and been up front about it. I have always pretty much agreed with his (and your) position.

I think you guys get the brunt simply because it has happened more often at your blog, if only because of the volume of commentary...

Thanks for visiting!

Hube said...

The difference, Mr. Round Up All Republicans, is that you idiots set the flame standard -- and then deleted comments that were just giving it back to you. Not to mention you've deleted comments for mere political disagreements.

Your whole outfit has become a sorry joke. Hence, your comments here should be regarded w/less than a grain of salt.

Tyler: Well stated post. I agree w/it 100%. 'Ol Perry has been my own personal "anonone," but his [Colossus] ban is only a temporary one. Maybe.

downwithabsolutes said...


What comment did I delete? I'm seriously interested in hearing your answer, because I can't remember deleting any of anonone's comments on my blog. Please provide me more detailed information.

Now, your friend Nemski DID delete a totally inoffensive comment of mine at DL. That was the straw that broke the camel's back. Now I no longer comment at DL because the level of respect offered by tool Nemski was so low.

Delaware Dem said...

I thought you had admitted to moderating Anonone's comments as well, Mike. If I am mistaken, I take it back.

And I wasn't criticizing you Tyler, just making an observation.

And Hube continues to make me wish my statement wasn't hyperbole. If only for a second. ;) Suck on it, Hube.

Hube said...

Not even if I was the last female (or would you prefer male?) on Earth, DD.

You remain a pathetic excuse for a "human being."

Hube said...

BTW, anytime you really wish to attempt to act on your statement, feel free to give it your best shot.

Good luck.

Tyler Nixon said...

God, how ironic that this post has sparked a mini Hube-DD flame sesh...

downwithabsolutes said...

No, DD...your previous comment said I DELETED a comment. I asked you to point out where I DELETED a comment. Now you're changing your argument to MODERATING. I never MODERATED anyone's comments, either.

Sheesh...don't get me mixed up with your fellow DL brethren.

Anonymous said...

Hube, you know very well that I made no offensive comment on your blog that got me banned, which I acknowledge is your priviledge, as it is Tyler's, or DL's or anyone else's.

However, what you have demonstrated to me over and over is that you can give it but you can't take it. You have a short fuse and an anger management problem, as is obvious to all who follow our local blogs.

You call me a troll, when you troll yourself, as you follow me around the local blogs so you can get your ad hominems stated. It's immature and it is weak, in my view. And I might add, "hypocrite" is one of your favorite nouns. What a laugher!!!

Perry Hood

Delaware Dem said...

You're right Matthews, I did say deleted. My mistake. And I stand corrected about you not deleting or moderating comments. I could have sworn you had, or maybe you banned anonone, who knows? Or maybe it was a fever dream about you, which greatly disturbs me. :)

As for Hube, you remain dishonest as ever. You pretend that I never apologized for the hyperbole, and you actually think I could care enough to track you down in some attempt to "round you up and shoot you." Ha. That you think my statement was something more than idiotic hyperbole reveals you to be delusional. Hube, you are just, in the grand scheme of things, a nothing. A wannabee Beck deserving of mockery and nothing more.

Hube said...

Perry: As the saying goes -- "get a life." I comment all over the blogs, here there and everywhere. You persistently commented at Colossus just to comment -- irrelevancies just to slam me. Your analysis of my personality means absolutely nothing since what you say equally applies to you. IOW, it's your usual cut and dry HYPOCRISY. One last time: Take a loooooong look in the mirror before analyzing others. Why you have such a hard-on for me, I'll never know. But your situation w/Colossus was just like A1's w/Tyler. And many others have recognized your trollish behavior on the blogs, on the left and right. So kiss off. I'm done w/you for good.

As for Del Dem: Your "apology" was about as sincere as your blog is intellectual. I will continue to point that very comment out as you and your feeble-minded brethren would never allow any right-leaning person to forget a hateful comment THEY made.

And as for "delusional," just the fact that you call me a Beck clone proves you to be so delusional. And the difference between you and me in the blogosphere is that *I* recognize that my opinions are, in the grand scheme of things, nothing. You actually think people give a shit about you and your fellow haters' opinions.

Just keep in mind, however: *I* have never advocated murdering people merely for their political opinions. You have.

Who's "delusional" again? Who's worth "nothing?"

You're just another loud-mouthed panty-waist....

Anonymous said...

Like I said, Hube: "... what you have demonstrated to me over and over is that you can give it but you can't take it. You have a short fuse and an anger management problem, as is obvious to all who follow our local blogs."Folks need go no further than this thread to view you at your worst, as you bravely hide behind your moniker. So be it!

Perry Hood

Hube said...

I "hide" behind nothing, Perry.

You remain, as ever, a blind hypocrite.