[R] Trolling/Flamebaiting Sandy Hook Families Thread

[Kernen]

So, I don't know for sure if any one post actually crosses the line, but the emotional pot-stirring and systemic jabbing in the face of attempts to debate make me question the intention of the player. Even if none of this is actionable, I think it's indicative of an overall attempt to derail ideological opponents.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=374858&p=28562176#p28562176
viewtopic.php?p=28562626#p28562626
viewtopic.php?p=28574267#p28574267

This post in particular caught my attention. Considering the tone of the rest of the post, its safe to say this wasn't meant in a friendly way.

Indeed!

The PC term is "Ammosexual", kindly get it right.

I can think of a better one, but I don't want to get banned.

[Big Jim P]

More evidence to be considered:

viewtopic.php?p=28419771#p28419771
viewtopic.php?p=28420255#p28420255
viewtopic.php?p=28421575#p28421575

This one being particularly nasty, and directed at me personally:

People who are against gun control care little about dead school children. look at how gun nutters reacted after Sandy Hook, gun sales went up. All because people like Jim value their precious guns more than human life.

Emphasis mine.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

More evidence to be considered:

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28419771
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28420255
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28421575

This one being particularly nasty, and directed at me personally:

People who are against gun control care little about dead school children. look at how gun nutters reacted after Sandy Hook, gun sales went up. All because people like Jim value their precious guns more than human life.

Emphasis mine.

'Cause you haven't said shit about gun control advocates.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

So, I don't know for sure if any one post actually crosses the line, but the emotional pot-stirring and systemic jabbing in the face of attempts to debate make me question the intention of the player. Even if none of this is actionable, I think it's indicative of an overall attempt to derail ideological opponents.

http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28562176
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28562626
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic ... #p28574267

This post in particular caught my attention. Considering the tone of the rest of the post, its safe to say this wasn't meant in a friendly way.

I can think of a better one, but I don't want to get banned.

Nothing I've said there was against the rules. Strongly worded perhaps but no more than the things Jim and certain other posters have said about me and those who share my views.

[Big Jim P]

More evidence to be considered:

viewtopic.php?p=28419771#p28419771
viewtopic.php?p=28420255#p28420255
viewtopic.php?p=28421575#p28421575

This one being particularly nasty, and directed at me personally:



Emphasis mine.

'Cause you haven't said shit about gun control advocates.

I have, none of which violated site rules or were personally directed.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

'Cause you haven't said shit about gun control advocates.

I have, none of which violated site rules or were personally directed.

Save for when you accused me of being a gun grabber.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Going to add this one here to the consideration pile for possible context. Underlined Emphasis mine:

Just to be clear, I don't give a shit if Jim or his ilk want to stockpile enough ammo to take back the Alamo, just accept reasonable restrictions and support measures to stop the 'bad guys' from getting access to guns.

[Big Jim P]

I have, none of which violated site rules or were personally directed.

Save for when you accused me of being a gun grabber.

I did not accuse you personally, and gun-grabber is far from accusing me of valuing my right to bear arms over the lives of children. I value my right precisely because I value, and am willing to defend innocent life.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

Save for when you accused me of being a gun grabber.

I did not accuse you personally, and gun-grabber is far from accusing me of valuing my right to bear arms over the lives of children.

You accused me and all gun control supporters of being gun grabbers. And no it isn't it is a simple statement of the facts.

I value my right precisely because I value, and am willing to defend innocent life.

'My rights trump your dead.'

[Big Jim P]

I did not accuse you personally, and gun-grabber is far from accusing me of valuing my right to bear arms over the lives of children.

You accused me and all gun control supporters of being gun grabbers. And no it isn't it is a simple statement of the facts.

I value my right precisely because I value, and am willing to defend innocent life.

'My rights trump your dead.'

No, I described a certain subset of gun control advocates as "gun-grabbers".

My right to defend myself, home, loved ones and any other innocent, does indeed trump your right not to.

Enough. Our argument does not belong in Moderation.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

You accused me and all gun control supporters of being gun grabbers. And no it isn't it is a simple statement of the facts.




'My rights trump your dead.'

No, I described a certain subset of gun control advocates as "gun-grabbers".

Nope, you insulted people by calling them a politically charged nickname.

My right to defend myself, home, loved ones and any other innocent, does indeed trump your right not to.

Where did I say it didn't?

Enough. Our argument does not belong in Moderation.

Don't start nothin, wont be nothin.

[TheDrunkenLlamas]

Going to add this one here to the consideration pile for possible context. Underlined Emphasis mine:

Just to be clear, I don't give a shit if Jim or his ilk want to stockpile enough ammo to take back the Alamo, just accept reasonable restrictions and support measures to stop the 'bad guys' from getting access to guns.

Nothing there is against site rules.

[Luna Amore]

Save for when you accused me of being a gun grabber.

Which was ruled not actionable. Moving on.

The links in the OP don't strike me as actionable. However,

Regardless of the outcome, the gun rights fanatics will still whine about the 'ebul gubint' taking away the constitutional right to murder school children.

People who are against gun control care little about dead school children. look at how gun nutters reacted after Sandy Hook, gun sales went up. All because people like Jim value their precious guns more than human life.

We've been over this. Repeatedly. 5 warnings and almost 3 weeks of bans haven't gotten the point across. *** DEAT for trolling and flamebait ***

Don't start nothin, wont be nothin.

I hope you remember that with your next nation.