So for all the talk about how intelligent he was, he was far from wise. — Xtrix

“Pontificated” is an odd way to interpret me there. — Xtrix

Pontificate - "To speak or express opinions in a pompous or dogmatic way."

I stand by my characterization.

Pointing out a truism isn’t being dogmatic, nor pompous.

The reality is that you’re upset he was banned, and you’re looking for a fight.

Also unwise. But I do similar things often, so I don’t hold it against you.



Yeah— it’s unfortunate. Personally I found most of it funny, even at my own expense. Pretty predictable.

Pointing out a truism isn’t being dogmatic, nor pompous.

The reality is that you’re upset he was banned, and you’re looking for a fight. — Xtrix

You're trying to sound all reasonable instead of smug and self-righteous, but if you were really wise, you'd just shut up and let me vent. But I guess it's important for you to get in the last word.

just shut up and let me vent — T Clark

No.

If you want to vent, don’t make things up about me in the process.

No.

If you want to vent, don’t make things up about me in the process. — Xtrix

I didn't make them up. I mean what I say and I think your words justify my characterization. I understand you disagree.

I say this to let everyone know this was a difficult decision, made over a long period of time, with plenty of prior warning. — Hanover

I have no problem with the decision the moderators made. I know it was hard. You've all known him longer than I have. I'm just furious with people who have contributed much, much less to the forum than he did pissing on him now that he's gone.

Dude, he had some good information sometimes.. and when focused on a source text, could lead some constructive debates... but that guy pissed on everyone when he was here. And I have been here longer than him.. I will give him a positive though.. he seemed to be a fair moderator. He didn't seem to abuse his power.. At least as far as I know from my limited view.

Oooo. That hurts. As much as anyone streelight represented what is best in the forum. — T Clark

I am going to miss Streetlight's posts because he is extremely knowledgeable in politics. — Paths

honestly, street would express anger I just didn't feel like expressing cuz I've become milder over time. But I generally agree with his comments, even when correct and angry -- people didn't like that, of course — Moliere

What a shame. The forum is lesser now. — praxis

clearly we've lost a good contributor here. — Manuel

For better or worse, banning him is definitely a loss to this community. — 180 Proof

Banning Streetlight is bullshit — Maw

Yeah— it’s unfortunate. Personally I found most of it funny, even at my own expense. Pretty predictable. — Xtrix

he had some good information sometimes.. and when focused on a source text, could lead some constructive debates... — schopenhauer1

Agreed. Let's bring back Street!

Was there a specific comment or thread that broke the camels back to get him kicked out?

Was there a specific comment or thread that broke the camels back to get him kicked out? — schopenhauer1

I bet it was his discussion with @180 Proof @baker and @Tate in the roe v wade thread

Several years overdue. He needs therapy more than any other person I have seen on this or any other forum.

Hope he works through whatever his issues are.

I am just surprised he wasn’t done away with years ago tbh. Being knowledgeable is no excuse for open and untamed bigotry and bullying directed towards anyone who happens to share a different opinion.

evidently an ole timer, and not a word was spoken about it by anyone. — skyblack

I think - not sure - he voluntarily requested account deletion. He banned the forum, not vice versa. As far as I know.

Dude, he had some good information sometimes.. and when focused on a source text, could lead some constructive debates... but that guy pissed on everyone when he was here. And I have been here longer than him.. I will give him a positive though.. he seemed to be a fair moderator. He didn't seem to abuse his power.. At least as far as I know from my limited view. — schopenhauer1

Several years overdue. He needs therapy more than any other person I have seen on this or any other forum.

Hope he works through whatever his issues are.

I am just surprised he wasn’t done away with years ago tbh. Being knowledgeable is no excuse for open and untamed bigotry and bullying directed towards anyone who happens to share a different opinion. — I like sushi

@Jamal@Wayfarer

:ok:

I very rarely post on this website, and prefer to remain a reader most of the time. However, for what it's worth I found that for every post Street made that was interesting and worth reading, there were about 5 which had little to no substance other than to berate and belittle his opponents. This sort of thing isn't important for "preserving decorum" (an aspect Street himself would scoff at, and fair enough), it's important because it actually puts other people off contributing. Including me. I will miss his substantive posts, can't we just bring him back and force all his posts through to mod approval while deleting all the hyperbolic aggressive sanctimonious bullshit?

censorship?

On the old site it was always the hypothetical non-posting reader on behalf of whom moderators were supposed to act.

, it's important because it actually puts other people off contributing. Including me. — coolazice

Exactly! But mods cannot be expected to go through every post of a long term and prolific poster forever; this decision is long overdue, and has been delayed because of the one in six excellent contributions.

censorship? — Monitor

No. Flaming, insult and ridicule is an effective means of censorship as coolazice attests, and its removal is essential to free discussion.

Streetlight, banned?! :scream:

hmmm, banning streetlight.... that is a controversial one to say the least. Sure he could be rough at times, but isn't the disruption he might have caused with his hard debating style offset by his very knowledgeable contributions? I would think there should be a balance struck, except maybe when in case of extreme violations. He could he rough, inflammatory, sure, but he did not cross lines of decency and criminality I would think...

isn't the disruption he might have caused with his hard debating style offset by his very knowledgeable contributions? — Tobias

One cannot know how many contributors have been put off posting by the many gratuitous insults he made. But I know of another intelligent poster who has expressed such a sentiment as I quoted above. How many have read such posts and not even bothered to sign up to the site is anyone's guess. I have avoided him as much as I could, so the world has missed some of my pearls because of his flaming. That's three posters already.

One cannot know how many contributors have been put off posting by the many gratuitous insults he made. But I know of another intelligent poster who has expressed such a sentiment as I quoted above. — unenlightened

I appreciate that... I am of the rather thick skinned school when it comes to debating. I think there is a tad too much concern for the feelings of anxiety at receiving a harsh remark, but that is me. Of course there are limits to everything and they lay differently with different people. I am sorry you felt intimidated.

He was overly sensitive, quick to insult and never showed any attempt to use even a slight degree of charity in any interpretation. Once cast in the role of ‘enemy’ he lost all sense of reasoning.

If he was more thick-skinned it might have played out differently. Maybe after several months of therapy he will learn or maybe not. Either way good riddance!

One cannot know how many contributors have been put off posting by the many gratuitous insults he made. — unenlightened

Yep

He was overly sensitive, quick to insult and never showed any attempt to use even a slight degree of charity in any interpretation. Once cast in the role of ‘enemy’ he lost all sense of reasoning.

If he was more thick-skinned it might have played out differently. Maybe after several months of therapy he will learn or maybe not. Either way good riddance! — I like sushi

:100: yep

:100:

He sure read a lot of books, but didn't seem quite able to use any of them to aid his own well-being or guide his behavior. Thoughts and prayers. :pray:

It wasn't just flaming, it was bigotry too. The worst posts have been deleted, so your commentary might not be fully informed. Also, I think it's fair to say that almost no one would object to this decision if @Streetlight wasn't a great contributor in other ways. But we don't give out licences to break the rules to anyone. First and foremost, we try to do what's good for TPF. And it's not good for TPF to allow consistent disruptive invective from anyone or to allow anyone to ignore mod warnings.

Also, I hope no one thinks that this type of thing:

I take it for granted that Christians are vicious, vacuous, shells of human beings who actively ruin everything around them when they are not busy raping children or defending those who do. — Streetlight

is acceptable. If you do, please do us all a favour and leave now.

Including me. I will miss his substantive posts, can't we just bring him back and force all his posts through to mod approval while deleting all the hyperbolic aggressive sanctimonious bullshit? — coolazice

No, we don't babysit posters. They follow the rules or they get banned. It's that simple.

:100:

Streetlight, banned?! — Agent Smith

@Streetlight is banned...

I can confirm that this member asked to be banned. — Jamal

Yes? Diogenes the Dog, when reminded that the people of Sinope had sentenced him to exile, responded that he had sentenced them to remain in Sinope.