Well, I have to say the banning looks kind of fun.
I shuffle around the set like Mr. Rogers.
Chances are low that I will get banned for my sweaters being improperly buttoned.

I feel nothing except that it was the right decision. As far back as 3 years ago he was warned and that wasn't the last time either.

For your viewing pleasure:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7115/banning-bartricks-for-breaking-site-guidelines/p1

He deserved to be banned and he was banned. That's it.

I respect your decision.

Not to give @Benkei free popcorn? Yes, he doesn't deserve it. He'd spit in your face and tell you it's raining, that fella.

I was thinking more along the lines that it would be good to stop the party sooner than later.

Going to leave that to @Jamal. There were some fairly amusing moments there among the chaos but I expect yes, most have had their say.

I just wanted to point out the tu quoque fallacy that everyone thought that y'all be committing to a much higher degree than Bartricks himself.

Y'all be full of shit, was his guiding motto as it appears.

Yeah, you think your more logical because of your IQ.

:chin:

the tu quoque fallacy — Shawn

To be fair, I criticised him for both his personality and for his inept arguments.

Can we go back to arguing for locking this thread again? Second last post before the mods lock it wins. - on the assumption that the last post will be @Baden saying "I locked the thread".

I criticised him for both his personality — Banno

You can't criticize personalities online, only attitudes. And it's not like we're talking about Donald Trump either.

and for his inept arguments. — Banno

On this I only agree.

Two posts. that's cheating.

Banned @Olivier5 for persistently attempting to derail a thread with accusations of trolling and so on, refusing to stop when I asked, calling me an idiot and refusing to take it back, and then suggesting I ban him and saying he wouldn't care if I did.

He would disagree with parts of that, but those are my reasons.

I think some folks get to a stage where they have typed everything they wanted to type about and have received all the answers they are likely to receive from the members of TPF. I think they reach a saturation point and need a break from TPF to recharge and assimilate what has been offered to them. But I have noticed that many, if not most, come back after a while, so why 'burn yer boats,' in the way Olivier5 seems to have done? Why not leave in a dignified manner, if that's what you want to do.

Holy late Christmas gift! I can't believe I missed this. I'm not sure but I think I might hold the record for "Most words wasted on Bart".

I figured if I was meticulous enough with my argument and wording I would be able to at least make Bart unable to reply. A little personal challenge. But, the man is a Master at trolling.

The way he balances reasonable statements with nonsense, the way he manages to find the smallest inaccuracy in your wording to write an essay about, the way he commits a different fallacy each reply so that you can never pin him down, the way his insults are (almost) never actually ad hom. Masterclass.

Banned Olivier5 for persistently attempting to derail a thread with accusations of trolling and so on, refusing to stop when I asked, calling me an idiot and refusing to take it back, and then suggesting I ban him and saying he wouldn't care if I did.

He would disagree with parts of that, but those are my reasons. — Jamal

As a rule, I don't comment in the 'Bannings' thread [*]

What thread are you talking about? Is there a link to the examples of the alleged trolling?

It's unfortunate when a long-term poster is driven to the point where they don't care about being banned.
It is similar to the strong feeling I had when I wished my account to be deleted.
That was a result of the toxicity of the 'Ukraine Crisis' thread; also a general dissatisfaction with TPF and other personal reasons.
We can all be idiots at certain times...and being called one could/should be a wake-up call.
Unfortunately, the account of this particular episode sounds immature and childish.

Re your: 'He would disagree with parts of that, but those are my reasons'
[*] one of the reasons I don't comment is that when a person is banned they can no longer respond.

Sorry to see @Olivier5 go.
If you are reading this, I wish you all the very best. Take care.
Find the joy; follow the dance and music wherever... :flower: :sparkle:

What thread are you talking about? Is there a link to the examples of the alleged trolling? — Amity

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13850/why-is-the-hard-problem-of-consciousness-so-hard

I don't think he specified which posts he considered to be trolling. His point was that anyone arguing that the hard problem of consciousness is not actually a problem is trolling and should stop posting. He was at risk of derailing the discussion and turning it into another flame-war, so I deleted the post. This led to him posting the same thing, only worded differently, whereupon I asked him to stop, whereupon he called me an idiot, and so on.

He was at risk of derailing the discussion and turning it into another flame-war, so I deleted the post. — Jamal

There have been many discussions derailed by heated exchanges between 2 strong-willed characters whose personalities/beliefs have clashed.

I note this exchange on p23 of a long discussion:

↪180 Proof ↪creativesoul The folks who think that there no problem at all are welcome to do something more productive with their time than write here that "there is no problem at all", again and again. You could write about a topic you care for, on a problem you actually face in your p-zombitudiness. — Olivier5

So your idea of a discussion forum is that someone posts a claim and everyone who disagrees with it should refrain from posting in that thread.

That explains a lot about your approach to this forum. — Isaac

Again, I see a mirror of what transpired in the 'Ukraine Crisis' thread.
Again, @Isaac seems to remain your favoured one, no matter all previous complaints against him re misrepresentation and more.

A real pity that it came to this. A permanent banning.
However, @Olivier5 is well out of it :sparkle:

Olivier was a little high strung (much like you). He would completely flip out sometimes, especially in private conversations.

Oh.. :sad:

I for one will be enjoying a few drinks and perusing his past works.

I have a feeling they are likely to increase in value.

With @Olivier5 gone... now who's going to bother reading and replying to @Isaac's posts in the Ukraine Crisis thread?

As I said:

We can all be idiots at certain times... — Amity

Not me. I'm always a frickin genius!

Yes. That genius truly shines through when you're silent.

Yes. That genius truly shines through when you're silent. — Benkei

I thought you were off grid somewhere in France.

@Olivier5 was ultimately banned for refusing moderation. He only has himself to blame. This has nothing to do with @Isaac or any one else.

...banned for refusing moderation. — Baden

That would seem to be a culmination of unfortunate events, including others.
It seems that he couldn't respect the decisions and judgements of @Jamal.
And so, the sword falls...justly or otherwise...

Tu me manques @Olivier5 but we dance on :cool: :sparkle:

It seems that he couldn't respect the decisions and judgements of Jamal.
And so, the sword falls...justly or otherwise... — Amity

Or the rest of the mod team from what I've gathered. And it is just imo that those invited here do so under the condition that they follow moderation. At the same time, I do, of course, respect your right to defend him and bemoan his banning.

Or the rest of the mod team from what I've gathered. — Baden

Is this related to that one thread or over a period of time?
The whole team?

We need one of those signs:

The boss is not always right. But he's always the boss.