Petition to ban Sculptor

[Magnus Anderson]

Isn't it about time?

[Peter Kropotkin]

I’m not in favor of banning anyone.

Kropotkin

[Meno_]

I have not had the opportunity to get to correspond with Sculptor enough to comment one way or another.

[Motor Daddy]

I vote to ban Sculptor.

He's an oxygen thief!

If I can be banned merely for speaking the truth, then Sculptor is long overdue for wasting our valuable oxygen.

Get that clown out of here!

[Sculptor]

I vote to ban Sculptor.

He's an oxygen thief!

If I can be banned merely for speaking the truth, then Sculptor is long overdue for wasting our valuable oxygen.

Get that clown out of here!

Time dilation is a fact.
You need to go.

[felix dakat]

The supporting arguments for banning him so far are vacuous. He's quick with the ad hominems. But if we banned everyone who ad homs this place would be a ghost town. I voted no.

[pood]

I don’t think Sculptor does ad homs but he does the occasional insult, which are not the same thing. I think he is fine.

I would never vote to ban Motor Daddy because he is so charming. I’m pretty sure his avatar is an actual photo of him. It expresses his personality to a T!

[Ecmandu]

I don’t vote on polls. I make arguments.

I think we have a decent crew here, even if people often hold me as the exemplar of the ILP clown along with iambiguous.

[MagsJ]

_
Nah..

[Mr Reasonable]

i think banning someone is a failure to deal with them otherwise. it says we give up, or that we were unable to maneuver some kind of discourse. i mean look at ecmandu and iambig, those 2 are literally retarded. one is just short of being a bot. like someone could make a program that does what iambig does and we might not be able to tell the difference. the other is legit delusional by any standard, a bit of a drunk and always reverts to his his bit about his superiority and his unique understanding of the cosmos and shit. but we deal with them, if not only for our own sake for the reasons stated above, but for theirs because lets face is those 2 would probably be lost without some place to act nuts.

[Sculptor]

I like to talk plainly, and some people don't like that.
I do not take fools lightly and there are plenty on ILP.

But what is really going on here is that It like to challenge unfounded beliefs and say things about those beliefs that some people can't cope with.
That is what this thread is all about; other's lack of capacity to argue against reason and common sense.

[felix dakat]

I don’t think Sculptor does ad homs but he does the occasional insult, which are not the same thing. I think he is fine.

I would never vote to ban Motor Daddy because he is so charming. I’m pretty sure his avatar is an actual photo of him. It expresses his personality to a T!

Right right more like name calling and insults then actual ad hominem arguments.

[felix dakat]

Duplicate post

[Ierrellus]

Don't forget his good posts. I would not ban him.

[Ecmandu]

i think banning someone is a failure to deal with them otherwise. it says we give up, or that we were unable to maneuver some kind of discourse. i mean look at ecmandu and iambig, those 2 are literally retarded. one is just short of being a bot. like someone could make a program that does what iambig does and we might not be able to tell the difference. the other is legit delusional by any standard, a bit of a drunk and always reverts to his his bit about his superiority and his unique understanding of the cosmos and shit. but we deal with them, if not only for our own sake for the reasons stated above, but for theirs because lets face is those 2 would probably be lost without some place to act nuts.

Mr. R.

Seriously, you’re still on this kick?

You have serious mental problems dude. Debate is the put up and shut up.

You and iambiguous refuse to do it.

The list in actuality is not me and iambiguous, it’s YOU and iambiguous.

[iambiguous]

i think banning someone is a failure to deal with them otherwise. it says we give up, or that we were unable to maneuver some kind of discourse. i mean look at ecmandu and iambig, those 2 are literally retarded. one is just short of being a bot. like someone could make a program that does what iambig does and we might not be able to tell the difference. the other is legit delusional by any standard, a bit of a drunk and always reverts to his his bit about his superiority and his unique understanding of the cosmos and shit. but we deal with them, if not only for our own sake for the reasons stated above, but for theirs because lets face is those 2 would probably be lost without some place to act nuts.

Great! Another opportunity to post this:

...say what any of us will about Satyr and KT, but at least his forum isn't crawling with "social media" types who come into a philosophy forum mostly in order to yak yak yak about the sort of trivial pursuits that one would expect to find on facebook or twitter.

Or contribute post after post after post of "one-liners" in which the whole point seems to be "see how clever I am"?!

Not to mention reminding members over and again that he is the man that every woman wants and that every man wants to be.

I'm sorry but I can't help but associate him with that other "pooper": https://youtu.be/exL51n3py6g

To me, here he is in a nutshell:

I'm sitting on my couch, watching a video of the alabama/lsu game while smoking a bong and waiting for chinese food to be delivered. I was thinking of getting someone over here to clean the place. This is usually what I'm doing, I've seen this game about 130-140 times now. Or I'm in the bathroom someplace, bored and using my phone to post on message boards while I poop.

Also, I get to remind him of the gap between the threads that I started [or sustain] here at ILP...

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=197162
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=170060
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 8&t=195930
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 8&t=196100
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 8&t=196110
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=175121
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=195600
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=175006
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=186929
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=195614
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=195964
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296
https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382

...as opposed to the majority of his own "contributions" which consist mostly of all the cool trips he takes on his cool motorcycle and all the cool things he bought with cool pictures to prove it.

And now this:

"pedro is one of the few examples of someone in the world that i think is cool even though he doesn't really like me"



Oh, and as for banning Sculptor, I'm agin it.

aniceguy and Wendy on the other hand....

[Ecmandu]

Iambiguous,

I like that you stood up for yourself against postards like mr. r.

Ironically, it shows that you’re an objectivist with a solid sense of “I”.

[Motor Daddy]

But what is really going on here is that It like to challenge unfounded beliefs and say things about those beliefs that some people can't cope with.
That is what this thread is all about; other's lack of capacity to argue against reason and common sense.

You don't put forth a logical argument. You simply reply with a few words such as this quote of yours:

He's still wrong.
And clocks do not run fast or slow.
Time is DIFFERENT at DIFFERENT speeds.

...and this:

Is there something wrong with you?
How many other banal examples do you want to unremittingly spew?

You simply say "wrong" and give no explanation.
You simply say "time is different"

Duh?

If you are so logical and understand it, then why don't you explain it the way your logical brain understands it??

I'll tell you why; because you don't understand it, and you're simply spewing BS. That is TROLL behavior, just entering a conversation with a few quick drive-by statements that mean absolutely nothing.

I thought about this thread for a while before I responded. I would normally not be a supporter of banning anyone. But then I thought about how many boards I am banned from, and for what reason? No valid reason at all!

I was merely banned for putting up uncomfortable facts that the Moderators didn't like, because it was against their beliefs. They would simply delete my posts, and ban me, so nobody would ever know.

So I thought to myself, if a mod can ruin my stay at a site, then everyone should be held to same standard. It's either that or get rid of the bad mods, but that isn't gonna happen.

It's no wonder why the boards have dried up. Bad Mods banned so many people there is nothing left. The people that were interested in talking about science were banned, and the religious people were always welcome!

I gives less than a damn, I hope their sites close down due to the fact that they banned all the good people, due to their religious beliefs!

[Mr Reasonable]

lol triggered

[WendyDarling]

Iambiguous,

I like that you stood up for yourself against postards like mr. r.

Ironically, it shows that you’re an objectivist with a solid sense of “I”.

[Magnus Anderson]

Right right more like name calling and insults then actual ad hominem arguments.

"Ad hominem arguments" are better than personal attacks (name calling, insults, etc.) The latter are off-topic distractions meant to emotionally manipulate the public, the former are an attempt to defend one's position using arguments. I wish Sculptor had a habit of posting "ad hominem arguments". But he doesn't.

The supporting arguments for banning him so far are vacuous. He's quick with the ad hominems. But if we banned everyone who ad homs this place would be a ghost town. I voted no.

I don't know what kind of reasoning is that. I'd rather have a ghost town than a town full of criminals (which is what this place currently is -- kind of.) I'd understand that kind of reasoning -- but would still be against it -- if the owners of this forum were making money off this forum. But are they?

A well moderated philosophy forum, even if it only has a handful of members, attracts people interested in philosophical discourse. A badly moderator forum, on the other hand, attracts problematic types and repels logical types. Is that what you want?

Let's take a look at some of Sculptor's recent posts. This is merely scratching the surface. (He's been known for being a problematic type for a very long time -- for many many years. t's certainly not something new.)

He's still wrong.
And clocks do not run fast or slow.
Time is DIFFERENT at DIFFERENT speeds.

Here, he's merely repeating his previously stated beliefs.

Is there something wrong with you?
How many other banal examples do you want to unremittingly spew?

Here, he's suggesting there's something wrong with his interlocutor and he's saying that his interlocutor is "unremittingly spewing" banal examples.

Yet another Einstein denier.
What a moron!

Here, he's laughing at his interlocutor and calling him a moron.

In all three posts, no substance whatsoever, no positive contrubition whatsoever.

And most of his posts are like that if not worse (which makes him a bit more than just an average ad homer.)

[encode_decode]

.

_
Nah..

What happened to your avatar, MagsJ?

.

[Ierrellus]

What is the difference between ad hom and personal insult? Both seem to point to failure to achieve civil discourse. Fortunately, Sculptor can sometimes give decent, well-thought out posts. At other times he acts as the policeman for truth as he sees it. Nothing wrong with that so long as her does not consider those who disagree with him to be fools. I would not ban him, but I would like to see him take a course in polite conversation.

[Magnus Anderson]

What is the difference between ad hom and personal insult? Both seem to point to failure to achieve civil discourse.

I think what they mean by "ad hominem arguments" are arguments that attempt to prove that what the opponent is saying is false by using as a premise that something about the opponent is such and such.

1) John has low IQ.

2) What low IQ people say is false.

3) John says that 2+2=4.

4) Therefore, 2+2=4 is false.

That is better than a simple insult. The argument might not be a good one but it is not an insult (or at the very least, it's more than just an insult.)

At other times he acts as the policeman for truth as he sees it.

Imagine if everyone assumed they are right and everyone else is wrong. Everyone would be a policeman for truth. Everyone would be doing everything they can to promote what they think is truth and demote what they think is falsehood. So instead of having a forum where people are trying to influence each other rationally, you'd have a forum full of nasty people fighting for "ad space".

[Pedro I Rengel]

I like about Sculptor that he is an accurate representative of the current main stream's unadulterated superego.

Every ban tarnishes this website, and its current state is largely due to having banned most of the interesting people along the way. So, in that sense, he is also a little bit of a karmic punishment.

Until we solve the underlying problems that produce Sculptor, we deserve Sculptor.