Seems Tom King is catching a bit of well-deserved flak from his fellow travellers.
As I noted earlier, gunloons are all for “reasoned discourse” so long as it’s discourse that is approved by them and doesn’t deviate from the party line.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Get free blog up and running in minutes with Blogsome
Theme designed by Gary Rogers
Hypocricy, thy name is “Left Rudder”.
… shame you got stuck wtih that moniker, though. I almost feel bad for Hypocricy.
Comment by Linoge — August 31, 2007 @ 9:39 am
OK, so if that’s the case, why is the gun blogging community calling him out for it?
Comment by Sebastian — August 31, 2007 @ 9:41 am
I did not ban the VPC website I use it all the time when I want a laugh and remind myself about publishing the truth. What I did was tell jade I would not accept one of his statements until I could check it out as the only citation was the VPC. I also told him there was another statement he made I didn’t believe but would give him the benefit of the doubt because I did not have time to check it out. Below is a copy of the email I sent to Jade
Jadegold,
The Violence Policy Center is not a viable citation for proof of an NRA position, that’s like asking Israel to give a recommendation for Syria. I will allow your statement regarding gun ownership because I do not have time to check it out right now. I could have stated, as I saw in an earlier post, that CBS and the Georgetown Professor were anti gun hacks. I do believe either you or warvet did make a similar statement regarding John Lott.
Tom King
Jade was banned from this cite because of his inflammatory remarks regarding kids killing friends and such that have been documented here and on other blogs. I set the rules from the git-go and intend to follow them. That said; If Jade wants to apologize for his remarks he will be allowed to resume posting AS LONG AS HE FOLLOWS THE RULES.
Calling names is such an intelligent way to debate. I’m glad we are rid of you.
Enough of this BS because of one distressed soul.
Comment by Tom King — August 31, 2007 @ 9:42 am
Sebastian: Yours in but one lonely voice in the gun blogging community. I appreciate your civility. But it is all too common in your community that “reasoned discourse” is censorship and threats.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 9:46 am
Tom King-Dishonest Censor: If I were on your blog, you’d delete and edit my comments. I leave yours alone to stand as a testament to your hypocrisy.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 9:56 am
Judging from my traffic, I would beg to differ, and SayUncle reaches one of the largest audiences, if not the largest audience, in this sphere.
Comment by Sebastian — August 31, 2007 @ 9:56 am
Sebastian: I would count SayUncle as one of those sites which censors and threatens those who do not ‘toe’ the party line. I was banned there while another poster who advocated violence was not.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 10:03 am
Jade, one of your own ISP’s has bounced you. You use the same logic as the person who has been divorced half-a-dozen times yet blames all of it on thier partners.
Comment by thirdpower — August 31, 2007 @ 10:06 am
Thirdpower: You remain delusional. Why not run over to Tom King’s site and breathlessly tell him how you bested me. Maybe he’ll give you a treat.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 10:11 am
The truth really hurts, doesn’t it Jade?
Comment by thirdpower — August 31, 2007 @ 10:14 am
Nope, the truth never hurts, Thirdpower. That’s why you’re squealing like a stuck pig.
I deflated your ‘more guns equal less crime’ argument and that stings.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 10:17 am
Another red herring. When did I make that argument Jade? Please show me.
Comment by thirdpower — August 31, 2007 @ 10:19 am
But it is all too common in your community that “reasoned discourse” is censorship and threats.
Please. The only people you are fooling with that ridiculous assertion is echo chamber inhabitants that never read gun blogs.
Sebastian isn’t the only one criticizing Mr. King for his policies:
Say Uncle
And if you read comments to Mr. Kings, Sebastian and Uncle’s posts, you’ll find that many pro-freedom advocates agree…including myself by the way.
I’d much rather have the anti-freedom poo flinging, misleading, reality denying, unhinged, PSH, anti-freedom rants out in the open for all to see.
Mr. King has the right to run his blog any way he sees fit…but I think he’s making a mistake in this respect and I hope he will reconsider.
Comment by Sailorcurt — August 31, 2007 @ 10:21 am
Sailorcurt: I don’t disagree; for all I care, a blogowner can ban anyone because they don’t like the color of someone’s socks.
But that blogowner shouldn’t pretend they’re open to everyone regardless of sock color.
Really, SayUncle has very little room to talk about this issue.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 10:31 am
Jade, if you were so concerned about weblogs deleting comments that did not toe the party line, I expect you will also be writing a few posts on Robyn Ringler (for an immediate and obviously example of this phenomena), ILoveMyDaughterMoreThanYouLoveYourGun, and all of the other “gun control” weblogs out there that perform the same activities.
For the record, I really have no problems with what Mr. King did, but I am a self-avowed and easily-identified asshole. I have absolultely no problems with you presenting your information and websites on his weblog, Jade. However, when you started dragging other people’s families into the conversation and through the mud, tried your best to hate- and fear-monger, and generally tried to cloud a logical argument with copious amounts of pointless emotion… Yeah, that kind of idiocy *has* to have repercussions.
In other news, I just cannot spell. Blah.
Comment by Linoge — August 31, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Linoge: Nobody drug anyone’s family into anything. MAJ Mike brought his own family into the discussion first, on a number of occasions. The fact is that when a shooting involving a kid, accidental or otherwise, they always interview the parents who claim ‘we had no idea’ or ‘we always taught him to be careful.’
I’d also point to the comments on Robyn’s blog concerning the Woodling case.
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 10:42 am
Uhm, the first sentence of this entry refutes the second sentence.
Isn’t it plain that since, as you note, Tom is getting flak from us “gunloons” for censoring and micromanaging the comments, that obviously we ARE for “reasoned discourse” even when it opposes our position?
We are all sitting there saying that you should be allowed to post whatever comments and links contradicting our arguments that you want. We’re defending a gun control advocate’s ability to post views we disagree with and don’t approve of.
I think you’re a complete jackass, but I don’t think your absurd comments repeated logical fallacies should be censored or banned, and they never would be on my blog.
Comment by Guav — August 31, 2007 @ 11:28 am
Guav: Actually, only one site (Sebastian’s) has really chided Tom King-Dishonest Censor.
I think you’re a complete jackass, but I don’t think your absurd comments repeated logical fallacies
Say, now that’s ‘reasoned discourse.’
Comment by Administrator — August 31, 2007 @ 11:34 am
Jade, you’re in no position to lecture anyone about “reasoned discourse.” The only reason I would say anything like that to you is because you set the tone with me a long time ago.
The issue at hand is whether or not you should be censored, not whether or not you should be treated with kid gloves as you insult people and purposefully distort their positions.
On the topic of censorship, not only Sebastian has chided him but SayUncle has also, as well as several of us who have been talking to Tom within the comments on his blog telling him that the less restrictions on comments the better and that he shouldn’t censor you.
Of course, you know very well that more than just Sebastian is arguing against censoring you, because you used a plural description when describing who is giving Tom flak—you didn’t say “a fellow traveler.”
Fact remains, we don’t want you censored, and we are not afraid of your arguments in the least.
Comment by Guav — August 31, 2007 @ 11:58 am
So perhaps you were not the one who initially brought up the topic of firearm-owners’ families. You were, however, the one who distorted and disrupted the situation with pointless rhetoric, pathetic emotional pleas, and downright churlish behavior. Fear-mongering has no place in any conversation, especially when it is being levelled against another participant’s family.
And, sorry, Jade, but one instance of Robyn publishing comments that do not toe her remarkably narrow party line does not come anywhere near excusing the tens (hundreds? Thousands, even?) of times she has deleted/moderated comments that do not. The same stands for all of the rest of the “gun control” (read “gun theft”) weblogs out there… especially those that simply turned off comments because they realized their arguments could not stand up to public scrutiny.
Comment by Linoge — August 31, 2007 @ 12:38 pm
Guav: Do you seriously wish to engage in a discussion of which side engages in “reasoned discourse” and which side does not? I’m happy to entertain that discussion.
“cold dead hands” and NRA Board member Ted Nugent are on your side, you know.
Comment by Administrator — September 3, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Your latest comment has absolutely nothing to do with any of the comments I made here:
1. That we gun bloggers and commenters don’t think you should be censored, regardless of whether or not we agree with your position, and
2. That given the way you talk to us, you’re in no position to whine about me telling you that my *personal opinion* of you is that you are a jackass.
Comment by Guav — September 4, 2007 @ 9:44 am
Where did I whine about your “personal opinion,” Guav? The fact is you (and when I say ‘you’, I mean your side) don’t want discussion–you want to shut down discussion.
Comment by Administrator — September 4, 2007 @ 10:55 am
And yet it’s the anti blogs that most often “shut down discussion”.
Comment by thirdpower — September 4, 2007 @ 12:07 pm
Like SayUncle? I agree.
Comment by Administrator — September 4, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
I said:
“I think you’re a complete jackass, but I don’t think your absurd comments repeated logical fallacies should be censored or banned.”
You replied, sarcastically,
“Say, now that’s ‘reasoned discourse.’”
One can only assume you don’t think what I said was reasoned discourse because it contained my negative opinion of you. Given that you routinely express negative opinions about us in your comments, I found your feigned offense and sudden concern for “reasoned discourse” to be less than geniune.
Are there major gun control blogs that allow comments?
Comment by Guav — September 4, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
Guav: You folks assert you’re all for ‘reasoned discourse™’ and you come on my blog and call me a name. No whining here, but am I permitted to point out the sheer silliness of your comment?
Comment by Administrator — September 4, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
You’re permitted to say whatever you want to say.
To me the issue is one of censorship—comments being banned. You implied that King’s banning of you proves the pro-gunners do not support the free exchange of ideas, even though the sentence immediately preceding it—and the fact that many of us criticized him for banning you and his comment policy in general—means that obviously the free flow of ideas is more important to us than whether or not your ideas are things we agree with. In my blog, I don’t delete comments that are insulting or ban commenters I don’t like.
Fact: Most of us would rather have your comments allowed.
Yeah, I called you a name. Nothing worse than things you’ve said to us. No, name-calling is NOT reasoned discourse, not when I do it and not when you do it, nor is it intended to be so. Me telling you what I think of you is not part of the gun debate; it’s not discourse at all—it’s my opinion.
I am all for reasoned discourse. That doesn’t mean that if someone I’m debating isn’t entirely civil to me, that eventually I won’t give back what I’m getting. But I’d much prefer to leave that bullshit out of it. I’ve had long, extended debates on this topic with people who I completely and totally disagreed with, yet we never got to the point that you get with almost everyone you debate.
It’s not what you say that bothers almost everyone you come into contact with, it’s how you say it. We don’t fear your arguments, we dislike how you present them. You don’t piss me off because you’re a gun control advocate, you piss me off because you purposefully distort the things I say, assign nefarious motives that I don’t have, jump to conclusions I never implied and accuse me holding views I don’t hold.
You’re absolutely infuriating to debate not because your arguments are exceptional but because you muck up the discussion with all sorts of other bullshit.
Comment by Guav — September 4, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
Tom King’s banning as well as SayUncle’s banning pretty well proves the point. Gunloons don’t want ‘reasoned discourse™,’ they want blind obedience to their views. Look at how Robyn Ringler was treated; she mentions she got threats–how did your side respond? ‘Well, that’s unfortunate–but you deserved it.’
Another commenter on Robyn’s site is accused of molesting his own child just because he doesn’t kowtow to the gunloon party line.
My arguments are exceptional, Guav. And they’re effective. That’s what really bothers you. But I’m not a wallflower. If you call me a traitor or some other pejorative, I’m going to give at least as good as I get.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 7:43 am
You were not banned from Uncle’s. Kevin didn’t delete any of your comments. I didn’t “accuse”.Robb didn’t say she “deserved it”. You’re flat out lying and you know it. Keep posting.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 9:31 am
First of all, SayUncle says you’re not banned there and I believe him. Tom King’s banning of you was criticzed by the rest of us, as you have already acknowledged.
I’ll ask again: Are there any major gun control blogs that allow comments?
Thirdpower did not accuse ATR of molesting his girl any more than you said you wished Mike’s kid would shoot himself—both are complete mischaracterizations of what was actually said.
Your arguments are NOT exceptional, they are merely better than the usual emotional pap people like Robyn put forth. You COULD be effective if people wanted to have anything to do with you, but you come off like an asshole when you debate people, which is shooting yourself in the foot. You fuck up what could be decent arguments by bookending them with red herrings and straw men, along with the occasional ad hominem.
Are you the only one guilty of that? Certainly not. But that shouldn’t be the category you want to be in.
And as far you “giving as good as you get,” I never once said anything insulting to you, nor did I ever call you a traitor or anything else before you exhibited the behavior towards me that led me to believe you should be taken with a grain of salt.
And can you please fix your comments so that the paragraphs are actually spaced by a line? These line breaks suck.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 10:09 am
Guav: You really shouldn’t believe Kevin Baker, he’s a notorious liar. He banned me.
As for major gun control blogs that allow comments–I don’t know. I generally don’t frequent them so I’m the wrong person to ask. I will say, however, based on Robyn’s blog–any gun control blog will have a small cadre of folks infest the area with threats, insults and general goofiness.
Yes, thirdpower accused ATR of molesting his own kid and Robb accused him of homosexual acts. This is not how responsible people behave.
Sorry ’bout the format–outta my control.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 10:52 am
Jade: You really should pay attention to whom you are accusing of things. Kevin Baker writes The Smallest Minority—he has banned you.
SayUncle, who you keep accusing of banning you, writes … uhm … SayUncle—an entirely different blog. Perhaps you owe him an apology.
“As for major gun control blogs that allow comments–I don’t know.”
Well isn’t that relevant if you’re going to categorically state that our side is not interested in discussion and your side is? If the major pro-gun blogs allow comments—most of them unmoderated—and the major gun control blogs don’t allow comments—or heavily moderate them—isn’t that a good way to gauge who is more interested in actually participating in discourse?
“I generally don’t frequent them so I’m the wrong person to ask. ”
Haha … of course you don’t frequent them. You don’t frequent them because they do not allow comments, and you enjoy commenting and debating gun control. That’s why when a gun control blog that does allow comments pops up—like Robyn’s—you’re right there.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Jade: You really should pay attention to whom you are accusing of things. Kevin Baker writes The Smallest Minority—he has banned you.
SayUncle, who you keep accusing of banning you, writes … uhm … SayUncle—an entirely different blog. Perhaps you owe him an apology.
“As for major gun control blogs that allow comments–I don’t know.”
Well isn’t that relevant if you’re going to categorically state that our side is not interested in discussion and your side is? If the major pro-gun blogs allow comments—most of them unmoderated—and the major gun control blogs don’t allow comments—or heavily moderate them—isn’t that a good way to gauge who is more interested in actually participating in discourse?
“I generally don’t frequent them so I’m the wrong person to ask. ”
Haha … of course you don’t frequent them. You don’t frequent them because they do not allow comments, and you enjoy commenting and debating gun control. That’s why when a gun control blog that does allow comments pops up—like Robyn’s—you’re right there.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 11:21 am
Er … why isn’t my comment posting?
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 11:22 am
Jade: You really should pay attention to whom you are accusing of things. Kevin Baker writes The Smallest Minority—he has banned you.
SayUncle, who you keep accusing of banning you, writes … uhm … SayUncle—an entirely different blog. Perhaps you owe him an apology.
“As for major gun control blogs that allow comments–I don’t know.”
Well isn’t that relevant if you’re going to categorically state that our side is not interested in discussion and your side is? If the major pro-gun blogs allow comments—most of them unmoderated—and the major gun control blogs don’t allow comments—or heavily moderate them—isn’t that a good way to gauge who is more interested in actually participating in discourse?
“I generally don’t frequent them so I’m the wrong person to ask. ”
Haha … of course you don’t frequent them. You don’t frequent them because they do not allow comments, and you enjoy commenting and debating gun control. That’s why when a gun control blog that does allow comments pops up—like Robyn’s—you’re right there.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 11:22 am
I’ve always maintained Kevin Baker is a liar. I don’t owe liars apologies.
As for your comment not posting..can’t help you. I don’t moderate comments; it’s a blogsome glitch.
As for your mindreading–no, I don’t frequent gun control blogs because I’m not aware of any beyond websites like VPC or the Brady Campaign–which I don’t consider blogs. I came across Robyn’s blog by happenstance. Hey, you’re free to be as wrong as you wish.
I can take Robyn’s blog as an example (or Kevin Baker’s). Reasoned discourse by gunloons is impossible because the facts militate aagainst them.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 12:10 pm
Seems you also claimed he deleted your comments and that Uncle banned you. Both of which are flat out lies.
Seems the “facts” by Robyn have been pretty sparse as well.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
You: SayUncle censors and threatens those who do not ‘toe’ the party line. I was banned there. SayUncle’s banning pretty well proves the point.
Me: SayUncle says you’re not banned there and I believe him.
You: You really shouldn’t believe Kevin Baker, he’s a notorious liar. He banned me.
Me: SayUncle is not Kevin Baker. SayUncle writes SayUncle. Kevin Baker writes The Smallest Minority. Kevin has banned you. SayUncle has not. Perhaps you owe SayUncle an apology.
You: Kevin Baker is a liar. I don’t owe liars apologies.
Kevin Baker and SayUncle are two different people, who write two different blogs. You are banned from one blog. You are not banned from the other blog. The one that you are NOT banned from is the one you keep accusing of banning you.
Are you truly this incapable of following a simple conversation? Why is this whooshing so completely over your head?
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 12:38 pm
By the way; My comment wasn’t posting because it contained links. I took the links out and it posted fine. That’s all.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 12:40 pm
You should be able to post links using html.
Kevin Baker is still a liar. And a coward.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
And you weren’t banned by Uncle etc. That is one massive red herring you’re dragging around.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 1:37 pm
Nahh, Third. That’s you.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 2:12 pm
I should be able to post links using HTML, but I can’t. I tried the comment twice with the HTML links and it didn’t post until the third time when I removed the links.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
This is a highly amusing exchange.
I feel I should raise a Spock eyebrow and say “Fascinating!”
SayUncle: Anonymous Knoxville blog you’re not banned at.
Smallest Minority: Non-anonymous Tucson blog you ARE banned at.
I’ve met Say Uncle. He’s about ten years younger than I. Come to this year’s Gunblogger’s Rendezvous and you can meet us both. It’s open to all interested parties.
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 5, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
“Kevin Baker is still a liar. And a coward.”
That’s great, but I never said a damn thing about Baker, you did. It’s SayUncle that you’ve been accusing for a week of banning you (in various comments here and in other blogs), so who cares about Kevin Baker?
When confronted with the fact that they’ve been making false accusations against someone, an honorable and honest person would admit their mistake at the least, and at the most post an apology. That you have done neither says a lot about you, both as a debater and as a person.
Prove me wrong.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 2:26 pm
So I’m the one talking about Kevin Baker in a topic about Uncle’s? Really? God, you’re sad.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
Kevin Baker remains a liar and a coward. Afraid of debate.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Repeating yourself does not make the statement true.
But damn, it is amusing!
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 5, 2007 @ 3:07 pm
It is not amusing you cowardly liar. Go delete some more of Jade’s comments from your site.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 3:24 pm
JadeGold deliberately made a false accusation of murder on a USENET group
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.sport.nascar/browse_thread/thread/42bde91e087e450c/a03691f37c321368?lnk=st&q=Wayne+mann+Erol&rnum=1#a03691f37c321368
Everyone should read this to know what kind of scum Jadegold is
Comment by Jsabotta — September 5, 2007 @ 3:29 pm
Jade, forget about your new pissing contest with Kevin here in the comments for one second and please address what I am talking with you about.
Comment by Guav — September 5, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
Jade’s Response: Kevin Baker is a liar. Wait for it…
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
Guav: I make it a point never to apologize for telling the truth.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 5:29 pm
Alex had several dozen choice insults to me on my blog Jade. I happen to have discerned he’s homophobic, so I’m pushing his buttons. You, well, I have more choice words for you too.
Unlike you ladies, I can take it. I’m secure enough in myself to not let anonymous trolls like you and Alex “IGargleGentlemensRelishMoreThanYouOilYourPistol” Riley. Unlike you, I use humorous phrases instead of comparing innocent people to mass murderers.
The fact that you can’t tell the difference is a hoot.
Comment by Robb Allen — September 5, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
(that should read “Riley not get to me personally”)
Comment by Robb Allen — September 5, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Well, Robb, you and Clayton Cramer should get along famously. In a manly, heterosexual way, of course.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Ah, the ‘truth’. Kind of like the “Ministry of Truth” truths? Too bad you can’t actually answer any of Guav’s questions. But oh, right, Kevin’s a liar.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
I answered Guav’s questions. Can’t help if he doesn’t like the answer.
Comment by Administrator — September 5, 2007 @ 6:59 pm
You did? Where? It wasn’t on this site.
Comment by thirdpower — September 5, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Good lord… Jade, you are the first person I have ever met who would honestly fail a Turing Test. Congratulations. And here I thought that MoonbatRobotWidgetThingie was fake…
Comment by Linoge — September 5, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
“I make it a point never to apologize for telling the truth.”
You rotten little shitbag: you’ll let a horrendous lie lay around for ten years without apologizing for it.
Comment by Billy Beck — September 6, 2007 @ 2:15 am
Hey, Billyboy! How’re the Rogaine treatments going?
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 5:56 am
Jadegold, you have NOT addressed comments #37 and #44.
Comment by Guav — September 6, 2007 @ 7:21 am
#37 -No, it’s not “whooshing” over my head. The fact is Kevin Baker banned me; so much for reasoned discourse™.
#44 - Indeed, who cares about Kevin Baker?
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 8:25 am
“whooosh”
Comment by thirdpower — September 6, 2007 @ 8:33 am
Comment #37, Q: “Are you truly this incapable of following a simple conversation?”
Comment #63, A: “Yes.”
Damn, this is amusing!
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 6, 2007 @ 8:54 am
Kevin Baker: Do you believe drug users should have access to firearms?
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 8:59 am
This is actually surreal.
Comment by Guav — September 6, 2007 @ 9:39 am
Guav: I answered your questions. Is it reasoned discourse™ for Kevin Baker to have banned me?
It seems this is an important issue for you–that gun control blogs don’t have reasoned discourse™ and gun blogs do. Yet, you seem to want to defend a site that has banned a dissenting voice.
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 9:57 am
Jade:
Let’s see, I take (by doctor’s prescription) Toprol and Benicar. Does that qualify me as a “drug user” in your odd little world?
If someone has been found in a court of law to have illegally used drugs (that would be a drug abuser), then I believe their right to arms can be stripped, Constitutionally, from them, just as we strip them of their freedom and their right to vote. It doesn’t matter if that drug is heroin or alcohol.
It is Reasoned Discourse™ for me to have banned you? Yup. You don’t answer direct questions, you change the subject when confronted with evidence, you hie off on tangents whenever challenged, and you appear to be a couple of french fries short of a Happy Meal.
Not wanting to engage you does not mean not wanting to engage anyone else.
I concur with Guav. This is surreal.
And, entertaining as it’s been, I’ve wasted enough time on you.
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 6, 2007 @ 11:02 am
“Hey, Billyboy! How’re the Rogaine treatments going?”
You know, if I had your character, I’d probably be a dodging little impertinent cunt, too.
In fact, why don’t you put up a picture of yourself so we could all see what an impertinent cunt might have to work with?
Comment by Billy Beck — September 6, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Billy: Still dropping acid?
Seems like it.
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 1:29 pm
No. The market went to hell decades ago. Do you know anything?
When are you going to acknowledge your ghastly lie about Wayne Mann?
Comment by Billy Beck — September 6, 2007 @ 2:19 pm
Billy: I am obviously not as well-versed as you on the subject of hallucinogens and alternate realities.
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 2:49 pm
So Guav is defending Uncle’s site that Kevin Baker banned you from? Using your silly argument from earlier, does Kevin have administrator rights at SaysUncle?
Keep hopping. This is hilarious.
Comment by thirdpower — September 6, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Jade, please point me to which comment# of mine defended Kevin Baker or his banning of you. All I’ve been doing is defending SayUncle.
Every additional comment you leave that refuses to acknowledge that SayUncle and Kevin Baker are two different people with two different blogs—one of whom has banned you and one of whom has not, although you’ve repeatedly accused them of doing so—makes you look that much more ridiculous.
You can keep throwings those red herrings out there, but I don’t fish—I’m vegan.
Comment by Guav — September 6, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Guav: Good for you; love to be vegan but like steak too much.
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Please point me to which comment# of mine defended Kevin Baker or his banning of you.
Comment by Guav — September 6, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
Guav: Those of yours from #30 and following.
Comment by Administrator — September 6, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Uh, Jade, I hate to break it to you, but from #30 on, Guav was defending Say Uncle, not Kevin Baker. They are two different people, in case you have not gotten that point through the course of this thread. So, to break it down for you:
Kevin Baker - Banned you, not defended by Guav.
Say Uncle - Did not ban you, defended by Guav.
I know this is complicated, but if you try, you might just catch on.
Comment by Linoge — September 6, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
Jade, are you banned at SayUncle?
Comment by Guav — September 6, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
This is a test. Have you banned me yet? Seemed like it yesterday.
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 7, 2007 @ 10:50 am
Oh, good. Must’ve been a fluke!
So, Jade, ARE you banned at SayUncle? You might try a test post, like I just did.
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 7, 2007 @ 10:51 am
“Billy: I am obviously not as well-versed as you on the subject of hallucinogens and alternate realities.”
Then stop dodging the reality of what you did to Wayne Mann.
Comment by Billy Beck — September 7, 2007 @ 11:09 am
Jade, are you banned at SayUncle or not?
Comment by Guav — September 7, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Billy: So you admit to being a drug user who uses firearms?
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
Kevin: You banned me because you don’t want the ‘amen chorus’ infringed upon. It’s a common trait among small, angry men.
The drug question wasn’t meant to pry into your medical history; it was to ascertain you think responsible gunownership involves taking illegal hallucinogens and using a firearm.
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Guav: Kevin Baker has banned me because he’s a coward.
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 2:27 pm
Are you banned at SayUncle?
Comment by Guav — September 7, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
Ask SayUncle, Guav.
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
And he’s answered. No you’re not. That’s already been cited. Therefore your claim is false.
Comment by thirdpower — September 7, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
“Kevin: You banned me because you don’t want the ‘amen chorus’ infringed upon.”
Tell that to Markadelphia! I disagree with him on almost everything, but at least he doesn’t fail the Turing Test.
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 7, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
Ummm. who’s Markadelphia?
Kevin are you ok?
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
Jade, it’s a “yes or no” question, why is it so difficult for you to answer? I have asked you this simple and direct question four times now, and you have not given me a direct answer. For the 5th time:
Are you banned at SayUncle? Yes or No?
Comment by Guav — September 7, 2007 @ 4:39 pm
Turing Test Question: “Are you banned at SayUncle, yes or no?”
Failing answer: “Kevin Baker banned me because he is a liar and a coward!”
Jade, Markadelphia is the current member of the Left-o-sphere commenting at The Smallest Minority. He’s pissed me off enough that I asked him to leave for a while - which he did - but he’s back now.
I banned you because you’re nuts! Anybody reading comments #14, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51… (well, you get the idea) would reach the same conclusion.
You’re like one of the androids from Westworld: so perfect that nothing could possibly go worng!
This has been really amusing, but I’ve wasted enough time here. C’ya!
Comment by Kevin Baker — September 7, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
I know what you are trying to do, Guav, but Jade will never give you a “yes/no” answer in response to your question. Doing so would either substantially prove him to be a liar if he answers in the affirmative (since Say Uncle has repeatedly indicated he is, in fact, not banned), and woule equally demonstrate that he is a liar if he responds in the negative (given Jade’s claim in comment #7). The fact of the matter is that his psyche is so weak/warped, it cannot admit to any manner of failure or weakness, and thus the problem at hand.
Oh, and Kevin, stop stealing my line!
(Joking, joking. Though the evidence to support my initial claim (originally intended as a joke, I admit) certainly is piling up, as you are demonstrating.)
Comment by Linoge — September 7, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
Linoge: You haven’t joined up, yet? Oh yeah, you’re waiting on the UPS man.
Comment by Administrator — September 7, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Jade, are you banned at SayUncle?
Yes or No?
Comment by Guav — September 8, 2007 @ 7:53 am
Guav: Is Kevin Baker a coward?
Comment by Administrator — September 8, 2007 @ 11:32 am
I don’t know Kevin Baker, and have only seen his blog a couple times because there’s no RSS feed and I can’t add it to my newsreader. Furthermore, I know absolutely nothing about what transpired between you and him that led to his banning of you, so I am monumentally unqualified to answer such a ridiculous question for which there is no objective answer.
What do I have to do to get the un-cowardly Jadegold to directly answer a simple “yes or no” question?
Comment by Guav — September 8, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
You only need ask, Guav.
So, a gunblog banning me isn’t an example of how gun blogs wish to curtail reasoned discourse™?
Comment by Administrator — September 8, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
He has asked, six times, by my count. So let us try it again: Jadegold, are you banned at SayUncle? The answer will only require two or three keystrokes (depending on the answer), and surely you will have no problems answering it (after all, you said we only needed to ask).
Of course, if that was the case, what about the six previous times?
Comment by Linoge — September 8, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
I need only ask? If that were the case, I wouldn’t be “only asking” the same question for now the 7th time:
Are you banned at SayUncle?
If you’ll just answer the question without dodging it, I’ll answer the question you just asked me.
Comment by Guav — September 8, 2007 @ 7:44 pm
Linoge: How’s that enlistment paperwork coming?
Comment by Administrator — September 8, 2007 @ 7:44 pm
Guav: The question was answered in #7. My answer hasn’t changed since then.
Comment by Administrator — September 8, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
No, but what has changed since then is that it became apparent that you had SayUncle confused with Kevin Baker. You’re not banned at SayUncle and you never were. So your earlier claims that you were banned at SayUncle were wrong. That you refuse to acknowledge that you were incorrectly accusing someone of something they didn’t do is problematic on it’s own, but if you continue to repeat the same claims after being shown that you are wrong, then you stop being merely wrong and it starts being a lie. You are only banned at The Smallest Minority, Kevin Baker’s blog.
Comment by Guav — September 8, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
Damn. I honestly did not think we would actually get an answer out of him. Of course, he was damned from either direction (no matter his answer, he is still lying), so I guess the reality of the situation finally dawned on him. Or, at least, I hope so…
Either way, I think it is safe to say that Jadegold owes SayUncle an apology (meaningless though it may be). In fact, he owes him two - first, for accusing SayUncle of banning him (which he never did), and second, for continuing to stand by that claim despite all evidence to the contrary.
That said, I will not be holding my breath.
Comment by Linoge — September 8, 2007 @ 9:46 pm
No, Linoge—Jade does not owe SayUncle an apology because Kevin Baker is a liar and Jade doesn’t apologize to liars, remember?
Comment by Guav — September 8, 2007 @ 10:39 pm
Oh riiiight… I had completely forgotten those few lines of Jadegold’s code. At this point, I am almost wishing a computer is on the other side of that username, because if there is a flesh-and-blood person over there… Whooeee, he has got some major issues!
Comment by Linoge — September 9, 2007 @ 8:20 am
Guav: Nothin has changed since #7; this is pretty typical of gunloons–they don’t like an answer so they pretend you ever annswered the question.
Linoge: If you need help with the paperwork–drop me a line.I can cut some corners for you.
Comment by Administrator — September 9, 2007 @ 9:05 am
So now you’re just lying then. OK. This will be a useful thread to refer back to in the future. Kevin Baker is a coward, but falsely accusing people of things and then refusing to admit it apparently is not cowardly at all. And Kevin is a liar, but repeating things you now know to be false is apparently not lying at all. Now that we got that psychosis down, I’ll answer your question.
Is Kevin banning you an example of how gun blogs wish to curtail reasoned discourse? Gun Blogs, plural? No. It is example of how one blogger does not want to deal with you. That he and Tom King have banned you doesn’t negate the fact that most gun control blogs do NOT allow any comments at all. Also, since you appear to be banned in dozens of places (of all types) all over the internet, and since other gun control proponents have no problem posting at these other blogs, a rational person would arrive at the conclusion that you are not banned for the ideology or arguments you espouse, but the way you present them—wrapped in logical fallacies, straw men and red herrings. You act like a dick, so people treat you like one. Big surprise.
After partaking in this thread, it’s clear to me that even given a forum that you have complete control over and can’t be banned in, you still are not capable of reasoned discourse–one component of reasoned discourse being that you don’t accuse people of things they haven’t done, and if you do by accident, that you acknowledge it and perhaps even apologize when your error is pointed out. Reasoned discourse has to contain reason, and it’s clear that you’re just not that reasonable a person.
Comment by Guav — September 9, 2007 @ 10:49 am
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is probably the finest example of JadeGold’s mental health shortcomings that you will ever find. Consider:
In comment number seven, JadeGold equivocably accused SayUncle of banning JadeGold from SayUncle’s weblog. There can be no other interpretation of his comment. Since he made that accusation, he has stood by it for the rest of this thread. Additionally, he used the supposed cowardice and equally supposed lying nature of Kevin Baker as evidence of his being banned from SayUncle’s weblog. In this, I will give JadeGold credit - his stance has never wavered.
That said, his stance is, without the slightest, tiniest bit of doubt, completely and utterly wrong. First, SayUncle has never banned JadeGold from SayUncle’s weblog. Ever. Period. He made that fact clear in this post, and many different people have directed JadeGold, repeatedly, to this evidence. Now, I can understand confusing two different weblogs… there are so many different ones out there, it can be easy to get one’s lines crossed. As such, the initial accusation, in my mind, is forgiveable. However, when numerous people have repeatedly indicated that the initial accusation is false, and pointed towards the evidence indicating as such, standing by that accusation no longer is a matter of misinformation/misunderstanding, but more a matter of misleading. Misdirection. Lying.
Second, Kevin Baker is not SayUncle, never will be SayUncle, and has absolutely no control over SayUncle’s weblog. SayUncle maintains… well, Say Uncle. Kevin Baker, on the other hand, is the author and administrator of The Smallest Minority>. These two weblogs are quite different, and while I am relatively sure that both authors know each other, I honestly doubt they would allow each other administrative priviledges over each other’s weblog. As such, Kevin Baker’s actions (in this case, banning JadeGold from his weblog - The Smallest Minority) have absolutely no bearing upon JadeGold’s fallacious and libellous accusations against SayUncle. It is evidence of nothing. It is indicative of nothing. It is irrelevant.
Third and finally, JadeGold has been banned from a variety of weblogs, across the internet. In fact, one of his prior internet service providers went so far as to terminate his service agreement. Why, you ask? JadeGold lies, often to excessive ends. In fact, in the past, he went so far as to accuse an elderly man living in a retirement home on one side of the country of being a 20-something-year-old murderer on the other side of the country (the event that caused his ISP to unilaterally terminate his contract). Furthermore, his lies regularly have no evidence to support them, and, in all honesty, all evidence often indicates the exact opposite of what JadeGold states. However, when that evidence is presented to him, does he reconsider? Does he recant? Does he apologize? Never. His libel, his dishonesty, his misinformation, his misrepresentation knows no bounds, no end.
Due to that, he will always fail, because, eventually, someone will always find the facts that disprove his erroneous claims. And no matter how many times he repeats an untruth (for example, in this very thread), it remains a lie.
For myself, I am done here, and I will not be returning to this site. JadeGold has demonstrated a remarkable lack of personal integrity, responsibility, or accountability, and people that far lacking in any semblance of morals or ethics are not people I wish to associate with. If this is JadeGold’s standard operating procedure, I do not blame Mr. King, or anyone else, for banning him from their weblogs. To be honest, if he ever comments upon mine, that comment will be deleted, and his IP will be permanently banned - I could not stand to have my corner of the internet despoiled by someone as despicable as this.
Comment by Linoge — September 9, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Hallelujah, Linoge.
Comment by Administrator — September 9, 2007 @ 4:14 pm