What happened to Stormin Norman was obscene

[American Kid]

Hey how you do?

So with the demise of Chit Chat (which I'm beginning to think more and more was a good idea) I've been prowling 'round some of the darker alleys of my favorite site here. I'd known a little off-hand that "shit was gettin' thick" over here in Socialism vs. Capitalism/Opposing Idealogies/whatever the fuck you want to call it. But I didn't know it was this thick.

There's about 4 or 5 people at this site who's respect I have unequivocally. Based on a few things. How intelligent they are. The quality of their arguments. Their ability to back them up (via quotes, links, ect ect). But most of all, their convictions and how hard they are willing to fight for them. Whether right or wrong (or maybe I should say, whether I agree or not)

But in other words, their heart.

Stormin Norman was easily (and still is) in my top 5. Maybe higher. There's nobody at this site who puts up more of a fight. Sometimes wins. Sometimes doesn't. But fights fucking anyway. And that takes a lot of guts. A popular criticism 'round these parts is that a "cappie" who comes to a commie site to debate must "have no life." And this, in my opinion, besides being condescending, couldn't be further from the truth.

Some people just like to fight. Some people just have things to say. Norman, absolutely, fits into this category. And fight he did, almost every night. Why not? It's fun.

It's just really too bad. And if Stormin Norman was freaking out and getting beligerent toward the end (as James claims he was) I'm sure it wasn't without provocation. And Jesus Christ they're just fucking words, man. Lenny Bruce must be rolling in his grave.

It just really sucks. Did Stormin Norman deserve the same indignified fate as Thine Stalin? Hell, did Thine Stalin deserve the same indignified fate as Thine Stalin?

I don't know. Not that there was much I could've done while everything was (and it was) spiraling out of control. I didn't always agree with what he said. And it was mutual, it'd already been established. Nonetheless, I'm glad to see he's back. It's always good to see "Old Friend's" now and again.

-AK

(Edited by American Kid at 12:21 pm on Feb. 26, 2003)

[synthesis]

He was spamming and flaming. James deleted those posts. He spammed and flamed some more because he claimed he couldn't be censored any longer, and wanted to be banned.

Personally, I was against the ban, but I think if we keep the ban we should ban his other incarnation as well. There's no point to having one or the other.

[synthesis]

By the way, there's a difference between banning someone because their ideas offend you and banning someone because they're making multiple posts with eight pages of nothing but "these pussies are too weak to even ban me."

[American Kid]

lol, I agree to a point. I can appreciate the "logic" in that sense.

But a little bit of what I was trying to get at up there ^^^^ was this: what provoked Norm to short-circuit like that?

(admittedly, Norm saying something like "these pussies are too weak to ban me" sounds hillariously in-character for him :) )

God, I just hate it had to come to that. And I can't help thinking there could have been better "problem-solving" techniques which could have been constructively implented at the time. From what I have read (mostly in the "Sticky New Policy" thread or whatever it's called at the top of this page) it seems like James and Normin were getting off on antagonizing each other. Looks like they both self-destructed.

Norman felt threatened and went into his "I'm-unfucking-stoppable-I-fear-no-commie-puke-and-will-not-be-bossed-around-I-am-a-commodity-at-this-site-no-one-can-ban-me-I-can-stop-fucking-bullets-and-also-I-can-shit-ice-cream" mode.

James had inherited a few superpowers (adminstrative-type, if you will) and decided to flex these new muscles. Maybe recklessly. Like a wide-eyed kid with a bee-bee gun on Christmas morning.

Looks like, as the movie says, someone "shot their eye out."

-Ak

(I guess what I'm trying to say is, maybe a 3rd party should have stepped in and wrapped them both the wrists)


(Edited by American Kid at 12:31 pm on Feb. 26, 2003)

[Exploited Class]

I understand whre you are coming from AK, and where others are coming from as well.

Just according to board forum ettiquete on the internet he should have been banned. Spamming and such as he was doing is asking for a ban. But I believe it should be a temporary ban.

I've been on the internet since it was FIDOnet and ran my own BBS, good old 2400 baud days. And I would have banned him as an administrator. But it would have been a limited ban for somebody who has posted a lot prior.

We all get hot under the collar, we all test our freedom of speech on boards, we protest in the only ways we can. Those protests can be destructive for a board but generally if somebody posted before you give them a time out ban for a couple of weeks or a month then let them back in after everybody cools off.

Once on a board that I liked to post to, a picture was considered poor taste and disturbing. I had seen worse and didn't like the censorship, so I reposted the person's picture in all 50 forums. I knew ahead of time I was going to get banned and that would be my punishment but I needed to protest and show my feelings. I was banned and couldn't even look at the forums. It was lifted 3 months later.

Many times you have to swallow your pride, email the admin, say your sorry and explain that why you did what you did but you understand the ban and appreciate their board and understand why rules are in place and ask to be let back on. Then usually they say okay in 2 weeks or whatever, so long as the person makes a concious choice to resolve the issue instead of trying to sneak back on as somebody else or disrupt.

I've been to boards with little administration and they are crap. People post with only the intent to advertise their site, some spam over and over and it gets out of hand.

A good site is a sign of a good administrator and although many of us want to live in the world where everybody follows the rules and nobody has to play police of the board, they still have to.

I say Norm should be able to come back on. But I think there should be an apology and I think he should promise not to spam in that manner again.

[Old Friend]

The events surrounding this situation are laid out in "New Policy". At least some of my side of the story still exists there. I guess I will tell them once again.

I went to add some commentary in my "Ignorant Statement's Hall of Fame" and it had been blocked by James, who cited his new policy. At that point I made a thread claiming that James was guilty of Mindguarding (see the Groupthink thread, if it hasn't been erased). The criticism offered there was valid and substantial. Low and behold when I got back from work, James had once again tampered with my work. This wasn't the first time James had edited my work, because earlier that month he had edited one of my statements to read what he wanted it to say. That is when I went on the attack.

All of my remarks were really directed at James. Some of the comments were not so nice, like when I called him a c%$k sucker and a homosexual, but many of those that have sense been erased were legitimate points. If you look in the New Policy forum, you can get a sense of the ones James erased. The ones that might have been extremely embarassing for someone like him were deleted, as were the ones that actually expressed my concerns.

Why is it that RedComrade seems to be the only person opposed to me that understands exactly what transpired? I will tell you why, because he is intelligent enough to respect a challenge, where as James and many of the others here are not. I believe there are a few people wandering these parts that witnessed what happened, DC, RedCeltic, and maybe others.

I have found a new home, and don't plan on visiting here too often. I just wanted many of the people that I still respect to understand my reasons for doing what I did. As you all know, it isn't in my nature to allow that nincompoop, James, to have the last word. In fact, that is what this boils down to. James has hated me since I showed him up on the Global Warming (which has been erased), and depleted Uranium debates.

After he realized that I was better than him, he made it a point to steer clear of this forum. I don't think he liked having to run like a mangy mut, so when he had a position of power he sought to sabotage me. Why is it so hard to understand why the results of putting a mental midget in charge of discussion would yield less than perfect results?

You should look at who you have moderating this forum, not the guy who has been coming here for stimulating conversation. Look at the guy who generally has nothing to offer, not the person who has shared so many of my ideas with you in order to give you a perspective that I believe is right. As long as you keep a person with James's pusillanimous nature in charge of stacking the cards against the opposition, the quality of discussion will most certainly suffer as a result.

(Edited by Old Friend at 10:59 am on Feb. 26, 2003)

[Old Friend]

Oops.

(Edited by Old Friend at 7:55 am on Feb. 26, 2003)

[Old Friend]

Sorry, I didn't think it had gone through.

(Edited by Old Friend at 7:54 am on Feb. 26, 2003)

[American Kid]

Your welcome, Stormin Norman.

-ak

[Old Friend]

American Kid,

Oh, and thank you AK for sticking up for me. I know that I might have forgotten to mention that, but I appreciate all those who have shown their support. Repect is a courtesy that is to be earned, and in this case the respect is mutual.

Although you are not as much of a political animal as myself, I enjoy your commentary on a variety of topics. To be honest, some times I will visit other forums on this site just to read what you have written. I do this for two reasons. One, I like your writing, as it is reflective in nature and it is thought provoking. Two, you make me laugh. It is true that I am serious about a number of things, but to me there is nothing better than the sort of humor that can diffuse the general angst that I feel about the world. Be it "The Simpon's" or American Kid's honest humor, I love to laugh. If I had to pick the thing I like about you the most it is your ability to make me laugh, for it does not come easy. Not only is this a monument to your sense of humor, but this quality also speaks to your level of intelligence.

In addition, I also like the colloquial style with which you present yourself on this sight. It gives a person the feeling that they are actually having a conversation in person. I can tell that we actually have much in common by the slang you use. When talking to you, I am reminded of a good friend of mine who died of a brain tumor. I am not sure what it is, but something about your personality initiates some sort of recall mechanism in my mind. Despite being sick, Jeremy never really lost his sense of humor, or gave up. I feel honored in having met another person with such a unique outlook on life.

Let me also put it in this perspective. I am intraverted in many respects, and I never really seek out friendships. If it weren't for people like you, people who are outgoing and openminded, people who recognize something within me that they like, I would have missed out on many friendships and opportunities. I can truly say that it is people like yourself that bring out some of my better qualities, and help me to see the importance in things that I may have overlooked. It is this principle that allows for a healthy exchange that we can use in order to derive the truth. In short, I have learned more from you than you can imagine. I hope it's not be too presumptious to call you a friend. It may be cheesy to think of somebody you have never met as a friend, but this is this best I can do in the way of gratitude. This is not the first time you have defended me, and I have thought of you as a friend for some time. However, the articulation of this idea is the only way I know how to thank you for your loyalty.

Your Friend,

Stormin Norman

(Edited by Old Friend at 10:51 am on Feb. 26, 2003)

[American Kid]

Your welcome again and thank you a million times over, Norman. Holy shit I'm humbled by what you've just written- you have no idea.

In all honesty, I'll admit I was rubbed the wrong way a bit when I read your response and I don't think I was even mentioned once, lol. Fuck me, not even my initials.

But it's safe to say you've more than made up for it. Thank you very, very much for every word of it. I only wish I was a good enough writer to put into words how much it's truly appreciated.

In the meantime, it's half-past four in the morning (for seriously) and I'm having trouble reading what's on the screen. Again, (for seriously).

-aK

[Michael De Panama]

Quote: from Old Friend on 11:43 pm on Feb. 25, 2003
Why is it that RedComrade seems to be the only person opposed to me that understands exactly what transpired? I will tell you why, because he is intelligent enough to respect a challenge, where as James and many of the others here are not. I believe there are a few people wandering these parts that witnessed what happened, DC, RedCeltic, and maybe others.
Excuse me. RedComrade is certainly not the only one. I've been ranting about your banning all over the Commie Club. Yeah, me.

As much as I dislike you and everything you represent, SN, I'm not another one of these cowards who supports silencing you. I am in complete agreement that this is only a representation of how these so-called "leftists" would act if they had their revolution. It's fucking pathetic. I'll be the first to admit that Stormin Norman is ten times smarter than most of the "commies" that have been showing up lately. Fuck, if you can properly punctuate your sentences, you don't deserve to get banned. Perhaps it's a bit too "radical" to suggest to the "radical left" that maybe they could toss down all these rules for once and let the message board flow normally without trying to control every little thing. All this message board is is words, for fuck's sake.

[synthesis]

I opposed the ban as well - for exactly this reason. I knew you'd be back to scream about us commie pukes with a new username and that since you would ask politely, you'd be let back.

You're a damn liar, SN. I saw half your bullshit you claim was deleted, and it's just that. The reason you are able to continue spouting this bullshit is precisely because your earlier bullshit was deleted - allowing you to reinvent its content.

You're a damn liar, SN. You can't prove anything either way.

Answer this. Why'd you come back? Why didn't you just leave? Are you that pathetic that you need to cry for attention on a board full of people you hate?

Whatever.

[canikickit]

I don't like Norm. I also think he's dishonest and basically full of shit. I don't know whether or not James actually deleted anything of Norm's which was not worthy of deletion, and I don't care either way, but I think Norm's last days of spam were a big joke.

To think that you demonstrate the real nature of communism by being banned from a site for asking to be banned is insane. The behaviour of Norm was worthy of a ban; motivation or not.

Norm likes to claim the moral high ground. I think it is pathetic that people give him an avenue to do so, and fall into his traps.

Obviously Norm has a level of intelligence, but there is also a fundamental flaw in his whole line of thinking.

I'm also curious about one thing, which I will bring up here.

Scott Ritter. I'd like you to clarify something Norm, and forgive me if I get some things wrong and feel free to clear me up on any mistakes.

You say that Scott Ritter is not trustworthy because he could have been blackmailed by the Iraqi regime. Would he not just admit to this following the revelations of his misconduct to the general public? I don't care either way, I'm just curious.

[Ymir]

'what happened to stormin norman was obscene'

Norman IS obscene and has offended many people. Besides, he ASKED to be banned! I think Norman should be banned along with any new alias he attempts to log on with. He seems less of a 'fighter' and more of an agitator. It is the decision of the che-lives bureaucracy what to do with such people, but I say that he should be banned.

[American Kid]

I don't agree with a good deal of what Norm has to say either sometimes. Everyone knows how moderate I am, and sometimes his hard-line views are difficult for me to swallow. But not unlike it would be for one of his counter-parts from the left side of the spectrum. Like, say, D DAY, who's very dedicated and very hardline. And with whom I seldom see eye-to-eye.

But again, as stated in my initial post here, its this exact reason that D DAY would be in my "top 5" also of people I respect, as he at least has these convictions, which, in my book, is admirable. I certainly don't agree with him, but my respect for him is palpable.

I don't think he should've been banned. I believe he was baited. I think he was provoked. People on both sides of this issue were out-of-line, and someone should've stepped in to moderate.

Ha, moderate.....

Peace out,
-aK

[canikickit]

I don't think people who have strong convictions should be admired on that premise alone.

Hitler had strong convictions. Bush has strong convictions. Simon Cowell has strong convictions and so does some other assshole.

[Mazdak]

ARE YOU KIDDING? D DAY? Of all the people, i think he is possibly the most ignorant person. He reminds me of that story of the Emperor's new clothes. He is a fool, yet somehow he is not only a mod, but an admin. He calls himself a communist, yet values family, religion, can't spell capitalism or kuwait, and defiles Che by putting a man who would have loathed him in his avatar. disgusting at best.

[American Kid]

lol, canikickit, naturally when I say I admire people with passionate convictions I mean it within reason.

Yeah, no doubt, Adolf Hitler really believed the jews were a "mongrel race", and he really believed there ought to be some kind of, shall we say, "final solution" to this "jewish problem."

And when I say really believed, I mean he really believed.

And of course, The Kid stops a second and "re-evaluates the situation" before bestowing upon these firm beliefs his usual showering of adulatious admiration (is that a word? irregardless; as alliteration it's aces).

However, shifting gears, Simon Cowell is just doing his job I think. A dirty one, that someone has to do. Seriously, I have minimal sympathy for these people he cuts down. Somebody has to, otherwise they'll be left to roam this planet, further spreading terrible music across the land.

As far as D DAY and his "status" as a good and/or shitty communist, I could give a fuck. It's just, from my perspective, as far as I can tell, he means what he says.

Fin.
-aK

[Old Friend]

I don't like Norm. I also think he's dishonest and basically full of shit. I don't know whether or not James actually deleted anything of Norm's which was not worthy of deletion, and I don't care either way, but I think Norm's last days of spam were a big joke.

I learned a long time ago never to listen to the dodo bird. They will lead you to extinction every single time. Yes, my friends, Canikickit is a throwback to the time of the Bolsheviks, his thinking will forever be remembered in the amber pits of hell.

Sorry, but I don't understand your question regarding Scott Ritter. What does it matter if he admits to being blackmailed after the fact, aside from admitting to the indictable offense of espionage? The damage has been done. When applying for a security clearance, the government looks at financial problems and blackmailable offenses for that very reason. The Soviet espionage outfit operated under the assumption that all Americans could either be bought or had some skeleton in their closet that could be used against them. It appears Scott Ritter was both bought by the Iraqi who gave him money for his documentary, and blackmailed into producing propaganda in Saddam Hussein's behalf. Give me a better explanation for his 180 degree flip over the Iraqi situation.

(Edited by Old Friend at 12:26 pm on Feb. 27, 2003)

[canikickit]

Well, I don't know what Scott Ritter said or did, so I'm just asking, don't do your usual thing of saying "people with my opinions are all idiots" or something like that.

What I mean is, Scott Ritter told lies about Iraq because they would otherwise tell about his penchant for children, right (is this what you claim)? Now that these alegations against Ritter have been made clear, wouldn't he just say "I lied because I didn't want people to know about the etc., etc."

Perhaps it wouldn't amek a difference if he admitted it, but I think he would want to.

I don't care about the Bolsheviks, I can't even remember which ones they were. How many of my posts did you have to read to reach that conclusion?

The dodo wasn't extinct through any fault of its own. It was extinct due to foreign elements being introduced into its habitat. The same way JFK was killed due to a foreign object element being introduced into his body.


However, shifting gears, Simon Cowell is just doing his job I think. A dirty one, that someone has to do. Seriously, I have minimal sympathy for these people he cuts down.

I have no sympathy for those talentless fools. I don't like the way he acts, I think he could cut them down with a bit more panache(sp?).

Don't worry, I hadn't written you up as a Nazi sympathiser :wink: I just don't respect people who I feel are misguided, particularily if they strongly persue their wrong convictions. Nevertheless I see where you're coming from (you fascist).

[Mazdak]

It is simply that he claims to be what he isnt. It is an embarassment. It would be like Stormin Normin having an avatar with a hammer and sickle and quotes from the Communist Manefesto in his signature.

Respect him? Why? Because he is 100% convinced he is something which he in truth is not? Not too admirable if you ask me.

[Blibblob]

Nobody deserves respect, we all deserve to rot.