Should timsatt1 be banned?

[luv]

Vote. You can state your reasoning below. This is ultimately up to Coach and the mods to decide, but let's see what the people have to say.

[rbedgood]

Actually I've found on other sites that suspensions (1-2 weeks typically) have curtailed the behavior of problem members.

Whether he personally insulted others or not in the past or not is somewhat irrelevant. If it is against the rules, it is against the rules. Whether he is right or wrong, discussing topics by the rules of the community would seem to be the kind and appropriate manner to conduct himself.

[chief31]

Suspending someone is absurd, because they will just come back and cause more trouble.

The kid is annoying, obnoxious, and ignorant but I don't believe a suspension or banning is in order.

I don't think he was personally attacking prough because he has been saying stuff like this since before prough got back to the site.

Perhaps he will learn something from us.

If not he will at least have gotten something to think about.

I must have missed the attack on prough91. Can anyone guide me to it?

[timsatt1]

whenever i made the hypothetical statement that i should not feel guilty that my dad worked hard while your dad fiddled around or whatever, and he thought i was talking about HIS dad. not "a" dad. so he personal messaged me and said it wouldnt be hard to find a tim satterfield in wichita kansas blah blah blah.

that is what he considers me attacking his family.

[hermhater]

Actually I've found on other sites that suspensions (1-2 weeks typically) have curtailed the behavior of problem members.

Whether he personally insulted others or not in the past or not is somewhat irrelevant. If it is against the rules, it is against the rules. Whether he is right or wrong, discussing topics by the rules of the community would seem to be the kind and appropriate manner to conduct himself.

I must have missed the attack on prough91. Can anyone guide me to it?

I don't know about his infractions in the past, only that prough took timsatt talking about others parents personally, when timsatt was being insensitive to millions of people, not just prough.

I don't know that it was just one post in particular, but during an entire thread timsatt decided that the reason poor people are poor is because their parents did drugs, had premarital sex, and didn't care enough about their kids to have been born with money.

Typical timsatt insensitivity.

[timsatt1]

I don't know about his infractions in the past, only that prough took timsatt talking about others parents personally, when timsatt was being insensitive to millions of people, not just prough.

I don't know that it was just one post in particular, but during an entire thread timsatt decided that the reason poor people are poor is because their parents did drugs, had premarital sex, and didn't care enough about their kids to have been born with money.

Typical timsatt insensitivity.

i gave a hypothetical about a person who did the right things at a young age and reaps the benefits and a person who screws off in life at a young age and suffers the consequence and that it isnt right or moral that the one who did wrong and is now reaping for it is owed by the government. that was a hypothetical about one case of poverty...not every case. i know i didnt clarify, that was my fault.

[Guru]

i gave a hypothetical about a person who did the right things at a young age and reaps the benefits and a person who screws off in life at a young age and suffers the consequence and that it isnt right or moral that the one who did wrong and is now reaping for it is owed by the government. that was a hypothetical about one case of poverty...not every case. i know i didnt clarify, that was my fault.

Please. I have no doubt that you mean everything you say no matter how insensitive it is. Cut it out with your "holier than thou" crap and start talking some football.

[chief31]

I didn't see anything personal in those statements. Maybe prough91 just needed to put timsatt1 on his 'ignore' list.

timsatt1, you can be a very irritating person, on here. But, I remember being in my early twenties, myself. Later, when you look back on yourself, you may be embarrassed for yourself. Maybe not. But I know I was more ****y and judgemental than I feel that I should have been.

But, I do not see any violation of the rules there. I generalize to make my point alot too. And if it isn't specifically insulting someone, then it isn't a violation of the rules. At least not in my opinion.

I voted yes on the poll, (Just for fun.) but I will not be banning him....YET.

[timsatt1]

I didn't see anything personal in those statements. Maybe prough91 just needed to put timsatt1 on his 'ignore' list.

timsatt1, you can be a very irritating person, on here. But, I remember being in my early twenties, myself. Later, when you look back on yourself, you may be embarrassed for yourself. Maybe not. But I know I was more ****y and judgemental than I feel that I should have been.

But, I do not see any violation of the rules there. I generalize to make my point alot too. And if it isn't specifically insulting someone, then it isn't a violation of the rules. At least not in my opinion.

I voted yes on the poll, (Just for fun.) but I will not be banning him....YET.

i voted yes just for fun as well, so now i got to figure out who the 3rd person was...that took it seriously :(!!!

but anyways, i will never look back and be embarrased as i dont have a lot of pride anyways. i dont think i am above everyone or even anyone for that matter. i think we are all equally important as we are created by God...never tried to put anyone down, trying to teach them not to rely on government but learn to do what they got to do for themselves.

[timsatt1]

Banning him is too conservative of a step. Liberals believe in free speech, even if people are saying what you don't like.

Not that I'm saying I'm a liberal (or that I'm not), but I say let the conservative stay because liberals say he should....

i cant speak for liberals...just the leaders of the liberal party aka the house and senate leaders and speaker of house.

first off....they believe in freedom of speach? is that why the actual leaders of the liberal agenda tried to stop a private citizen, rush limbaugh, for being able to use his freedom of speach on his private radio station.

second....bringing back the fairness doctrine on the radio waves? yes, this what the democrats in the senate tried to do...make it to where the radio waves are now monitored by government, and there has to be equal time for every side, democrat and republican.

so, there is your liberals and their "freedom of speach" aka "we truly want a socialist or communist country, whichever comes first."

[hermhater]

i cant speak for liberals...just the leaders of the liberal party aka the house and senate leaders and speaker of house.

first off....they believe in freedom of speach? is that why the actual leaders of the liberal agenda tried to stop a private citizen, rush limbaugh, for being able to use his freedom of speach on his private radio station.

second....bringing back the fairness doctrine on the radio waves? yes, this what the democrats in the senate tried to do...make it to where the radio waves are now monitored by government, and there has to be equal time for every side, democrat and republican.

so, there is your liberals and their "freedom of speach" aka "we truly want a socialist or communist country, whichever comes first."

You are so lost man...