cpr, the new censor on TB2K II

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

It has become as simple as this. Step by step, cpr is rendering this forum unusable, and by doing so, he prevents the rest of us from effective participation. This is de facto censorship. But cpr doesn't seem to mind that kind of censorship. He has repeatedly commended Lady Logic for shutting down the original TB2K.

cpr has three methods to accomplish his censorship. The first is to post so many new threads that they overwhelm the TB2K list, making it difficult to find any threads not started by cpr. The second is to answer his own threads immediately, so the Recent Answers list becomes as unusable as the TB2K list. The third is to cut-and-paste entire earlier threads into most threads not started by cpr.

Hmmmm had a good idea, by trying to post a large number of threads on topics that might attract interest, conversation, controversy or debate. However, due to the overwhelming number of threads started by cpr, these may never become well-established conversations. cpr may also choose to disrupt any thread and render it unusable at any time, if he chooses.

As I see it, so long as cpr is willing to continue down this road, he will undoubtedly succeed in shutting this forum down, by simply turning it into a garbage dump where no one would want to come or to stay. It may cost him countless hours of obsessive posting, but this doesn't seem to faze him, since he has an obsessive personality.

This is a shame, but it seems inevitable to me. Consider the alternatives:

1) We ignore him.

This worked well for about 30 days. His new threads were conspicuously devoid of responses in August. Other threads were very popular, but cpr couldn't drag two words out of most of us - not because we were being mean to him, but because we simply didn't care to spend time talking about anything cpr wanted to talk about.

But his new tactics, if pursued diligently, will make ignoring him impossible. He will be omnipresent and take up about 95% of the space in the forum, no matter where you turn. As soon as he succeeds in this goal, the only effective way to ignore him will be to leave. Then the forum dies.

2) We plead with him to stop.

We have. He has no respect for us, so he sees no reason to respect our wishes. He continues and we have no control over his irrational obsessions. The very presence of KOS here seems to have enraged him to the breaking point.

3) We out-post him.

We can't. cpr's postings are so diluted of content that we cannot possibly compete in the matter of bulk without resorting to watered-down content ourselves. As every thread becomes watery and contentless, the forum dies.

It is also ironic that cpr accused hmmm of doing what he himself has been doing with extreme effect: posting so many new threads that cpr's are no longer dominant on the thread list.

4) We ban him.

This was tried in the old TB2K. First, there is no mechanism to prevent his entry or his posting, so it must all be done by the sysop, after the fact. This is just as time-consuming for the sysop as cpr wants to make it. If cpr wants to make OTFR tap-dance for 5 hours a day, he can, if we chose to go down that road. There's no future in that.

Second, the issue of banning or censorship is so rancorous and volatile it tears the community apart. Torn apart, the forum dies.

5) We make it so unpleasant for him he leaves of his own free will.

Impossible. cpr's obsession renders him impervious to ridicule or abuse. He is perfectly capable of posting 1000 articles here over the course of a month before he realizes that everyone else is gone and he's alone!

6) We sneak out and reassemble elsewhere.

Perhaps. But in order to ditch cpr, it would have to be done via email. Since a considerable proportion of the regulars do not expose their email addresses, this would be problematic. Also, I happen to like Phillip Greenspun's format and detest most other forum sites for their banner advertising, slow loading speeds and clumsy format. I doubt I'd last a week anywhere but LUSENET. If we tried to stay on LUSENET, cpr would find us and present the same problems.

7) We give cpr what he wants from us and he stops pestering us.

All cpr wants from us is to listen to his rants, to make him the center of attention, and to provide purpose and meaning to his life by giving him a theater full of enemies and toadies where he can strut around and be king.

Giving him what he wants would only give him a reason to continue what is already giving us. It will never provide him with a reason to stop it.

So, as best I can figure it out. We are at cpr's mercy. Either he suddenly proves he is fit for human society, by slowing his pace of posting to one new thread a day and maybe five or so rational replies (with no cutting and pasting). Or he continues what he has so ably started, and doesn't stop until he smears his excrement on every square inch of his playroom.

I expect he'll be on the job in this thread, shortly. (Say hey, cpr!) I expect a very long rant and a very large cut-and-paste within the hour. I must confess to pessimism. I expect the forum will die, in spite of my efforts to the contrary. I've seen net-kooks in action before.

If you value this meeting place and the people here, pray we catch a lucky break. We need one right now. For now, I'm staying on the ship.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), September 17, 2000


Wise words, Brian. I was always of the Polly pursuasion, but recently CPR's posts have started to make me wish I'd spent late 1999 in the bunker with Shakey, watching a rerun of Doctor Strangelove.

-- E.H. Porter (Just Wondering@About.it), September 17, 2000.

Brian, nice post, but it will be lost.

See the thread entitled to Forum Regulars. You may 'choose' to stay on the ship, but already MANY have 'jumped'.

Anita has began a new board and it is quite nice. Hope to cya there.

-- call me reg (a@regular.person), September 17, 2000.



I am not........HMMMMM.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 17, 2000.

Nicely stated, Brian. I'll be sticking around, too (mostly lurking). It'll be a cold day in Dallas before some loudmouth pissant like cpr runs ME off a forum.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), September 17, 2000.

My Latest Posts

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 17, 2000.


So good of you to make it, cpr. Come in. Have a seat. Can I get you a Coke?


Actually, I have no sensible answers to your posts for several reasons.

1) There are so many of them that only an automaton could begin to address them all sensibly. If you actually wanted answers, you would post them at a pace where answers were possible to be obtained. Next, once a series of answers were given, you would adress them in a serious, sensible tone. The result would be readable and persuasive.

2) I do not give you sensible answers because I am not interested in the topic. You are free to post on the topic, obviously, but you cannot compel answers any more than you can compel my attention. Face it. Not many people want to participate in your threads because there is no interest or reward in talking with you about Y2K. C

BTW, children try to compel attention by throwing tantrums. What you appear to be doing is similar.

3) You do not receive sensible answers because you rarely ask questions. Your postings generally consist of accusations, taunts or rhetorical questions. Few of them invite reply because there is very little sensible to be said about them. They are better formulated to end debate than to start it.


I think you must not have been reading with much attention. You are a censor because your actions render the forum unusable for anyone except those who are intent on reading (but not debating) your output.

If you would like to comment on the points I made, you might make a stronger case. My being a "leftist" really doesn't have much bearing on the matter, does it?


Have you forgotten so quickly, my dear cpr? I would have thought you might retain some shadow of a memory of those ten days in late June when we corresponded so abundantly. I already HAVE answered for being a dunce about Y2K. To wit:

You were right about Y2K. I was wrong about Y2K.

>> I am not........HMMMMM. <<

Yes. Hmmmm posts on many different subjects. You post on one. One. One. One.

Now, just in case it makes a difference, I will try to get this across to you one more time: You were right about Y2K. I was wrong about Y2K.

Feel better?

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), September 17, 2000.

You have to understand CPR's basic mindset (such as it is):

1) He screwed up his life due to his Y2K fear-uncertainty-doubt regarding how people would REACT to the upcoming Y2K (non-)event, by giving up his $100K/yr income and devoting himself to his idiotic de- bunkery.

2) Nobody really cared about Y2K, much less who called it right and who called it wrong. His entire de-bunking effort was a complete and total waste.

3) Y2K has come and gone, CPR lost much and gained nothing. CPR IS MISERABLE.


Well, I am still interested in having a rational discussion about Y2K, because I think that there is a lot to discuss and learn from. In fact, now is probably the BEST time to do this while it is still fresh enough, yet detached enough. To this end, I appreciate all the great responses from both doomers and pollies alike. (Even, interestingly enough, Andy Ray, who has made significant contributions to my Y2K threads.)

CPR is miserable about the choices he made regarding Y2K ... so I'm supposed to walk gently and not raise the subject??? I don't think so.

And I'm not going to let CPR get away with anything, either. His recent turning on Doc Paulie, and accusations regarding Ken Decker, are actually FUNNY, and I don't mind bringing that up. (Oh, and did I mention that he thinks that I'm Gary North?....)

CPR doesn't bother me. Though, I must admit, that "Doomzies-Be-Them" guy. Now, he seems a bit odd....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), September 17, 2000.

Well said, Brian. Presently you, hmm, I'm Here, cyber freud, abc, Decker, Flint, Unkee D, KOS (and maybe an anonymous Doc P?) are countering cpr's irrationality with logic. Applause to you all.

I think the only thing that might put a stop to this is for all of those that cpr has considered "friendlys" to confront his behavior.

I know that CD, Dirt Road, SMP, Buddy, Patricia, Peg, et al. either lurk here or post under other handles. As long as they are silent, cpr believes he has approval. More than anything, this silence has illuminated for me the Debunker's belief that those on the old Time Bomb who didn't confront the extremists must have approved of them. Let them now show us how it is done and perhaps we will yet learn what we failed to understand.

-- (Adelle@home.now), September 17, 2000.

A good example of how far off the deep end CPR has gone today:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003p1j"> REJOICE DOOM ZOMBIES: ****THE 2005 CRISIS IS COMING****


-- This is (getting@pretty.weird), September 17, 2000.

Addele (;-)) maybe some are anonymous because they know cpr is mentally ill and will turn on anyone who disagrees openly with what he is doing. He can and will hurt his "friends" with more than words.

-- (xxx@xxx.xxx), September 17, 2000.

Adelle: Do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), September 17, 2000.

I'm afraid Brian is quite right. CPR spent the 2-3 years prior to rollover demonstrating that he was perfectly happy making *thousands* of posts to himself, all by himself, and convincing himself he was saving the world. So we could ALL give up on this forum and leave, and even it he noticed, it wouldn't bother him a bit as he continued to make many thousands more posts to nobody.

I don't approve of censorship of anyone. But I'd appreciate it if OTFR would enlist some help, and factor all cpr posts to a separate thread with a single link we could follow if we saw fit. This link could be placed at the top of every thread cpr tried to destroy, which by now is nearly all of them.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 17, 2000.

Chickens coming home to roost. Enjoy your "free speach".


(BTW, free speach without rules is just verbal anarchy, as you are now finding out. Have fun.)

-- Yeah Right (Ahhh@haaa.haaa.haaa), September 17, 2000.

Actually, that isn't quite true. You can find several threads that CPR hasn't tried to "destroy" here. If they aren't to your liking, you can always start some new ones. Either way, you might find it preferable to talking about CPR.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 17, 2000.


Lemme talk to dis pussy.

-- (Vito_di_Testosterone@social.club), September 17, 2000.

SENTA .........."vito" que vuole di parlare con me?

Lei ha bisogno buona fortuna.

a piu tarde'

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 17, 2000.

cpr admits failure, resorts to massive cut-and-paste in order to kill this thread. Doesn't care how it looks to others. Doesn't care that he is acting intolerant and un-Christian. Doesn't care that he is now censoring others, although he so loudly and self-righteously howled when he was censored, and although no censorship has been attempted against him on this forum.

Who'd've guessed? He is convicted by his own actions, his own words and his own values. He is one soul-sick man. Let's hope and pray he isn't drinking heavily, too.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), September 17, 2000.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 17, 2000.

Forum Regulars----This Thread is for YOU


-- (anonymous@forum.regular), September 18, 2000.

Thank you, OTFR, for removing the massive cut-and-paste job cpr dumped into this thread and for your other clean up efforts this morning. I hope it did not consume too much of your time.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), September 18, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ