[mrjonathanr]

I'm curious as to what people think are appropriate standards of behaviour on the forum.

I know what I think, which is that UKB is great for robust but intelligent debate, often with juvenile glee - but it's not childish and petty.  Or moronic or babyish, which is why I forsook UKC for this forum and have never been back.

I puntered someone today, (think that's the 2nd time in 4 years here) for 'Abusive. Unnecessary'

This was the post:

Sloper you're so full of shit mate I don't even know where to start!

That's right you don't know where to start: you don't have any grasp of the issues, you don't have any knowledge of the subject or any rhetorical skills, in fact about the only thing you've got a grasp of is the depth of your own ignorance.

But still, if you ask a grown up you might be able to come up with a half decent insult.

Frankly you're pathetic.

I thought it was abusive, undignified and insofar as just a tirade without substantive argument, fell below what I'd hope to see on what is usually an inclusive forum.

Sloper didn't like my puntering so with rapier-like forensic wit he struck back (Twice):

Fuck off

and

Have another for good measure

So this is my question: is Sloper Mick Ryan in disguise??

[webbo]

No he's not that much of a wanker, fairly close but not quite there yet. Give him time.

[Doylo]

I don't think Mick Ryan is a bellend.

[Sloper]

I'm curious as to what people think are appropriate standards of behaviour on the forum.

I know what I think, which is that UKB is great for robust but intelligent debate, often with juvenile glee - but it's not childish and petty.  Or moronic or babyish, which is why I forsook UKC for this forum and have never been back.

I puntered someone today, (think that's the 2nd time in 4 years here) for 'Abusive. Unnecessary'

This was the post:

Sloper you're so full of shit mate I don't even know where to start!

That's right you don't know where to start: you don't have any grasp of the issues, you don't have any knowledge of the subject or any rhetorical skills, in fact about the only thing you've got a grasp of is the depth of your own ignorance.

But still, if you ask a grown up you might be able to come up with a half decent insult.

Frankly you're pathetic.

I thought it was abusive, undignified and insofar as just a tirade without substantive argument, fell below what I'd hope to see on what is usually an inclusive forum.

Sloper didn't like my puntering so with rapier-like forensic wit he struck back (Twice):

Fuck off

and

Have another for good measure

So this is my question: is Sloper Mick Ryan in disguise??

You puntered me for responding to some fairly crude abuse, as if you're the arbiter of moral standards and now feel so injured that you feel the need to be vindicated by a ruih of support from your fellow fuckwits with thin skins who can dish it out but can't take the slightest in 'prick' in return.

If you think you're above being juvenile and petty, you're not, your actions demonstrate this.

In short your moral high ground is as akin to a whore not overcharging a drunk punter.

Log Pile.

[a dense loner]

Just a thought on the above mr, Dave did say sloper was full of shit, that's what he retorted at.

[a dense loner]

Fuck you posted that while I was writing sloper!

[lagerstarfish]

Just a thought on the above mr, Dave did say sloper was full of shit, that's what he retorted at.

yeah, but he is though

[a dense loner]

That's not the point

[lagerstarfish]

not only is Slopesy intellectually superior to all other UKB contributors, he is also impregnably thick skinned. He would not have taken the slightest offense at Dave's post, so he had no need to retort - he was just doing it to be abusive

[mrjonathanr]

You puntered me for responding to some fairly crude abuse, as if you're the arbiter of moral standards and now feel so injured that you feel the need to be vindicated by a ruih of support from your fellow fuckwits with thin skins who can dish it out but can't take the slightest in 'prick' in return.

It wasn't the retort I puntered you for, it was bad form in being so downright unpleasant.

The point is, for all your faux superiority, you become upset and abusive when you're challenged.

This forum is a consistently collegial place.... most posters behave with respect towards others here... you are one of very few whose standards fall below that.

Why act like that in public?  It comes across badly. 

[mrjonathanr]

I see you have puntered me for being a 'coward'. That's three consecutive punterings now, I guess you're quite upset.

Very odd. 

[Sloper]

Not at all, upset, just descending to your level.

As for being challenged, Dave didn't challenge me, just responded with childish abuse, you puntered me for abuse but seem to have overlooked Dave's post, I think that speaks volumes.

As for the 'public' aspect, hmm who started this thread?

Can I suggest that you recalibrate your moral compass if you think my retort was anywhere close to as unpleasant as Dave's response to me?

[Will Hunt]

It was completely over the top and unnecessary, but I enjoyed it for what it was - scathing and, in my opinion, amusing chaffing. All's fair in love and war. I understand others may not take it the same way and will punter.
Where Slopestyle went wrong was to punter someone for puntering him which is beyond the pale. If you get puntered (one per person per disagreeable post), you take it on the chin and get on with your life.

[petejh]

He's a strange fish but he makes UKB a more interesting, if not always (edit)pleasant comfortable place to surf. Like a piranha. I'd quite like to see a heated debate between JCM and Sloper about some inconsequential guff to see who'd lose their rag first and start calling the other a nobhead.

[mrjonathanr]

Not at all, upset, just descending to your level.

My eye 

Three punterings because you've been called out for being unpleasant? I puntered you once, which was all that was necessary to say: raise your game.

Why lash out every time it doesn't go your way? That's not rough and tough, that's weak.

[Will Hunt]

I'll hold your coats, lads. 

[lagerstarfish]

tit for tat puntering should result in a fine at least

[tomtom]

I think the sensible thing here would be to discuss what is/isn't appropriate levels of behaviour... Of course it's difficult to do this without the examples (which then turns a bit tit for tat) but if possible please?

[Sloper]

John and I get on very well indeed but it takes a fair amount of booze for either of us to lose our rag with each each other: however as an Old Etonian, John always comes up with a much more interesting line of abuse than is the norm on here.

As for puntering someone who punters you, well having been on the receiving end of this, I now I consider it quite right to respond in kind.

MJR, really, it's not lashing out, not even a studied jab, just calling out your hypocrisy and cowardice. Let's be honest you put prejudice beyond consideration, but as a lefty maybe I should have been magnanimous and expected that?

[Sloper]

I think the sensible thing here would be to discuss what is/isn't appropriate levels of behaviour... Of course it's difficult to do this without the examples (which then turns a bit tit for tat) but if possible please?

Why not, who thinks that the following is acceptable?

Tough words from the man who clearly has only a grasp on his own cock, whilst reading back his own posts to himself, wallowing ecstatically in his perceived sense of loathsome smug tory superiority until a thimble full of fetid tory gunk drips into a fistfull of tissues. And as you catch a glimpse of your own drained vacant face reflected in the laptop screen a wave of inadequacy washes you back into your otherwise empty moribund existence as an unwelcome self-parodying web antagonist.

In summary; fuck off.

[lagerstarfish]

l having been on the receiving end of this, I now I consider it quite right to respond in kind.

oh no you don't !

etc.

[tomtom]

He's behind you!!

[lagerstarfish]

oh no he - oh!

[lagerstarfish]

tiddly winky winky,

tiddly winky woo,

I love you

[psychomansam]

A while back I got bored of puntering Sloper for dickishness and gave him some waddage for insulting me in an almost measured way. As they say in teaching poorly behaved boys 'catch them when they're good'.

[Bonjoy]

I think the sensible thing here would be to discuss what is/isn't appropriate levels of behaviour... Of course it's difficult to do this without the examples (which then turns a bit tit for tat) but if possible please?

Why not, who thinks that the following is acceptable?

Tough words from the man who clearly has only a grasp on his own cock, whilst reading back his own posts to himself, wallowing ecstatically in his perceived sense of loathsome smug tory superiority until a thimble full of fetid tory gunk drips into a fistfull of tissues. And as you catch a glimpse of your own drained vacant face reflected in the laptop screen a wave of inadequacy washes you back into your otherwise empty moribund existence as an unwelcome self-parodying web antagonist.

In summary; fuck off.

Whose insult was that Sloper? Pretty good line in vitriole (if a little harsh).

Edit: Just skimmed the other thread. Sloper you suggested Dave give you a half decent insult, he delivered if you ask me.

[GCW]

Or moronic or babyish, which is why I forsook UKC for this forum and have never been back.

Oh my god, how ironic.

I'm off to punter Michael "Mick" Ryan for being Sloper.

[SA Chris]

I'd quite like to see a heated debate between JCM and Sloper about some inconsequential guff to see who'd lose their rag first and start calling the other a nobhead.

UKC circa years 2001 - 2003, plenty of it IIRC.

[petejh]

Why not, who thinks that the following is acceptable?

Tough words from the man who clearly has only a grasp on his own cock, whilst reading back his own posts to himself, wallowing ecstatically in his perceived sense of loathsome smug tory superiority until a thimble full of fetid tory gunk drips into a fistfull of tissues. And as you catch a glimpse of your own drained vacant face reflected in the laptop screen a wave of inadequacy washes you back into your otherwise empty moribund existence as an unwelcome self-parodying web antagonist.

In summary; fuck off.

I think wanking-off to your own clever posts is unacceptable. Or did I misunderstand...


But seriously how do you expect people to react? Your unquenchable thirst for condescending ripostes has a cumulative effect on people and Dave's response could have been triggered by any one of the last three thousand you've posted. A lot of what you say is informative, challenging and interesting but you also seem strangely devoted to acting the evilgenius-villain-troll from some nightmarish and shit cyber-pantomine. Nobody likes trolls, and nobody likes a well-educated person acting like an arse, so occasionally you reap what you sow. There are plenty of other well educated and well-informed people on this forum who don't act like arses which proves that high intellect isn't an excuse for coming across like a condescending twat.

[GCW]

I'd just like to point out that the general level of grammar within this thread falls below what I would deem acceptable.

[moose]

A lot of what you say is informative, challenging and interesting but you also seem strangely devoted to acting the evilgenius-villain-troll from some nightmarish and shit cyber-pantomine.

You are Charlie Brooker and I claim my prize.

[chris j]

To be honest, I thought the original post the OP puntered Sloper for was fairly measured and restrained (by Sloper's standards) & if that's the standard to trigger a puntering then the OP is going to have a busy time... (Sloper says something contentious to the political left, someone else responds in an impolite way, torrent of vitriol follows, plus ca change...) I've no comment on the punterfest that happened after, though it's a bit UKC not to suck it up and go and lay it all out in public instead. I'd always thought the UKB culture was a bit more robust than that (but maybe in the relatively new overlord-run sponsor friendly regime things are changing?  )

[chris j]

I live in Devon, by the local standards you have about 50 years to go... After 12 years down here it sometimes seems like we barely moved in yesterday.

[mindfull]

  

[tommytwotone]

Interesting stuff re: potential admonishment for this kind of thing...hellbanning Sloper anyone?

http://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/

Alternatively, given that the site clearly has stats to cover your total, average posts etc, is there a way of limiting your posting to a total per day - or even percentage of your average?


That way, people who are nice could post, say, 1000% of their average. People who are prolific and clog up the forum could get limited to 50% until you get to the point of only being able to post, say, 1 thing a day or something.

[andyd]

Interesting stuff re: potential admonishment for this kind of thing...hellbanning Sloper anyone?

http://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/

Alternatively, given that the site clearly has stats to cover your total, average posts etc, is there a way of limiting your posting to a total per day - or even percentage of your average?


That way, people who are nice could post, say, 1000% of their average. People who are prolific and clog up the forum could get limited to 50% until you get to the point of only being able to post, say, 1 thing a day or something.

3t. This is the internet. You can't police it to that extent; that's not what it's about. You have to take the crunchy with the smooth. That said, you don't have to read what the person acting like the school yard bully says, or indeed respond to him. Just block that person. This isn't the first thread that is essentially complaining that Sloper is being mean. He doesn't take the hint. Just like in life we need to pick the people we talk to and associate ourselves with. On that note, are you playing out this week?

[tomtom]

Interesting stuff re: potential admonishment for this kind of thing...hellbanning Sloper anyone?

http://blog.codinghorror.com/suspension-ban-or-hellban/

Alternatively, given that the site clearly has stats to cover your total, average posts etc, is there a way of limiting your posting to a total per day - or even percentage of your average?


That way, people who are nice could post, say, 1000% of their average. People who are prolific and clog up the forum could get limited to 50% until you get to the point of only being able to post, say, 1 thing a day or something.

3t. This is the internet. You can't police it to that extent; that's not what it's about. You have to take the crunchy with the smooth. That said, you don't have to read what the person acting like the school yard bully says, or indeed respond to him. Just block that person. This isn't the first thread that is essentially complaining that Sloper is being mean. He doesn't take the hint. Just like in life we need to pick the people we talk to and associate ourselves with. On that note, are you playing out this week?

 I might be about tuesday afternoon Yarkshaire wards...

[Will Hunt]

Think I'm probably free on Sunday. Any Yarkshires fancy getting out and about?

[mindfull]

There's only law of the strongest on the internetz ...

And then I still fart in the face of the strongest ... wankers! 

[Wood FT]

strongest ... wankers!

coming soon to BBC3

[andyd]

strongest ... wankers!

coming soon to BBC3

Is that another Richard Osman concept or more in a literal sense like Splash! And Tumble? If so, will there be celebs?

[mindfull]

All the celebs of UKB should be there, all lined up to receive the holy fart!

[danm]

There isn't enough wood on the planet for this thread.

[Moo]

The irony for this whole event is defined by the thread title.