I’ve been reluctant to jump in here because it feels like I’m being a vulture picking at the carcass.
That’s not what my intention is nor do I think is it anybody else’s . . . it just looks that way.
I don’t think it’s JUST the fact that this guy was obnoxious. If that were the case, then patriciareed’s comment that we’re free to ignore a poster that annoys us would apply. I don’t disagree with her.
But, as I just said, and I think most in this thread have skirted around but implied, it was much much more than just being obnoxious. This guy was destroying threads that could have been productive.
I’m not railing against “obnoxious” members. We have a few of those, and even some may view ME as obnoxious. That’s part of the Internet, PERIOD, and we all adjust to that in our own way . . . “ignore”, blow off . . . whatever.
If everyone ignored or blew off, that would be fine . . . his posts would have just been another ho-hum plain vanilla hit-and-run banality.
But that has not been the case with this fellow.
There have always been those “few” that get hooked, and new members, unfamiliar with that individual, usually get hooked right away.
I don’t object to a simple expression of a contrary opinion . . . that’s certainly to be expected on a political board, and enhances productive discussion.
But when that expression is made in a form that can reasonably be seen as “obnoxious”, it can elicit that series of abrasive exchanges that drive the thread south.
I saw the resurrected behavior of destroying productive threads, and THAT’S what I had a problem with.