It's your method - you demonstrate it by going first.

I view it more like pornography.

Chez once again avoiding substance in a thread by not making a statement that can be actually discussed. When you add this to your constant stirring up **** by supporting any poster in the forum accused of being awful you should be able to understand why I think you're just a ****ing waste of space. You are the worst poster in PU.

Touch. You're well up there on the worst poster list.

You demand I go first with your nonsense approach and then rant rather than offer anything yourself - which kinda proves the point.

I've been asking you for a definition of bullying in a thread about bullying that I started by basically saying I don't think there can be bullying in. You refuse. You're a low IQ *******.

BbcChez just flat out ignoring an on topic example of bullying. Whatever man, keep grasping at the make believe that you are anything more than a middling at best troll

As I said I view it more like pornography.

So far you have given no argument as to why there can be no bullying in PU apart from the bogus one about cyber bullying.

There can be bullying. You enabled the racist bully every chance you got. You tone police anyone who challenges bigoted views towards the oppressed. Your whole posting history is the definition of privilege. The fact youve gone on this crusade on this subject is sort of hilarious.

You're not being tone policed LG and crusade? Lol

At least we agree that bullying is possible - its always a bad thing imo.

They've probably been bullied into silence.

Well, except we had one actual bully in here and you whined that even a temporary demodding was too harsh and have taken it upon yourself to tone police all criticism of bigots since. Because lol bbcchez

You're being obsessively wierd again LG.

But yes we have at least one bully here - you.

It's an impressive feat to so dominate a thread and yet contribute nothing of substance.

The volume comes in large part from all the whining directed at me but you're simply wrong to deny the substance.

I've also several times asked others for their preferred description of what LG does and for their reasoning with very little if anything in response.

You may not like the approach but that's discussing bullying.

No, it's actually not. It's a grade A collection of hypotheticals, diversions, non-sequiturs, and assertions all thrown around seemingly randomly as you struggle to make any sort of a point. You've been asked repeatedly for clarification, and to provide some description or examples of what you're talking about, in clear language, using words whose meanings everybody can agree on. You refuse, and just spout some more nonsense about how everybody but you is so unreasonable. If that's the best collection of "substance" you can pull from 54 posts, that's truly pitiful.

Why don't you go back to the beginning and answer the question? In the context of PU, a lightly moderated anonymous online message board for adults, what is bullying?

An essential component of bullying is it's personal and not content based.

A bully looks for a weak person and attacks them. They find this rewarding.

If you say Klay Thompson is terrible at basketball and I throw a fit and call you names because I disagree, I'm not bullying you even though I'm personally attacking you. The content is the motivation.

Now if I find somebody unpopular and reply to their every post with "yeah but you wear rabbit tales shirts!" and I obviously don't respect them, I'm being a bully. It doesn't matter what they post, I'm attacking because they are weak in the local society.

It's pretty easy to point to a fig leaf of content for deniability. Repetition, effectiveness, and a loose connection to the most recent post are ingredients for bullying. You have to let it go eventually or you become a bully.

BbcChez is really losing it this weekend. Might be time for him to take a 2+2 mental health day and reevaluate. Dude can't even admit that a mod threatening people via PM is bullying by his definition.

Sure, something permissible isn't necessarily to be encouraged. Still, if you seek out the one small place in which such behaviour is at all permissible, it's hard to feel sympathy.

Whining on someone else's behalf brings even less sympathy.

Sure but the conversation isn't about sympathy. It's about a personal attack on the people who bully. Talking about me having sympathy for bahbah would be the same as talking about Kerowo having sympathy for LetsGambool over this personal attack on him. Maybe we do, maybe we don't but that's a separable point.

Just to address the rest of your point: There is definitely some sympathy for bahbah and others but that's more about being sympathetic with the idea that 2+2ers should be able to discuss politics with more focus on content than on abuse.


Actually it is (mostly) clear and it is substantial. A lot of the quantity of posts you object to has been an attempt to clarity. By no means is everyone here being unreasonable.

A semantic debate about what constitutes bullying doesn't really interest me if contained within the definition is a bunch of bullying I have no reason to feel sympathy for (by which I mean care about at all).

Fair enough. I see it far more about the people/system doing the bullying than whether there's sympathy with the target.

I like how Chez's declares his opaque dissembling as "clear and substantial" while virtually everyone taking part in the thread claims he is being anything but.

You know one sure fire way to shut LG up Chez? Engage him. Did Bruce's actions in PU rise to the level of bullying? If not why not? If so how so?

It is mostly clear and substantial kerowo.

Bringing up long over issues to attack someone who's not even here is expected from the obsessively weird LG. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at you either.

Huh? We are discussing whether there can be bullying in this forum! I gave an example of actual bullying by someone with actual "power". Lol at hand waving it away for partisan reasons and continuing to prattle on about how mean responses to content are bullying. Blindly defending every offensive viewpoint and tone policing the forum isn't some sort of noble action chez.

Another potential example of bullying would be if a poster committed a violent crime IRL then went onto this forum and mocked the victim with "bitches be crazy".

lol LG

Your attempts to bring up the fiasco are endlessly pathetic. It's a very good example of just how obsessively weird you are.

It's actually an example of what could be considered bullying in PU. A mod from outside the forum threatening people seems like bullying. If it wasn't Bruce would you consider it bullying?

See, that is an actual example that anyone can understand. That is substance. My stating it's clear and full of substance, while true in this case, is not actually substance.