What's new
By:

Sirkickyass, Moderator.

Francis Bacon was once accused of corruption as a judge on account of routinely taking bribes, and all. He adamantly disputed these charges, astutely pointing out that he always took bribes from both sides, and could not therefore be unduly influenced in favor of one side or the other. What some might call "corruption," I just call "bidnizz," my own damn self.
 
Hopper said:
Francis Bacon was once accused of corruption as a judge on account of routinely taking bribes, and all. He adamantly disputed these charges, astutely pointing out that he always took bribes from both sides, and could not therefore be unduly influenced in favor of one side or the other. What some might call "corruption," I just call "bidnizz," my own damn self.
Click to expand...

You call yourself "bidnizz?" I thought you called yourself Hopper, or aint, or something else entirely?
 
Must be some kinda misunderstanding there, eh, Dark? I don't call myself nuthin, except "self." Now and again I say "Self, whatcha gunna do now?"
 
Darkwing Duck said:
You call yourself "bidnizz?" I thought you called yourself Hopper, or aint, or something else entirely?
Click to expand...

You haven't figured out aint yet? He's got a whole thread whining about whiners. He's above it, of course, but he can't figure out those miscreants who don't know all those quotations he does which prove his whining is the moral high road, and their whining is the cesspool of stupidity. This thread is purely an intellectual exercise in pointing out that a current moderator might have been part of the disease which so unfairly mischaracterized him in the past. And said moderator might be guilty of the same crimes he was unfairly accused of. But he's not offended. Or bitter. He's just kicking the tires on a little theoretical debate, having a little country fun. Just wait till he breaks out the Latin.
 
My old homey, Biley, who has often expressed his dread over the possibility of my return. He aint foolin nobuddy, though. We both know he loves me.
 
Here's a little quote for ya, eh, Biley?:

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people."
Eleanor Roosevelt


I don't know about the rest of y'all, but, my own damn self, I'm here to discuss people. Along those lines, Eleanor was HOT, eh!?
 
billyshelby said:
You haven't figured out aint yet? He's got a whole thread whining about whiners. He's above it, of course, but he can't figure out those miscreants who don't know all those quotations he does which prove his whining is the moral high road, and their whining is the cesspool of stupidity. This thread is purely an intellectual exercise in pointing out that a current moderator might have been part of the disease which so unfairly mischaracterized him in the past. And said moderator might be guilty of the same crimes he was unfairly accused of. But he's not offended. Or bitter. He's just kicking the tires on a little theoretical debate, having a little country fun. Just wait till he breaks out the Latin.
Click to expand...

Latin was fun, if not a little stale, in the two years I took of it in college. All the declensions, conjugations, case, and tenses were quite the burden to memorize.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree Aint. Even if I spotted every part of your original post I don't there's an implication that I would be corrupt. But thanks for flattering me.



Everyone knows the rule about finders keepers.

Also, 10k in a wallet? How would that thing even fold with that much paper stuffed inside? You'd have to transfer it to your own safe out of practical necessity.
Click to expand...


Thank you for giving me my new favorite lawyer joke about how someone tells an obvious fake situation joke about a lawyer, and a lawyer tries to defend it. I have told this joke twice already to huge laughs.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
Latin was fun, if not a little stale, in the two years I took of it in college. All the declensions, conjugations, case, and tenses were quite the burden to memorize.
Click to expand...

Well, until aint's inevitable flameout, you'll get a chance to practice your Latin. aint's standard post is usually spam, has something thematically to do with nursing at Jerry's breast, often recalls a quote/link from 1987 where a ballboy remembers Jerrry cracking the window in the bathroom after taking a crap, then attacks some argument in gibberish with a circular gibberish argument, throws out a quote from somebody who is actually a smart person, and then concludes with a Latin anecdote to definitively prove aint aint as stupid as he sounds. He gives propagandists a bad name, but that's aint.
 
if this hopper guys is actually aint, thank goodness he actually types correctly 90% of the time now.

correction, read another thread. i'll give him a 70%.
 
Last edited:
Kicky must love this thread. Ain't tries to bash him and and in the process only makes himself look like a **** head. He than tries to save face (or distract us at least) with follow up posts, which in turn only exacerbates his dilemma. Reminds me of a comedian bombing horribly.
 
Hopper said:
I know others who whole-heartedly agree. He likes to, or at least used to like to, act as though his opinions are sancrosanct gospel and that it is utterly blasphemous, not to mention completely stupid, to even dare question him.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think Kicky is right most of the time. Guess I agree with him too often to think of him as overly arrogant.

Just sayin'.

And I don't necessarily think that you should be disallowed from expressing your opinions, even if somewhat high-handedly, just because you care enough about the board to be a moderator. Moderating's no fun if you're not posting as well.

More to the point, I don't think Kicky radically changed his posting style between the time when he wasn't a moderator and when he became one. So if you're saying he's actually gotten better lately, it would seem you have a problem with him more as just a poster, not in his moderating duties.

As for the voting, that doesn't happen in the public eye, but Kicky has said that he abstained from voting in instances where he was involved in the conversation, and I believe him. That would seem to close the issue. Or am I missing something?
 
AtheistPreacher said:
More to the point, I don't think Kicky radically changed his posting style between the time when he wasn't a moderator and when he became one.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your thoughtful input, Preach (even though I didn't quote it all). I haven't been around these here parts for a couple of years, and I wasn't really addressing any particular moderation that Kicky may or may not have done. He answered the question, and I'll take him at his word.

I do think his posting style has changed, but we all perceive things differently. That's kinda the point. People always have their particular point of view and pre-existing allegiances/enemies. Kicky always had the little "posse" that he ran with (mainly the HarpringSucks crew), and many of them seemed to whole-heartedly approve of his attitude. If you're not disagreeing with Kicky, but reinforcing him in what he says, I have no doubt that you would have a different perception of him than those who didn't. So long as you were agreeing with him you would, ipso facto, have his approval, no doubt, and he would address you accordingly. He was one of several who seemed to perceive themselves as the "illuminati" of the board, and who would invariably praise each other's posts and seldom express disagreement with each other (even when they disagreed).

It's kinda sorry, if you ask me, but it seems to me that far too many posters like or dislike each around here based primarily on whether they agree or disagree with the other's opinions. Nothing unique, I guess, but still kinda sorry.
 
Hopper said:
It's kinda sorry, if you ask me, but it seems to me that far too many posters like or dislike each around here based primarily on whether they agree or disagree with the other's opinions. Nothing unique, I guess, but still kinda sorry.
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately that tends to be the case everywhere. Most people just don't have the self-confidence, rationality, and empathy necessary to disagree with people while still liking and respecting them. It's even harder on a messageboard when you don't have to deal with the human person, and have the defense of anonymity. Easier to be an ***. I've been known to be somewhat condescending as well. Meh.
 
I'm generally trying to avoid any acrimony in this thread; there's really no point given the tenor of the first post. The gauntlet's already been cast. There's nowhere to go. I will, however, respond briefly to a handful of points here.

Hopper said:
I do think [kicky's] posting style has changed, but we all perceive things differently.
Click to expand...

I'm probably the person least qualified to opine on this subject given that I'm the subject rather than a neutral observer. However, I can attest to the fact that I believe my posting style hasn't changed markedly and I can also affirmatively state that I have not conciously changed my posting style.

As far as external indicia goes, I will say that I receive the exact same criticisms today that I have for my entire tenure on Jazzfanz. The cast of characters that charges that I follow them around and try to make them look bad changes over the years but the criticism remains the same. It was Vinylone, then it was Simple Man, JPR, and aintnuthin, then it was Scatacephalus, Archie, and beantown.

I think if my posting style had changed dramatically these complaints would either have ceased or would have changed in nature. Neither has occurred.

If you're not disagreeing with Kicky, but reinforcing him in what he says, I have no doubt that you would have a different perception of him than those who didn't. So long as you were agreeing with him you would, ipso facto, have his approval, no doubt, and he would address you accordingly.
Click to expand...

I'll admit I had problems following this pathway. It reads to me as "if you like him, it's because you like him."

He was one of several who seemed to perceive themselves as the "illuminati" of the board, and who would invariably praise each other's posts and seldom express disagreement with each other (even when they disagreed).
Click to expand...

I guess this begs the question: how would you know we disagreed if we invariably praised each other's posts?

In reality bordy and I agree on almost nothing, especially politically. Pearl and I have had arguments relating to economics and politics pre-dating you ever joining the board. YB and I can't even agree on what we think of your posts.

If there is an illuminati on jazzfanz I think it's probably colton and Jason. After all, they literally do control everything here. They could even disappear you.

It's kinda sorry, if you ask me, but it seems to me that far too many posters like or dislike each around here based primarily on whether they agree or disagree with the other's opinions.
Click to expand...

If you think I fall into this category, I submit my honest contrition. I will certainly refrain from starting threads designed to pick at scabs that are three years old.
 
Well, I will say, 'twere I that this thread was about, I'd probably have my ego fed so much that I'd be doing a jig much in the same way John Stockton celebrates big shots while singing something like:

This thread is all about me
It's there for all to see
It's for the guy that boasts
This thread has 39 posts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top