bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

I've been to my high school reunion a few times. This is the first time I've been involved with a 4th grade reunion. This really brings back memories.

referencing the "slur" that got HER banned...

IMO, it was not banning worthy...

oh well... the MODS had had their fill of HER

in the end, the MODS acted faster than cinque's beloved Mueller

I guess, you don't have to hurry anymore Mueller

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

corncob pipe said:

---

referencing the "slur" that got HER banned...

IMO, it was not banning worthy...

oh well... the MODS had had their fill of HER

in the end, the MODS acted faster than cinque's beloved Mueller

I guess, you don't have to hurry anymore Mueller

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

---

I guess we can officially retire his jersey and hang it from the rafters of BFans purgatory, right next to stovepipe's.

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

---

Now, that's conjecture. I've told you what was explicitly conveyed and you continue to advance defenses for this banned racist troll, even to the point that now you are defending by obloquy. Care to make it a trifecta and heap praise on the field marshal?

bubbadog said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

A

---

Cinque identified himself several times as male. I share your impression that the references to being a female were made by made by posters who never advanced beyond a junior high level of maturity or wit.

It seemed to me that most of what he posted here were just links to news stories that otherwise would not have been posted here because they were inconvenient to the dominant right-wing narrative here. He didn't add a whole lot of his own commentary.

Simply posting those kinds of stories was a trigger for a lot of the posters here. I think he knew that and was purposefully trolling them. But going way back on Baylor Fans, I don't remember him always being a troll. My recollection is that he didn't post all that much when I first joined BF. He identified himself as black and a Democrat and got attacked for both. Then it seemed like he retaliated by trolling.

.

---

Yeah, I don't have this same impression at all. He didn't just post stories from radical left sites and walk away. I learned to not click on any post he started.

---

I didn't try to read all of his threads. From those I read, the stories he posted tended to come more from mainstream sources, as I recall. Or at least they were stories that were widely reported in the media but hadn't received any attention here. The sources he posted from were not even comparable to some of the crazy fringe sites and twitter feeds I see as sources from certain other posters.

---

Before putting him on ignore, I started posting Media Bias Check links behind stories he posted because they were from the wacko sites.

---

I'll take your word for it. Like I said, I didn't read a lot of his threads. But I did notice that a lot of the thread subjects that could be gleaned from the thread title involved stories that were widely in the news but were drawing no attention here.

For example, one of the biggest stories in the news right now involves the murder of a Saudi dissident. Haven't noticed anything about that here. I suspect cinque would have started a thread about that.

There's the story about the woman in St. Louis who called the police on a young black man for trying to enter the condo he was legally renting. And another story about the white woman in NYC who called 9-1-1 and falsely accused a 9-year-old boy of sexually assaulting her in a grocery story (the store's video cam showed his backpack brushed her as he tried to walk past with his mother). Both of those are pretty outrageous stories that would make normal people shake their heads. I suspect cinque would have posted both (and, inevitably, then been accused of racism for calling attention to bad behavior with a racial dimension to it).

There's was also a big story in the past week or two by Dexter Filkins (award-winning war correspondent and author) about ties between the Trump campaign and Russian banks. I imagine cinque would have posted about that. The story appeared in the New Yorker, which is hardly a fringe publication. In fact, they have a track record for very solid reporting. I haven't seen anything about this article in other media so far, but it's an interesting story. Here's the link: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign

---

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/34273/last

"Conversations" with Cinque went like the following:

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

---

Now, that's conjecture. I've told you what was explicitly conveyed and you continue to advance defenses for this banned racist troll, even to the point that now you are defending by obloquy. Care to make it a trifecta and heap praise on the field marshal?

---

Making defenses? Are you on drugs?

Let's recap. We were talking about the origin of his name.

I said I always THOUGHT it was a reference to the Amistad. Never claimed any certainty. I asked you whether, to your knowledge, he had said that his name was a reference to the SLA. You declined to answer that. So as far as I'm concerned, you're relying on conjecture, as I was.

Earlier in this thread, I said that I had not seen the post(s) that supposedly got him banned. I asked whether anyone who HAD seen them could summarize them. (Others have asked this previously.) No one has given an answer. In case it was unclear to you (and I'm not sure how it could have been), I'm not defending someone whose ban-worthy posts I haven't even seen.

What's really interesting about this thread is that, even after cinque is gone, you boys are still triggered by any discussion about him that doesn't consist entirely of rants and name-calling. He must have really gotten to you.

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

---

Now, that's conjecture. I've told you what was explicitly conveyed and you continue to advance defenses for this banned racist troll, even to the point that now you are defending by obloquy. Care to make it a trifecta and heap praise on the field marshal?

---

bubba has his stinger out today. Any disagreement he interprets as a personal attack.

Osodecentx said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

---

Now, that's conjecture. I've told you what was explicitly conveyed and you continue to advance defenses for this banned racist troll, even to the point that now you are defending by obloquy. Care to make it a trifecta and heap praise on the field marshal?

---

bubba has his stinger out today. Any disagreement he interprets as a personal attack.

---

You don't read so good.

90sBear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Edmond Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Midnight Rider said:

---

A

---

Cinque identified himself several times as male. I share your impression that the references to being a female were made by made by posters who never advanced beyond a junior high level of maturity or wit.

It seemed to me that most of what he posted here were just links to news stories that otherwise would not have been posted here because they were inconvenient to the dominant right-wing narrative here. He didn't add a whole lot of his own commentary.

Simply posting those kinds of stories was a trigger for a lot of the posters here. I think he knew that and was purposefully trolling them. But going way back on Baylor Fans, I don't remember him always being a troll. My recollection is that he didn't post all that much when I first joined BF. He identified himself as black and a Democrat and got attacked for both. Then it seemed like he retaliated by trolling.

.

---

Yeah, I don't have this same impression at all. He didn't just post stories from radical left sites and walk away. I learned to not click on any post he started.

---

I didn't try to read all of his threads. From those I read, the stories he posted tended to come more from mainstream sources, as I recall. Or at least they were stories that were widely reported in the media but hadn't received any attention here. The sources he posted from were not even comparable to some of the crazy fringe sites and twitter feeds I see as sources from certain other posters.

---

Before putting him on ignore, I started posting Media Bias Check links behind stories he posted because they were from the wacko sites.

---

I'll take your word for it. Like I said, I didn't read a lot of his threads. But I did notice that a lot of the thread subjects that could be gleaned from the thread title involved stories that were widely in the news but were drawing no attention here.

For example, one of the biggest stories in the news right now involves the murder of a Saudi dissident. Haven't noticed anything about that here. I suspect cinque would have started a thread about that.

There's the story about the woman in St. Louis who called the police on a young black man for trying to enter the condo he was legally renting. And another story about the white woman in NYC who called 9-1-1 and falsely accused a 9-year-old boy of sexually assaulting her in a grocery story (the store's video cam showed his backpack brushed her as he tried to walk past with his mother). Both of those are pretty outrageous stories that would make normal people shake their heads. I suspect cinque would have posted both (and, inevitably, then been accused of racism for calling attention to bad behavior with a racial dimension to it).

There's was also a big story in the past week or two by Dexter Filkins (award-winning war correspondent and author) about ties between the Trump campaign and Russian banks. I imagine cinque would have posted about that. The story appeared in the New Yorker, which is hardly a fringe publication. In fact, they have a track record for very solid reporting. I haven't seen anything about this article in other media so far, but it's an interesting story. Here's the link: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign

---

https://sicem365.com/forums/7/topics/34273/last

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

bubbadog said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Malbec said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Oh, OK. I'd always thought that his name was a reference to the leader of the slave rebellion on the Amistad.

But I'm not sure he ever clarified that.

Is the SLA reference your conjecture, or was it something he explicitly stated?

---

Why would someone with such obvious racial motivation use a moniker created by white slave traders? If he were intending to pay homage to that person, he would have used some derivation of Sengbe Pieh.

---

So you're relying on conjecture?

---

No. I am dismissing yours.

---

And replacing it with your own conjecture

---

Now, that's conjecture. I've told you what was explicitly conveyed and you continue to advance defenses for this banned racist troll, even to the point that now you are defending by obloquy. Care to make it a trifecta and heap praise on the field marshal?

---

bubba has his stinger out today. Any disagreement he interprets as a personal attack.

---

You don't read so good.

---

I don't think Malbec is on drugs. Do you really think that?

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

You are either way behind the curve on "cinque" or else you are in on it. That moniker has become part of the lexicon of academia in political science and racial interaction for its activity across cyberspace. I hear about it almost every Thursday at my weekly coffee group which includes several professors who have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this forum, or even read it outside of monitoring "cinque's" endeavors. The discussion of those lunatic posts here and elsewhere have made for some historic comedy from their students that gets relayed by the profs.

I think that the management here did themselves a really big favor in distancing themselves from having that "person" posting here. I hope that they are able to see it every time it reappears and deal with it to the point where the infestation decides this site is a host that's just not worth its trouble and eventually moves on.

I do drink out of plastic red cups every now and then, but no, I don't think I am on drugs. When certain peoples' posts start making sense to me, I'll be sure and have myself tested just in case.

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

---

At the corner of centralizing government power and making everyone equal...equally poor that is.

---

Really? I have not seen that handbook. It is however a fantasy in your world. That's sad. You have no proof.

Waco1947 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

---

At the corner of centralizing government power and making everyone equal...equally poor that is.

---

Really? I have not seen that handbook. It is however a fantasy in your world. That's sad. You have no proof.

---

I have no proof? See Soviet Russia, Maoist China and the 100+ million deaths brought with it. Radical leftism is the largest cause of murder humanity has ever seen. Radical leftism has citizens of countries agreeing to letting the government dictate every aspect of it's citizens lives.

bubbadog said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

---

What he said. Banning a third of the black posters on this site just fails the smell test, given the racism of some of the white posters.

And, again, I don't like bans at all. I also don't like the sporadic enforcement of the ToS around here; it plainly depends on one's jersey.

quash said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

---

What he said. Banning a third of the black posters on this site just fails the smell test, given the racism of some of the white posters.

And, again, I don't like bans at all. I also don't like the sporadic enforcement of the ToS around here; it plainly depends on one's jersey.

---

Did you happen to see the offending post that got him banned? Several posters here say they did. I've asked several times for them to share what he wrote, since they seemed very clear that it was extremely racist. But nobody has stepped up.

Which is interesting.

bubbadog said:

---

quash said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

---

What he said. Banning a third of the black posters on this site just fails the smell test, given the racism of some of the white posters.

And, again, I don't like bans at all. I also don't like the sporadic enforcement of the ToS around here; it plainly depends on one's jersey.

---

Did you happen to see the offending post that got him banned? Several posters here say they did. I've asked several times for them to share what he wrote, since they seemed very clear that it was extremely racist. But nobody has stepped up.

Which is interesting.

---

He called blacks that vote Republican a word that rhymes with balloon.

bubbadog said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

---

Honest discussions of race do not bother me. I fall into the camp that feels as a society in the U.S. we have moved beyond most of the egregious wrongs of the past and are now trying to balance an ever moving pendulum that will never fully settle. There will always be people who find or seek out conflict and race differences are as good of a reason as any for some of those people. There will always be people that look to capitalize on those differences as well. There will always be people that just aren't comfortable with a culture that isn't their own. I include all sides in those statements.

As for you, your posts are typically more developed than Cinque's which would probably account for some of the different responses. If I'm being honest, probably a lot of posters just stopped reading through some of them because they didn't want to take the effort. That's not an insult, just an observation of message board posting in general. Drive By's seem to have more of an effect than thought out (long, like this post) commentary.

There are indeed a few Drive By posters on this site who paint the entire black culture with broad strokes and I agree they don't get called out as often. Personally I think I've flagged more conservative posts than liberal posts for this reason. I've also flagged them just to see if anything would happen or if there would be any consequences. As you (I think, or someone) has noted - there didn't ever appear to be any change by the mods.

I think you are probably pretty spot on when it comes to calling out trolling behavior from within one's tribe or perhaps, "tribe a little closer to my views than the other tribe", as is the case with moderate posters.

The only racial slurs I have ever seen on this site have been issued by posters who claim to be black.

A ridiculous double standard.

Thread NEEDS this:

Canada2017 said:

---

The only racial slurs I have ever seen on this site have been issued by posters who claim to be black.

A ridiculous double standard.

---

bubbadog said:

---

quash said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Bubbadog I was always fine reading Cinque's news links and posts however I think you are ignoring a lot of troll behavior. The few times I attempted to have a discussion it was never responded with legitimate conversation, only avoidance, dodging, ignoring of valid points, etc.

I believe I mentioned several times that he was trolling. Clearly, he was. I only noted that he didn't seem to start out that way on BF. I, too, found that he didn't usually respond to attempts to engage in further dialogue. (The one exception seemed to be threads on religious doctrine.)

I agree Cinque also took the brunt of a lot of mean spirited comments from posters a lot of which was out of line. However, I have to ask how much of this was self-inflicted?

Let's take the example you posted above. You said that no one had mentioned the story of the 9 year old accused of sexual assault and I pointed out where it had been several days ago. You noted that Cinque would have commented on the racial dimension of the incident yet when it was posted, there was no mention of any racial dimension. Instead it was framed in the context of women's false accusations of sexual assault taken to the extreme. The ethnicity of the boy did not matter and the woman was rightly criticized in the post.

So was this case one of a racist white person or an overly defensive woman looking to be a victim?

I think you are right in that Cinque would have chosen the race angle because that was the angle Cinque chose to take - A LOT.

---

I take your point and appreciate that you're trying to engage in honestly discussing a serious question. Here's my measuring stick. I talk about racial angles a lot, too. Maybe not as much as cinque, but a lot.

One reason I do it is because a lot of Americans (especially here but not just here) seem to think that we became a post-racial society, that racism is past, whatever legacy it may have created is irrelevant, and that everyone should just move on and not talk about race at all. From this viewpoint, anyone who DOES point out the persistence of racism in certain areas of our society is "playing the race card" and, therefore, must be a racist themselves. I think that view is both oblivious to present realities and a poor interpretation of our history.

This does not mean that racism is behind every bad act, like the ridiculous reaction of the white woman in the store. But acknowledging this also does not mean that racist behavior today is an anomaly in our society.

Did cinque bring it all on himself? To the extent that someone trolls, they should expect an equal measure of angry pushback from people here who can't help but take the troll bait.

But I would also note that, when I've posted on race, I didn't get the same kind of angry backlash and personal attacks as cinque did. And so I have to wonder why that is.

And I would note that there are several pretty notorious WHITE race-baiters on this site. I won't name them here. You probably know who they are. They're not as prolific as they used to be, it seems, but they'd regularly start threads highlighting crimes committed by black people. They'd make claims about a "failed culture" that, in their minds, was inextricably tied to race. These posters just as obviously trolls as cinque was. But I notice they got a pass from the majority here, and anybody who attacked them as trolls got attacked by the majority. And so I wonder why that is.

Finally, cinque may have been the most prominent troll on the left of the dial around here, but he was far, far from the only troll. The trolls on the right of the dial get a pass, except from a few posters like quash and LIQR. I wonder why that is, too. It may be that majority here really don't object to trolling as long as they're part of the troll's tribe. Or it may be that they don't even recognize trolling when it comes from their side of the aisle.

---

What he said. Banning a third of the black posters on this site just fails the smell test, given the racism of some of the white posters.

And, again, I don't like bans at all. I also don't like the sporadic enforcement of the ToS around here; it plainly depends on one's jersey.

---

Did you happen to see the offending post that got him banned? Several posters here say they did. I've asked several times for them to share what he wrote, since they seemed very clear that it was extremely racist. But nobody has stepped up.

Which is interesting.

---

An animal that wears a mask. They dig in the garbage. Rednecks shoot them and eat them for dinner. Rhymes with loon. I will spot you the letter C.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

---

At the corner of centralizing government power and making everyone equal...equally poor that is.

---

Really? I have not seen that handbook. It is however a fantasy in your world. That's sad. You have no proof.

---

I have no proof? See Soviet Russia, Maoist China and the 100+ million deaths brought with it. Radical leftism is the largest cause of murder humanity has ever seen. Radical leftism has citizens of countries agreeing to letting the government dictate every aspect of it's citizens lives.

---

Silly. China bans Google and now is thinking about allowing a heavily censored version. Guess who wants to censor search engines here in America?

Who gets into tariff wars that support over paid union workers and bosses at the expense of the consumers of America? The man you voted for.

Who begs for censoring the press and hates freedom of speech?

You said the word "literally" Do you know what it means? Please show me where in the imaginary playbook it is written? Good luck. You know its not literal if its imaginary, right?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

---

At the corner of centralizing government power and making everyone equal...equally poor that is.

---

Really? I have not seen that handbook. It is however a fantasy in your world. That's sad. You have no proof.

---

I have no proof? See Soviet Russia, Maoist China and the 100+ million deaths brought with it. Radical leftism is the largest cause of murder humanity has ever seen. Radical leftism has citizens of countries agreeing to letting the government dictate every aspect of it's citizens lives.

---

Silly. China bans Google and now is thinking about allowing a heavily censored version. Guess who wants to censor search engines here in America?

Who gets into tariff wars that support over paid union workers and bosses at the expense of the consumers of America? The man you voted for.

Who begs for censoring the press and hates freedom of speech?

You said the word "literally" Do you know what it means? Please show me where in the imaginary playbook it is written? Good luck. You know its not literal if its imaginary, right?

---

^^^ Just another friggin lib idiot

Limited IQ, "literally"

Canada2017 said:

---

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

Where I get a copy of the lefty's playbook?

---

At the corner of centralizing government power and making everyone equal...equally poor that is.

---

Really? I have not seen that handbook. It is however a fantasy in your world. That's sad. You have no proof.

---

I have no proof? See Soviet Russia, Maoist China and the 100+ million deaths brought with it. Radical leftism is the largest cause of murder humanity has ever seen. Radical leftism has citizens of countries agreeing to letting the government dictate every aspect of it's citizens lives.

---

Silly. China bans Google and now is thinking about allowing a heavily censored version. Guess who wants to censor search engines here in America?

Who gets into tariff wars that support over paid union workers and bosses at the expense of the consumers of America? The man you voted for.

Who begs for censoring the press and hates freedom of speech?

You said the word "literally" Do you know what it means? Please show me where in the imaginary playbook it is written? Good luck. You know its not literal if its imaginary, right?

---

Not even close to accurate.

Time to tell me again how you vote Republican most of the time.

---

Hillary, Feinstein, Sparticus, Kamala, Schumer, etc

Which part is not correct?

Does China censor Google?

Havent several here called for the censoring of Google?

Has our president said he wants to get the media under control?

Did our president say it is "frankly disgusting the way our press is able to write anything they want"?

Do tariffs support the auto union worker by keeping factories in America instead of other places in the world?

Doesnt this also protect the union bosses?

Doesnt this also cause Americans to pay more?

Which part do you disagree with?


btw Jim, thats a great rebbutal. Way to show off your intelligence.