Woodruff -- Severe Forum Abuse, Flaming [Global issue][Done]

[stahrgazer]

Serbia,

My response post indicated why I do believe my post was on-topic.

However, I realize that in my emotionalism, my motivation is misunderstood and seems harsh.

So. A final post, explaining it.

Woodruff:
I saw this and came in planning to defend your honor.

Then I saw the OP's samples. The sheer quantity of them appalled me, so that I saw no "honor" in your repeated vitriole, and could not support you.

Then I saw, you're a teacher, and not just "any teacher." You're supposedly a teacher of a fine institution, AFJROTC.

I am very proud to have graduated high school as a Cadet Major of that program. I learned from two upstanding shining examples of the Officer's corps: an NCO and a Lt. Colonel, both retired from the USAF. Through them, I got a real understanding of honor, of principles; and through that course, I got a history of aerospace in the United States and other parts of the world. That foundation helped me in a career in aerospace myself, although not in the service.

I apologize that in my dismay about the character you reflect, I was perhaps a bit harsh... however, the opinions I expressed are still the opinions.

The sheer quantity of the instances merit some action above just a wrist-slap.

The rest of my posts were invited by you, woodie, because you used your career to justify the need for de-stressing by posting that nastiness all over these forums; and you used some mild, if "not all that funny" teasing about your cadets dropping batons to start you off.

If the Sarge and Lt. Col. of my AFJROTC program had been posting stuff about me on the internet; and unapologetically cursing a blue streak dozens of times where minors are present, I wouldn't have been able to learn Corps values from them.

So, yes, I think it reflects a character problem. But also, yes, I think the OP's concerns over the quantity of instances is totally justified and merits disciplinary action.

And yes, I'm dismayed to find that I couldn't support Woodruff in this case after all.

[Woodruff]

Enough is enough. If you can't post something that will help us make a decision than please don't post. It doesn't matter what profession woodruff is in. On topic please.

Sorry, Semp, but I think that since his "justification" for every rant used as an example of his severe forum abuse and extreme flaming is that he was upset because someone downed his students, then that does open his conduct and discussion of his students as part of the topic.

Utter bullshit. What is at hand is what I've said ON this site. What I do OFF of this site is thoroughly irrelevant.

Actually, it adds baiting to the initial complaint. If discussing someone's personal stuff isn't allowed, then he's baiting people into doing it by mentioning his profession

Oh my God, are you serious? What is the axe you have to grind here, stahrgazer? This doesn't even make basic sense.

He's got a mindset that it's absolutely appropriate for him to post anything he wants, but absolutely inappropriate for anyone to disagree with him.

I certainly do NOT have that mindset. In fact, as I CLEARLY POINTED OUT in my post regarding being trolled by pimpdave (which you obviously haven't read), I have thirteen pages worth of posts to that point from May 5th. That's thirteen pages of mostly disagreements in which my only inflammatory statements were in response to pimpdave. That doesn't remotely support your (or pimpdave's) claim that I can't allow anyone to disagree with me or that I flame anyone that does. That's called evidence, stahrgazer, rather than your insinuations.

And if they do disagree with him, they're subject to his vitriolic abusive retorts, which he then claims is justified.

Here, I'll just quote it again for you...maybe you'll get it if you read it twice:
I certainly do NOT have that mindset. In fact, as I CLEARLY POINTED OUT in my post regarding being trolled by pimpdave (which you obviously haven't read), I have thirteen pages worth of posts to that point from May 5th. That's thirteen pages of mostly disagreements in which my only inflammatory statements were in response to pimpdave. That doesn't remotely support your (or pimpdave's) claim that I can't allow anyone to disagree with me or that I flame anyone that does. That's called evidence, stahrgazer, rather than your insinuations.

He even admits he's deliberately "venting" stuff that happened outside of CC when he does it, which belies his, "it's justified" claim.

I don't "vent" stuff that happens outside of CC. I use CC as a de-stressor...a very different thing.

While I agree he's not going to listen to a reasoned approach about his inappropriate posting designed to shed light on whatever his "stressors" are, it does lead to his "motive" for those continual abuses he subjects others to.

Or, on the other hand, you could review my post regarding pimpdave's trolling, which you clearly have not yet done.

Serbia,

My response post indicated why I do believe my post was on-topic.

However, I realize that in my emotionalism, my motivation is misunderstood and seems harsh.

So. A final post, explaining it.

Woodruff:
I saw this and came in planning to defend your honor.

Then I saw the OP's samples. The sheer quantity of them appalled me, so that I saw no "honor" in your repeated vitriole, and could not support you.

Then I saw, you're a teacher, and not just "any teacher." You're supposedly a teacher of a fine institution, AFJROTC.

I am very proud to have graduated high school as a Cadet Major of that program. I learned from two upstanding shining examples of the Officer's corps: an NCO and a Lt. Colonel, both retired from the USAF. Through them, I got a real understanding of honor, of principles; and through that course, I got a history of aerospace in the United States and other parts of the world. That foundation helped me in a career in aerospace myself, although not in the service.

I apologize that in my dismay about the character you reflect, I was perhaps a bit harsh... however, the opinions I expressed are still the opinions.

The sheer quantity of the instances merit some action above just a wrist-slap.

The rest of my posts were invited by you, woodie, because you used your career to justify the need for de-stressing by posting that nastiness all over these forums; and you used some mild, if "not all that funny" teasing about your cadets dropping batons to start you off.

If the Sarge and Lt. Col. of my AFJROTC program had been posting stuff about me on the internet; and unapologetically cursing a blue streak dozens of times where minors are present, I wouldn't have been able to learn Corps values from them.

So, yes, I think it reflects a character problem. But also, yes, I think the OP's concerns over the quantity of instances is totally justified and merits disciplinary action.

And yes, I'm dismayed to find that I couldn't support Woodruff in this case after all.

stahrgazer, I strongly suggest that you learn the phrase "enough is enough". And no, I didn't "invite" you to say a damn thing about my career. In fact, I have, both pleasantly and unpleasantly, asking you to fucking stop it. And yet, you continue.

In short, shut the f*ck up.

[pimpdave]

In fact, I have, both pleasantly and unpleasantly, asking you to fucking stop it. And yet, you continue.

You and stahrgazer have a lot in common!

[Woodruff]

In fact, I have, both pleasantly and unpleasantly, asking you to fucking stop it. And yet, you continue.

You and stahrgazer have a lot in common!

Says the perfectly innocent and only viciously maligned pimpdave, who would never consider goading another ConquerClub member by baiting and trolling incessantly.

[king achilles]

This is locked as this forum is not a thread where you guys can keep attacking each other.

Since this particular case is really about posts made from other forums, this matter is more appropriately handled by the global mods who are more familiar with the ongoing in those forums.

Next time, if it concerns flaming and other forum violations, report those posts by clicking on the exclamation mark inside the upside down triangle of that particular post you are reporting.

If you see one or both of them being turned into guest, then the case has been handled accordingly.

I am moving this to closed as I am not considering this a C&A issue but it will be handled very soon.

[rdsrds2120]

Just a heads up, the Woodruff case has been resolved for any of you that were following.

-rd