Noah Fence and factvalue

This is so utterly ridiculous.

I'm amazed admins have been as patient as they have with fact value. S/he repeatedly flouts posting guidelines, is warned about it, and then carries on doing it. I can't believe the anti-semitic shit s/he posted without any apology or explanation, despite Ed, jesuithitsquad and radicalgraffiti doing a sterling job pointing out and breaking down just how beyond out of order her/his comments were.

I personally think FV should bloody well apologise for that shit and agree not to be a completely belligerent arsehole any time a) someone disagrees with them, and b) someone points out that their comments might be racist/sexist etc as a prerequisite for being allowed to post on the site.

But, ya know, no strong feelings either way and that...

Thank god we have a new thread about factvalue in the feedback forum. It's been a whole 24 hours since anyone has posted in the other one.

Sadly, there are only 3 threads by or about factvalue on the entire front page of the feedback forum. In such times as these the international proletariat needs to know about the tribulations of working class hero, factvalue. S Artesian has done their part; who else here will carry the torch?

Glad they're banned, been refusing to respond to their behaviour for a while now.

Noah's "I admit I'm an arsehole but everyone is one too and won't admit it" schtick is very tiresome and he uses it to justify endless attention-seeking behaviour and some nasty aggressive stuff.

Factvalue seems to have read the graphic someone posted a while back, I think it was trolling/debating in bad faith and thought it was a how-to guide.

i don't recall the admins saying "everyone has to agree with whoever starts the thread"

S.E. wrote:

in essence arguing, that there should be no discussion.

It seems like the logical place for discussion is here -

http://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016

a thread which is already largely about factvalue's and Noah's behaviour on this site. Having derailed and effectively shut down the micro-aggressions thread not once but twice, a third thread in the feedback forum about Factvalue and Noah seems a bit excessive. I mean, how much more fucking time is about to be wasted talking about wasting time?

As for the posters' behaviour, I doubt if any resolution will be reached with people who take the moral high ground about being rude and beligerant.

Fleur

S.E. wrote:

in essence arguing, that there should be no discussion.

It seems like the logical place for discussion is here -

http://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016

a thread which is already largely about factvalue's and Noah's behaviour on this site. Having derailed and effectively shut down the micro-aggressions thread not once but twice, a third thread in the feedback forum about Factvalue and Noah seems a bit excessive. I mean, how much more fucking time is about to be wasted talking about wasting time?

As for the posters' behaviour, I doubt if any resolution will be reached with people who take the moral high ground about being rude and beligerant.

exactly.

Good fucking question.

I really have wasted far too much time arguing with people who won't discuss in good faith and then fling insults and personal jibes and all round aggressive behaviour when people don't agree with them, while at the same time whining about being bullied by dumb groupthinking sheeple.

Ban them, don't ban them, I don't give a flying fuck. I just refuse to interact with them in any way at all when they come back. Simply not worth my time.

I can't speak for anyone else, but personally I'm here to know Noah's fate. If he is perm-banned I'll never get to hear another story about Pete, he of the breakfast story fame. And that, in and of itself, would be a clear crime against all humanity.

Oh come off it, Artesian.

Your deliberate mis-interpretation of other people's posts so you can do your grumpy old man schtick.

Ok SA, your turn now. Please speak clearly and precisely.

(1) Is the behavior the two were banned for against the posting guidelines?

(2) Were they warned and given a fair opportunity to change the behavior?

(3) Specifically, why are you opposed to the ban?

(4) Precisely, what is less charitable than "chicken shit?"

(5) Are you aware this thread, in and of itself, is likely against the posting guidelines?

Please only query moderation decisions, using the feedback forum, if they do not appear to conform to this policy, not just because you don't agree with them.

Details--I thought you were a big fan? Hopefully, admins are feeling, er...charitable.

Which post was deliberately misinterpreted.

Jesuit's posts. It seems that everyone but you got what he was saying. I've seen you do this with other people you clearly dislike; you just don't bother reading their posts generously, instead finding the interpretation that suits your already established negative impression of that poster.

Now to Khawaga and others-- I simply followed those instructions to register objections to the admins decision. That's all. Nobody had to respond-- couldn't care less who agrees or disagrees with me. But our Jesuit doesn't even think it's proper to register the disagreement. That's what I object to. That's all.

He thinks it's a waste of time? Then what the fuck is he doing wasting his time on the thread. Nobody's holding a fucking gun to his head.

I don't know why he bothers, and could care less, and I have no intention of answering his little Miss Manners Guide to Being a GoodSportLibcomer.

It's bullshit, chickenshit, whatever shit you want. NF and FV were no more offensive than our resident Jesuit or anybody else

That's it. Makes me a grumpy old man? Big fucking deal. I've been called worse things, and by better people.

None of that makes you a grumpy old man. What you posted in response to jesuit was.

But, you going again, with the "better people" and "worse things" comment again is part of the grumpy old man shtick. Now, I have no idea if I am a better person than those that have called you worse things, but "grumpy old man" fits the bill of your behaviour on this thread and others because what else would I call something so mundane as being needlessly angry on an internet message board?

Interesting edit choice on that quote there SA. Seems you've left a sentence off there at the end. Here's that full quote.

If you want to discuss admin decisions, please go to the comment and feedback forum. There is already a thread to discuss off-topic comments on this thread.

Here are the answers to the 1st two questions.

(1)yes it is against posting guidelines
(2)yes they were warned

As for this--

But our Jesuit doesn't even think it's proper to register the disagreement. That's what I object to. That's all.

He thinks it's a waste of time? Then what the fuck is he doing wasting his time on the thread. Nobody's holding a fucking gun to his head.

I don't know why he bothers, and could care less, and I have no intention of answering his little Miss Manners Guide to Being a GoodSportLibcomer.

Waste of time and no discussion are your words. You can keep repeating them ad infintum if you like, but no matter how many times you do, I never said either of those things. Take a breath and then reread the thread. My initial post on the topic was mocking the absurdity of starting yet another thread about it. How many 'meta' threads does one poster need?

As far as the 'misinterpret' thing goes--you're not as dense as you act on the internet, so you clearly know I wasn't referring to Noah's health issues. But since you cannot/will not back up your opinions, you thought you might shut it down with an appeal to emotion.

Folks, great that we have created a safter space here for folks and folks. They were very triggering.

Misinterpret? Bullshit. On this thread Jesuit is essentially trolling.

Again, deliberate misinterpretation to suit what you already think of the poster. If he is trolling here, well, then you can definitively say that quite a bit of what FV and Noah were posting in that thread, in particular the second time (which got them banned), was a clear case of trolling. What? You don't have a sense of objectivity?

Having discussed this amongst the admins, we have decided to make factvalue's ban permanent. He has been warned about his habitual derailing on numerous threads, as well as on the Micro-aggressions one where after being warned he then posted a link to a video of a children's TV show from the 1950s, initiating nostalgic reminiscences in complete disregard of the warning.

Noah's ban will remain temporary as he has contributed more constructively to libcom in the past. He'll be unblocked tomorrow.

In response to Mr Jolly (as there's little point discussing anything with S Artesian): the bans have nothing to do with any 'triggering' behaviour but with repeatedly flouting the rules of the site (i.e. constant derailments), as is fairly self-evident from the description above. If you think a youtube video of Andy Pandy adds anything of value to a discussion on racism then feel free to explain..

And Jesuit, he can lead the Mao Memorial Criticism, Self-Criticism, and Chance to Change Unacceptable Behavior Circles.

Everybody attends, right?

tbf, this is actually funny

Nice to hear Noah's coming back. I know he's a bit of a bell sometimes, but let he or she who has never been a bit of a bellend at some time or another cast the first stone.

Well rid of that other lad though - his borderline jew-baiting put me right off him. Yeah, I know some of you will say he wasn't really anti-semitic but I reckon you're suspending your disbelief a bit too much there. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then odds on it's a duck. Mind you, I'm told he's a nice enough chap in person. Internet eh.

Just letting people know that Noah's account has now been reactivated.

S. Artesian

Don't you think you're letting him off too easy, with just a permanent banning? Maybe you can have him arrested or something; or hack his bank account, if he has one.

Oh Artesian, come on, the admins can't even seem to straighten out Libcom's perilously weak security configuration so how are they possibly going to hack factvalues bank account?

;)

Serge Forward

Mind you, I'm told he's a nice enough chap in person. Internet eh.

[youtube]cUTWDhWrnDU[/youtube]

Well here I am and deeply sensible of the honour of being reactivated. I'm very grateful.
Now I've shaken off that other troublesome fellow I can perhaps get back to being a good boy again? Oops sorry, sarcastic wanksock alert!

Predictable as it all was this has certainly been one of the highlights of my Libcom experience. The most amusing aspect being the fact that on a number of times I've purposely tried to get banned and failed miserably yet on this occasion I really was just thoughtless and careless and walked straight into it quite innocently. This inevitably leads me to the conclusion that I'm not half so smart as I sometimes like to think I am! I had a good old chortle over that on Saturday.
What's somewhat disappointing is that I've had a number of emails and PMs from some surprising and some not so surprising sources saying that they feel that our ban was unjustified including a few suggesting that Libcom has a pretty reactionary attitude towards ideas and language that falls outside the accepted norms. That's not disappointing to me in itself, it's nice to know that others can spot the blatantly obvious too, no, what disappoints me is that the comments are made in private not public. I'd suggest that sticking your neck out is good for the soul and good for debate. Being a cowardy custard just perpetuates the tired ideas that often rule the roost around here.
Anyways, the main objective has been achieved much to the delight of the usual suspects(you know, the ones that aren't interested but always make an appearance when the opportunity to bash the arch enemy arises. Hmmm.). Plus the anti Semite stick has had an airing which is great because it's always a good idea to keep handy tools in good working order.
All in all, a most satisfying episode. Well done Libcom, you're aces, you know that?

Now, help me out here, banning Noah, was that a micro or a macro aggression?

;)

Pennoid

Now, help me out here, banning Noah, was that a micro or a macro aggression?

;)

Feels like a nano aggression to me - more like a tickle than a punch. However, it's reminded me that I want to ask a question myself;

Is forming a barrier around a cop collaborating piece of shit like body guards around an A-list celebrity a micro or macro counter revolutionary, anti anarchist activity?

So I read the posting guidelines and I found two parts that could be used to justify Factvalue's ban.

1. Insulting and ridiculing others on the forum. (This falls under the cyber-bullying category)

2. Going off-topic on threads. (This falls under the trolling category)

Here's the thing, though. This is behavior that I saw from many people on the forum when I was active, and continue to see now as a part-time lurker.

Insulting and ridiculing others
Although people are nice most of the time, insults and ridicule are common enough on here that it never surprises me to see it. Some of it's been pretty fucking nasty but the only time I saw anyone banned for it was when they were unpopular. Everyone else got a free pass.

Libcom has a reputation for being a forum that you need thick skin to go on. I've heard this from a surprising number of people I know in real life (mostly lurkers). This shows you that insult and ridicule are no rare occurrence.

Factvalue himself was a frequent target of insult and ridicule. Yeah, he dished it out too, but in many cases he was not the first to sling it.

Going off-topic
Is there anyone here (including admin) who hasn't gone off topic on a thread? Many of us have done this several times. Where's our bans? Or at least warnings? There've been threads I started that got derailed and it frustrated the hell out of me. (And most of them had nothing to do with veganism... not that it should matter.)

Factvalue was far from innocent in this. He'd make many long posts in long off-topic debates. I like him, and appreciated many of his contributions to the forum, but I found this behavior frustrating. But it takes two to tango and everyone who engaged in this with him is equally guilty. No consequences for them, though, right? Or for the others I've seen derail threads without Factvalue's help.

When going off-topic is excessive enough to derail it is annoying and disruptive. But when it's just a bit of banter or side chat it's actually quite pleasant and it was one of the things I liked most about libcom. I'm sure plenty others here enjoy it, too. These little off-topic chats gave me a feeling of connection and friendship with others. It was fun. I saw the last bit of off-topic posts that got deleted from the Microaggressions thread, which was the precipitating event for the perma ban of FV and temp ban of Noah and for Auld-bod's warning. It was just a bit of small fun chit chat, nothing that is legitimately derailing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As for those who say that Factvalue has made anti-Semitic posts, I did not read any of the posts that were mentioned. Clearly, though, the admin do not agree that he's been anti-Semitic or we would have been banned for that long ago. Bigotry is against libcom guidelines and from what I've seen admin are serious about enforcing that.

I do have a lot of appreciation for libcom admin and the work they do for free to maintain this site. And I still think libcom is by far the best site of its kind online. But shit like this is disappointing and I'm sure it turns plenty of people off enough to turn them away. It also makes me feel a bit less hopeful for the possibility of revolution, to see such hypocrisy and unfairness in how we on libcom treat each other. I expect more from us and the revolution sure as hell demands more.

And it's not just the admin, of course, but a large number of the active users of this forum who think that this hypocritical bullshit has all been justified and probably would've liked to see it happen much sooner.

TL;DR: Hypocrisy and double standards.

I don't really know the background to all this - I just occasionally lurk now, trying to soak up info/theory/news from a safe distance, while posting in the more relaxed non-political threads - but these comments struck a chord with me:

ultraviolet

1. Insulting and ridiculing others on the forum. (This falls under the cyber-bullying category)

Insulting and ridiculing others
Although people are nice most of the time, insults and ridicule are common enough on here that it never surprises me to see it. Some of it's been pretty fucking nasty but the only time I saw anyone banned for it was when they were unpopular. Everyone else got a free pass.

Libcom has a reputation for being a forum that you need thick skin to go on. I've heard this from a surprising number of people I know in real life (mostly lurkers). This shows you that insult and ridicule are no rare occurrence.

I've heard this too. And although I understand it technically doesn't relate to the forum rules, I've seen Libcom's twitter account ridiculing other twitter users, dishing out childish insults, most recently in reaction to someone else's liberal politics. Fair enough, disagree with someone's ideas, but it doesn't do the site's image any favours by acting in an aggressive (nano micro macro quantum whatever) manner - it ain't good PR. And it's a tad hypocritical, when you consider the rules of the forum. If this behaviour somehow contributes to the purpose of the site, then I'm happy to be corrected.

The admins have done a great job in building this site into what it is - as ultraviolet said, for free - and it's still for me the best political literature resource there is, but perhaps some of the forum rules need revising and/or relaxing. Because at times it can feel like a bit of an impenetrable clique.

[/quote]

More ridiculing on post #40. Presumably the admins will be on that pretty sharpish?

So UV knocks it out of the park. A thorough, honest and indisputable post based on facts and written in a non aggressive, non partisan and extremely sensible way. The problem is that sensible doesn't hold much water here as evidenced by her 3 inexplicable down votes.
You know how liberals, Trots and I dare say any other political group of people have certain parameters and an accepted ground of discourse within which they can agree or disagree whilst remaining comfortable and we look at this and think what a bunch of narrow minded, unimaginative bunch of myopic numpties. Well, is it not possible that Libcommers are equally subject to such a social construct? So what happens when liberals for example are challenged with ideas outside of their usual thought zone? Well, they start talking shit to justify themselves, gang ridiculing and discrediting the challenger and looking for ways to shut them up so that they can settle back into their comfort zone. Of course they are totally oblivious to all this and smugly feel they've done a good job of removing the upstart. Well I put it to Libcom in general, the admins and a certain crew of persistent posters that this is exactly what's going on here. So, I've made accusations of groupthink and of course have been ridiculed for such a suggestion but if I'm correct that's bound to happen.
I don't mind being insulted or ridiculed - it often confirms what I already think and I'm more than capable of giving a whole lot better than I get but I do mind the fact that the site I found four years ago which transformed my politics and gave me political hope is nothing more than an echo chamber for insular back slapping fools. Turning a blind eye to the uncomfortable is also common here - three wise monkeys dressed in red and black nappies riding in circles on their little trikes. It's all such a shame.
Certainly not everyone is guilty of all this but almost everyone won't raise a challenge. It's about that time to pipe up if you smell the bullshit.
As has been said by others and myself many times I the past, Libcom is the best radical website by a country mile. The admins deserve heaping praise for this but that shouldn't make them exempt to scrutiny on how they police the site or any other connections to policing they may have.

So go ahead, mock, belittle, insult, whatever. Fill yer boots. You stick to your safety in numbers ridiculing policy. Do I give a shit? Well, yes actually. How the fuck will we build a significant movement whilst circle jerking and never stepping outside the safety zone of anarcho acceptability?

As for those who say that Factvalue has made anti-Semitic posts, I did not read any of the posts that were mentioned. Clearly, though, the admin do not agree that he's been anti-Semitic or we would have been banned for that long ago. Bigotry is against libcom guidelines and from what I've seen admin are serious about enforcing that

I've accused him of borderline anti-semitism. Factvalue is an intelligent and sophisticated contributor and this has included him playing clever enough with comments that are well open to an interpretation of antisemitism but which are still just fuzzy enough to leave room for doubt and allow him to play the innocent "I ain't done nuffink" role. My suspicion is the admins couldn't decide either way so went for the "chicken-shit" derailing and being a bit rude option.

I’m reluctant to get involved in this discussion, though feel perhaps I should cough up.

I don’t think libcom is perfect, nothing is. When posting I’m a guest on someone else’s website. I support the cause of libcom and do not expect ‘perfection’ (from my personal perspective) from the administrators. If I go to someone’s house and they don’t like me farting, I try and respect their space, and treat libcom with a similar deference. So I broke their guide lines and got a warning – big deal. Other people get away with it (as most of us have), it only shows that the admins can get browned off and decide to call a halt.

I feel the petulant reaction to these decisions is likely a displacement activity for our mostly political impotence in the world at large. The majority of libcom critics I’ve met, in the real world, are liberals masquerading as anarchists. Finally, I do not expect to be ‘free’ in a capitalist society, so why should I project my fantasies onto libcom?

AB, I like to think we're real life friends and comrades and I have no beef with you but I think your post cuts others way too much slack. I guess it wasn't your intention to but it doesn't address the point I am making here. God knows I don't expect perfection from anyone but full tilt hypocrisy and manipulation of circumstances deserves calling out. That include admins and the fucking hypocrites on this thread pointing out ridiculing as a crime whilst doing it right here. It's laughable(not in a good way) and embarrassing.

Noah #45

Noah, my post was in no sense a personal slight on you. My point is not that everything you say is wrong, it is - what do you hope to be the outcome of slagging off other posters and the admin? A moral victory and a Saul like conversion on the road to libertarian communism? It’s not going to happen. Other people have other perspectives. Everyone’s motives are suspect. I’ve met you – does that make us a clique? I don’t think so and to proceed productively (in a political sense) we all must try and not tread on each other’s toes in terms of personal attacks.

Edit
Trying to get the words in order!

Yeah, that's fair enough. There is though, a difference between criticism such as I've made in my last few posts and personal attacks which I confess to being guilty of elsewhere. Those attacks always come after a refusal by others to either engage constructively or leave a topic alone and are born of my frustration at this. Not really a valid excuse I guess but as you say, we're none of us perfect.
What do I hope to get out of this? Not very much I suppose but then ask that question too much and you'd never bother doing anything. Plus there are more lurkers than contributors and I hope tha they will maybe get a broader view of anarchism than the usual poker in the ass well trodden path of mediocrity.

Noah Fence

AB, I like to think we're real life friends and comrades and I have no beef with you but I think your post cuts others way too much slack. I guess it wasn't your intention to but it doesn't address the point I am making here. God knows I don't expect perfection from anyone but full tilt hypocrisy and manipulation of circumstances deserves calling out. That include admins and the fucking hypocrites on this thread pointing out ridiculing as a crime whilst doing it right here. It's laughable(not in a good way) and embarrassing.

I'm not sure why I'm bothering to jump in at this point when it should be clear this thread is going nowhere, but...

This isn't about certain posters being banned while the same behavior is ignored in other posters. The bannings came after numerous warnings and after the admins had a hard look (at least as I understand it) at FV's posts in relation to anti-antisemitism. None of this came out of nowhere and it's disingenuous to say the least to treat this as some of 'challenging the orthodoxy' witch hunt.

The admins aren't perfect, they've sometimes made the wrong call (like when they've given me a warning ;-)), but I am curious about what supposed thoughtcrimes Noah and FV have committed? Being vegan? Continuing to derail threads after being warned not to on numerous occasions? Not taking on board the criticisms of our Jewish posters when they expressed their concerns of the anti-Semitic implications of their posts?

I just don't see any persecution here.

Also, Noah, what are you doing getting board with this Aufheben gate nonsense? You're better than that.

Chilli Sauce

Also, Noah, what are you doing getting board with this Aufheben gate nonsense? You're better than that.

What, I should just take your word for it that it's nonsense and ignore it? You see. That's exactly what I did years ago but it won't go away. This isn't the only place I look at politics. From the research I've done so far there definitely seems to be a bad smell emenating from Libcom. Whether it's just a small fart or someone has shat on the carpet I can't tell yet. But what does 'you're better than that' even mean? Better than doing a bit of research when I here that allegedly The Libcom Collective comports with cop collaborators? Surely, whether it's true or not I should at least look into it ffs?

Also, this is precisely about some posters getting in the arse whilst others do the same thing with impunity. Look at the admin statement, they banned him for derailing after being warned not to. Nothing to do with anti semitism. This happens all over the forums but people rarely get warned or banned. No, what they really banned him for was being too much of a smart arse.
And no, disengenuousness involves deciet and underhandness, I'm being straight up here. I know, it's a strange idea to say exactly what you think but you know, I thought I'd give it a go just for the hell of it.

Just for the record, FV is no smart ass. You're a smart ass Webby, Steven can be a smart ass, Revol was certainly a smart ass. FV, he's just a rambling, derailing, off-topic bloat of a poster who just likes to hear his own proverbial voice.

In a rush at the moment, but I'm pretty sure the admins specifically addressed FV's words on during that anti-Semitism discussion when they banned him. Am i wrong on that?

BTW, many of FV's antisemitic comments were quotes from that well known antisemite Norman Finklestein or his Jewish friend from Haifa. If that doesn't make FV a Nazi sympathiser and holocaust denier I don't know what does.

Yes, you are wrong on this;

Ed wrote

Having discussed this amongst the admins, we have decided to make factvalue's ban permanent. He has been warned about his habitual derailing on numerous threads, as well as on the Micro-aggressions one where after being warned he then posted a link to a video of a children's TV show from the 1950s, initiating nostalgic reminiscences in complete disregard of the warning.

Auld-bod

I feel the petulant reaction to these decisions is likely a displacement activity for our mostly political impotence in the world at large.

Exactly

In this context FV’s alleged anti-Semitism is a red herring. After Steven asked for evidence of anti-Semitism, the evidence produced was circumstantial. Has no one ever read or seen the movie, ‘The Ox-Bow Incident’ (1943)?

By the same token, in my opinion, ‘Aufheben gate’ is a crock of crap cooked up by politicos with an axe to grind. Some kind of guilt by association bollocks. All this stuff is just scraping the barrel.

jef costello

Auld-bod

I feel the petulant reaction to these decisions is likely a displacement activity for our mostly political impotence in the world at large.

Exactly

Well there's some fucking insight for you, all condensed into one word too. FV should certainly take a leaf out of your book. Anyways, got to go now - I have to figure out how to communicate every thought I ever had in my life into one letter. Then I truly would have succeeded. So far the best I can manage is 7 letters: FUCK OFF.

Best thing about this thread is knowing that 5 years later, Samotnaf is still lurking around the site sending private messages to people telling them libcom is bad.

Noah, are you trying to court another ban?

As for me, I guess I stand corrected. That said, I'd still like to know what sort of heterodoxy you and FV are being punished for, Noah?

As for the Aufhaben stuff, Noah, are you seriously suggesting that the dude "collaborated" with the cops - like he was actively engaging and cooperating with them? Are you further suggesting that "libcom" (the admins? the ruling clique?), knowing this information, have made a conscious choice to defend him? Really man?

The dude may have made some ill-advised decisions (I don't know and I don't really care) and should maybe take a bit of responsibility for failing to consider how his research might be used. But to equate that with "collaborating" and then to implicate "libcom" in that? Come on, man.

Noah Fence

jef costello

Auld-bod

I feel the petulant reaction to these decisions is likely a displacement activity for our mostly political impotence in the world at large.

Exactly

Well there's some fucking insight for you, all condensed into one word too. FV should certainly take a leaf out of your book. Anyways, got to go now - I have to figure out how to communicate every thought I ever had in my life into one letter. Then I truly would have succeeded. So far the best I can manage is 7 letters: FUCK OFF.

This time perhaps stay gone.

Otherwise you'll just be back, either waving your mighty sword as the only one with the guts to call a spade a spade and stand up for what's right, or with one of those self-serving fake apologies for your behaviour.

If you genuinely wanted these forums to be better you would contribute something to them other than endlessly demands for attention. You may think that you're humble because you have occasional insights into yourself and can manage self-deprecation once in a while but this endless need to be the centre of attention and the immediate resort to nastiness or personal attacks as soon as someone fails to agree with you enough is absolutely selfish. I've been refusing to pour any energy into that black hole for a while and hopefully this will be the last time.

Trying to court another ban? No, that's coming later. Surely you know I could do a whole lot better than that?

Good to know an admin has poked their nose into my private correspondence. Maybe they saw the message from you Chilli saying the ban was unjustified. There you go, it got out in the end. Even if it didn't the admins would have seen it anyway.
As for the rest of your questions, I get enough of my kids patronising me, so spare me your condescention.

OK, I know I said I would never communicate with you again and I really meant it but this is just too fucking good.

Fall Back is not an admin and you would have to be completely fucking clueless about the whole Aufheben gate thing not to know that Samotnaf is at the front of centre of it and is the chief shit stirrer general.

And with that hahahaha, I'm done with you.

I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Noah, you need to take a step back man. Seriously, take a deep breath before you post again.

Most people on libcom were happy to see that your ban was over. Why are you squandering that, man?

Ok. Let's get this over with. Ed uses his Rolls Royce to run over peasants, Steven's hipster beard is a stick on, Ramona is a man and Mike Harman married a horse. Everyone on Libcom, especially myself is a complete cunt and anarchism has a boil on its ass.

Now here is an off topic video;

https://youtu.be/3gIdMEAvQk0

Right, that should do it. Now ban me already

Some people appear to have way too much of their self-image, emotions, time, energy and convictions invested in this site - it's just an online forum, FFS. Ironically, mainly those most loyal oppositionists who’re most contemptuous and critical of the site and admins... They generally seem to think that a shorter fuse is greater sign of integrity and passion, deeper caring & radicality etc - but it may be sign of other less impressive features... Disagreement here or ‘winning the argument’ is usually not something that has many real implications beyond the PC screen and the internal ego.

I have my own criticisms of libcom but tend to see it as a semi-public space like a public library; I might not like some librarian decisions or attitudes (and I criticised them over Aufhebengate more than most), or some of the other users, or some of the stock that's carried etc (though the library is uniquely fine) - but it's still a useful resource and sometimes a place where worthwhile discussions, news etc can be found.

The people who constantly butt in and disrupt stuff, then have tantrums about how they've been criticised or how they've been asked to leave till they sober up; well they seem to be only expressing the worst symptoms of the general isolation and impotence all those who feel a need to see radical change are suffering through the social ice age of the present. Are they strategically contributing to improving anything – even in their own lives - except the size of their ego or the self-justification for futile behaviour that only reinforces division and isolation? I don’t think so. Not that I’m against sharp criticism and absolute disagreement but seriously, if getting so angry about stuff on here that you start regularly insulting people and blowing yer top becomes a default setting .. what’s the point? Get a life back in real time & space. Maybe the hopeful glimpse of reducing the personal alienation via libcom becomes cruelly disillusioning and the resentment is then expressed in warped ways. It seems hard for some people to accept criticism and disagreement with their views – to the point where it becomes a personal grudge that must be pursued endlessly, self-obsessively, aggressively and pointlessly.

As for worrying about up/down votes (some of whch probably come from uninformed passing net browsers), I hate that system anyway (though I occasionally use it ‘cos it’s there’ and has sadly become a medium of exchange here,) but it’s seems generally the most aggressive who bother to complain about the anonymous down votes they – unsurprisingly – get.

Auld Bod

By the same token, in my opinion, ‘Aufheben gate’ is a crock of crap cooked up by politicos with an axe to grind. Some kind of guilt by association bollocks. All this stuff is just scraping the barrel.

NF has been prompted to bring it up here now as a convenient weapon – when, at the actual time of the controversy he was happy to stay neutral and keep the silence he now criticises others for above. But their closing-ranks defence of Dr J remains to the undying glaring shame of the admins and that’s exactly why it’s an easy weapon to be used by the opportunists. I agree with most of your comments here, AB, but on this I believe you & others are just wrong. “Guilt by association”? Yeh, if you mean collaborating with other academics in work that helps define & refine the cops’ tactics of dealing with public disorder etc – see, eg, my comments below article here; https://libcom.org/library/sic-international-journal-communisation

I wasn't even around when the Aufheben thing came about. Several years ago I asked what it was all about I was told not to bother looking into it. I didn't coz I foolishly trusted just about everyone here. Now I don't and so see it as necessary to look into it. That is all there is to it. You're theory of dissident psychology may be right and if so I'm obviously oblivious to it. If my theory is right then of course you're oblivious to it. I guess that makes us quits, right

Auld-bod

I don’t think libcom is perfect, nothing is. When posting I’m a guest on someone else’s website. I support the cause of libcom and do not expect ‘perfection’ (from my personal perspective) from the administrators. If I go to someone’s house and they don’t like me farting, I try and respect their space, and treat libcom with a similar deference.

Yes, so would I. But that's not the situation here.

It's more like being a guest in someone's house, and they're having a party so there's a bunch of us there, and we all did some farting, with a significant minority of us doing more of it than others, but only two people get kicked out for it (one permanently and one temporarily) while the rest are left to carry on.

Meanwhile, most of the guests (who had done farting themselves) are cheering to see this person go and talking like he's the only one who stinks.

I don't expect perfection either. That's not what this is about. In fact I have many positive views about the people on libcom, both admin and the regular forum users.

NF; It doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not; but if this or any other site made me as angry as it apparently does you and my contempt for it had grown to your level - and regardless of how justifed I thought my criticisms were - I can't see what the point would be staying on here except as a petty obsessive resentment that ate away at me.

ultraviolet

Factvalue was far from innocent in this. He'd make many long posts in long off-topic debates. I like him, and appreciated many of his contributions to the forum, but I found this behavior frustrating. But it takes two to tango and everyone who engaged in this with him is equally guilty. No consequences for them, though, right? Or for the others I've seen derail threads without Factvalue's help.

this is complete bullshit, factvalue has along history of sabotaging threads he don't like, the idea that everyone involved is just the same is liberal crap and you should be ashamed to push it.

ultraviolet

As for those who say that Factvalue has made anti-Semitic posts, I did not read any of the posts that were mentioned. Clearly, though, the admin do not agree that he's been anti-Semitic or we would have been banned for that long ago. Bigotry is against libcom guidelines and from what I've seen admin are serious about enforcing that.
.

some discussion of if he was actually anti-Semitic along with links to the posts in question can be found here https://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016
https://libcom.org/forums/general/topic-discussions-began-micro-aggression-thread-20092016

Red Marriott

NF; It doesn't matter to me whether you're here or not; but if this or any other site made me as angry as it apparently does you and my contempt for it had grown to your level - and regardless of how justifed I thought my criticisms were - I can't see what the point would be staying on here except as a petty obsessive resentment that ate away at me.

Maybe that's coz you're a petty obsessive resentment kind of guy - I remember you jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment when Thatcher died. Now that was an impressively long held resentment.
Also, I'd check that word 'apparently' if I were you. If you don't take it seriously you may well jump to the wrong conclusion. Now if you'd said 'apparently causes you such disappointment' you could have abandoned 'apparently' altogether.
It's all fair though - I making loads of assumptions about you and many others so it's only fair that you are afforded the same luxury. Of course one of us could be right or both of us could be wrong. What I'd really like is for me to have it all backasswards so that I could experience the enjoyment and excitement that I used to enjoy here. Nobody sounds very convincing to me though unfortunately. Now is that another near example of my 'self serving humility' or whatever it was you said. I gotta tell ya, the thought of you being correct about that makes me cringe. Once again though I just don't think you've even come close.
I really can't resist continuing this bullshit, call me weak if you like but that's how it is. Where are those fucking admins when you want them?

NF

Maybe that's coz you're a petty obsessive resentment kind of guy - I remember you jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment when Thatcher died. Now that was an impressively long held resentment.

I don't remember anything like that - but I checked the threads on Thatcher's death and all I found was from 2013 me posting a video; http://libcom.org/forums/news/thatcher-dead-08042013?page=1#comment-513179
- and then you being a grumpy bollox and being told so. Unless I missed something somwehere, nothing at all like me "jumping up and down and waving your knickers in the air in joyful adandonment".

NF

'self serving humility' or whatever it was you said. I gotta tell ya, the thought of you being correct about that makes me cringe. Once again though I just don't think you've even come close.

No, I haven't, it was Jef said that.

Haha! Oops, now I'm starting to sound like a fruitloop even to myself! The drowning man! Sorry for the slurs and hats off for the backbone displayed on the link you posted of an Aufheben conversation. I wonder if others on this thread reckon you're a knob for not just going along with the under the carpet sweeping or if 'you're better than that'.

Edit: I just read through that Thatcher thread and think I comported myself very well. And Jesus, that song in the video really was fucking dreadful.

Fall Back

I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

I still stand by most of what I've said, my opinions haven't changed at all and my experience here has been as I described it. However, I have to admit, I've been acting like a real fucking dick at times here in the last day or so. It's pretty embarrassing. My actions aren't those of someone that doesn't give a shit, it's precisely coz I do care that I'm pissed off and ready to weigh in with my customary pisstaking. Anyway, I've still committed a banning offence, I still want out and I still want out by way of a permanent ban. Come on admins, you warned me, I didn't heed the warning and if you leave me with posting rights you'll probably get more of the same. So do your work and put me out of my misery.
I genuinely feel sooo disappointed with Libcom and I admit I've recently become bitter. I read through that Thatcher thread and found I was challenging the concensus opinion but still having a good laugh. There was no bitterness there. I still have a good laugh posting and I'm still always honest but through my disappointment a bitterness has crept in which does me no favours. It's a damned fucking shame and I'm better off out of it.

Noah Fence

Fall Back

I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

If you take a closer look at FB's profile pic, I think you'll find you'll be even more disappointed.

Noah, I'm still not sure though in what ways you see yourself (and FV, I guess?) as particularly challenging the libcom orthodoxy?

Chilli Sauce

Noah Fence

Fall Back

I'm not an admin and haven't poked my nose into anything, but you made it pretty obvious.

Really? Well you make it obvious you can't be trusted - liking the Clash is bad enough but using their album cover as your profile picture? Holy shit man, those fuckers were bigger phonies than a thousand Libcommers.

If you take a closer look at FB's profile pic, I think you'll find you'll be even more disappointed.

Noah, I'm still not sure though in what ways you see yourself (and FV, I guess?) as particularly challenging the libcom orthodoxy?

Maybe you're blind to it? Maybe I'm full of shit? I think it's the former. There's no point talking about it any longer. As I've said, I just want out. It'll do us all a favour.

Oh Christ, I just took a closer look. Says it all really. That's one of the lamest pictures I've ever seen. Just looking at it gave me physical pain.

That's a great question Chili. I'd really like it if NF or UV would give it a go.

You don't really, do you? I mean, I like Noah Fence but do we actually need another of his "all about me" rants berating the admins and the Libcom orthodoxy for the umpteenth time? Or him begging the admins to permanently ban him in some sort of dramatic "big I am" flounce rather than him just stop posting here?

Noah mate, I think you're reading into things a bit too much and always end up opting for whatever negative option there is. Please knock the cringeworthy car crash posting on the head and try and chill the fuck out for a bit.

All fair Serge as your opinion but what's not open to opinion is my reason for wanting to get banned. I honestly can't resist posting here. I've tried and failed, I always get drawn in. I guess that sounds a bit pathetic and maybe it is but it's the truth nonetheless.
I've got things I want to do with my time while I'm still able, a political project in particular so I want out of here. I get on everyone's tits and most get on mine. What's the point?

Fall Back

Best thing about this thread is knowing that 5 years later, Samotnaf is still lurking around the site sending private messages to people telling them libcom is bad.

So you admit that the admins access private messages, then?

Edit: I see others have made this point earlier on the thread, except they clearly weren't taking the piss.

As you were.

the button

So you admit that the admins access private messages, then?

i never imagined that. i hope i'm right.
btw samotnaf recently flounced from the ICC boards. so it's not just us.

Admins with server access (two of us) could technically read private messages if we wanted as they're stored in plain text in the database. However neither of us have the time or interest to actually do that so you can rest assured that your messages to other users aren't being read by the admins. But, if you think that they are a secure way to communicate online I would suggest you start using other services which use end-to-end encryption etc. Even then, that is unlikely to protect you from a well resourced state actor, the advice "don't put anything on the internet you don't want read out in court" is still relevant.

I did receive an email from this chap about Aufheben plus a bunch of other people. I was already looking into it though - nobody instigated anything.
I'll take his word I guess but I found his comment that 'I made it obvious' a little peculiar as I can see nothing I posted that makes it in the least obvious. I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.
Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

Noah Fence

I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.

I think he actually copied an unpublished post to start a new thread.

Non-admins have forum tools, posts can be deleted / unpublished / edited etc. In general, like Khawaga said, those powers are mainly used for deleting spam.

Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

No one said don't look into it. Fall back explained that he wasn't an admin and hadn't looked, then Jim explained how PMs work and who has access.

No, he transferred it to a thread started by Seahorse.

Chilli pretty much said it directly. When I first heard of it several years ago a few people said it was all bollocks and that its not worth looking at. I think one was Chilli but I've no recollection of who else. I acted on that advice in my enthusiastic but naive belief that I could trust all Libcommers implicitly. From what I know so far the most generous I could be would be to say I guess it depends on how much importance one puts on what a friend does for a living. For me though JD is a considerable distance on the wrong side of the line.

Jim

Admins with server access (two of us) could technically read private messages if we wanted as they're stored in plain text in the database. However neither of us have the time or interest to actually do that so you can rest assured that your messages to other users aren't being read by the admins. But, if you think that they are a secure way to communicate online I would suggest you start using other services which use end-to-end encryption etc. Even then, that is unlikely to protect you from a well resourced state actor, the advice "don't put anything on the internet you don't want read out in court" is still relevant.

Ok, understood.
Can you tell me, as an admin, why you haven't kicked me off the site? I've clearly thumbed my nose at your warning yet I'm still here when others aren't.

Noah Fence

I'll take his word I guess but I found his comment that 'I made it obvious' a little peculiar as I can see nothing I posted that makes it in the least obvious. I think my assumption was fair enough considering that Fall Back used to be an admin and that some non admins are granted some degree of control over the site as recently demonstrated by Kwhaga who moved my post from where I particularly wanted it placed to another thread where I didn't.
Why, as a number of people seem to think, I should just ignore this without looking into it at all seems bizzare regardless of whether there's any truth in the accusations. Anyone care to explain?

I'll explain (although it's already been covered). There's one person on libcom - Samotanoff - who's been pushing the Aufheben scandal for literally years now. You've never mentioned Aufheben before so it didn't exactly take a Sherlock Holmes to figure out who'd you been talking to - especially given how you'd been talking about all these enlightening PMs you'd been receiving.

Fall Back, then, was being a smart ass and made what was clearly a smart ass joke based on the what, unsurprisingly, later turned out to be true. Everyone else understood it to be a joke. I mean, you don't think all the other people on this thread would be livid if they thought the admins had been reading anyone's private messages?

As for why Aufhaben-gate is a non-starter, I already addressed that on this thread and you made no effort to respond.

So, now I've cared to explain. Do you care to explain what anarcho-groupthink you and FV are being penalized for challenging?

I guess it depends on how much importance one puts on what a friend does for a living

If you'd bothered to read more than what samatof told you to, you'd know several memebers of the libcom group have categorically stated they have never even met the man, Dr. J.

And just fyi, samatof also asked to be banned. He's been waiting 3 years or so at this point. Settle in for the long-haul. In fact, that's how he was able to fill you in on the 'scandal.'

Please answer chilli's question above. Honestly, I'm interested in what you have to say.

1. I already stated I was taking a look at this before I received an email from someon I think is the samantoff that people are so fixated on. He sent me a link to a article on Indymedia and a link to a Libcom thread both of which I'd already read. The rest of the emails I got were saying what a pisstake it was that we had been banned(don't forget mate that you were the author of one of them) or hats off for saying what you think. Only one other person mentioned Aufheben. So get to fuck with your 'all these enlightening emails'. On the thread there were a number of people criticising the admins position.

2. I didn't respond to your comments coz they were patronising as fuck.

3. As I've already stated I have mentioned Aufheben before. I just didn't follow it up.

4. No, I wouldn't care to explain. Ive made it clear in threads I've started and posts on others. I'll give you some clues though. Ethics and morality covers some of it. Double standards and inconsistency. Gang like behaviour in response to unpopular posters. Deference and ass kissing of certain members regardless of what they say or do.
There is a certain unwillingness to step outside of the norms of debate which is fair enough but to sabotage those conversations isn't. Maybe when your stuck in it you're blind to it but others aren't and when they say so they are lambasted if they are not so well liked or ignored if they are. And of course some stop posting or abandon the site altogether.
If you're really interested then fill in the blanks by looking through some threads.

First off, Noah, it's well fucking out of order to discuss publicly what was discussed in PMs. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit.

Second, my PM in no way said it was a shame "we" had been banned. So, to use your own words, you can fuck off. I was glad to see the back of FV and, after this thread, I'm gonna be glad to see the back of you, too.

Third, you think you're being persecuted because you have a take on on anarchism and morality? Please!

Other than that, it's just personal beefs that you've decided were a political witch hunt because popular opinion on the site didn't favor you - which explains your unwillingness to address these issues despite your claim that those are the real reasons for your ban.

Chilli Sauce

First off, Noah, it's well fucking out of order to discuss publicly what was discussed in PMs. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit.

Second, my PM in no way said it was a shame "we" had been banned. So, to use your own words, you can fuck off. I was glad to see the back of FV and, after this thread, I'm gonna be glad to see the back of you, too.

Third, you think you're being persecuted because you have a take on on anarchism and morality? Please! Other than that, it's just personal beefs that you've decided were a political witch hunt because public opinion on the site didn't favor you - which explains your unwillingness to address these issues despite your claim that those are the real reasons for your ban.

publishing the contents of a private message is a particularly nasty thing to do, with no other purpose than an attempt to embarrass chilli, who made an attempt to be decent to you NF.

You didn't give the impression that you were seperating FV from your statement that the ban was wrong and yeah, I did something out of order to expose your disengenuous comment about 'all these enlightening emails' which I had said nothing about but you had used assumptions of to belittle my examination of Aufheben. And hey, you know what is also 'well out of fucking order'. Keeping schtum when you think something is wrong just coz it suits you to. No? Well then we have different ideas about what is wrong and right.

jesuithitsquad

Chilli Sauce

First off, Noah, it's well fucking out of order to discuss publicly what was discussed in PMs. Seriously, that's some fucked up shit.

Second, my PM in no way said it was a shame "we" had been banned. So, to use your own words, you can fuck off. I was glad to see the back of FV and, after this thread, I'm gonna be glad to see the back of you, too.

Third, you think you're being persecuted because you have a take on on anarchism and morality? Please! Other than that, it's just personal beefs that you've decided were a political witch hunt because public opinion on the site didn't favor you - which explains your unwillingness to address these issues despite your claim that those are the real reasons for your ban.

publishing the contents of a private message is a particularly nasty thing to do, with no other purpose than an attempt to embarrass chilli, who made an attempt to be decent to you NF.

Oh really, and why would it embarrass chilli for the world to know an opinion which is in no way sensitive or personal?

The hint is in the phrase, Private Message.

I didn't say you did embarrass him; I said you attempted to embarrass him, which is a particularly shitty thing to do to someone. It's even worse that it was someone making an effort to be supportive and nice to you.

Well aren't you a marvellous arbiter of proper behaviour. And what about my side of the thing. What about keeping quiet on a wrongdoing, what about assumptions made and published as fact? I guess none of that matters, right? Maybe he was or wasn't embarrassed but certainly I'm embarrassed by the convenient selection of facts that you lot make. I could give several examples from this thread alone.
Oh yeah, supportive? Like keeping quiet about his opinion on my ban?
I know you think I'm being a prick and to some degree you're right but it pales into insignificance compared with some of the shenanigans on this site.

This is gonna be my last post on this thread.

I just want to say that, despite the title, this thread wasn't actually about you in the beginning Noah. The first page was mostly people who, it seemed quite clear to me, were happy to see FV gone but were wishing you a speedy recovery - both in terms of your health and in terms of the salt mines of libcom banning order.

Since you love playing the up/down game, you'll notice that - prior to the end of your ban - the many up votes posts got about when they were about you on personal level or your ban being lifted. Well, my friend, way to fucking squander that goodwill.

I have no doubt you'll continue to dig your heels in and act like a petulant child, but I hope whatever personal friendships you've developed from the site are worth the fact that I don't think any remaining regular posters will be coming to your defense again. I certainly know I won't.

Noah Fence

Well aren't you a marvellous arbiter of proper behaviour. And what about my side of the thing. What about keeping quiet on a wrongdoing, what about assumptions made and published as fact? I guess none of that matters, right? Maybe he was or wasn't embarrassed but certainly I'm embarrassed by the convenient selection of facts that you lot make. I could give several examples from this thread alone.
Oh yeah, supportive? Like keeping quiet about his opinion on my ban?
I know you think I'm being a prick and to some degree you're right but it pales into insignificance compared with some of the shenanigans on this site.

Anarcho-Ethics in action!

So I tried to post on this thread last night but things kept popping up and I never got the chance. In the meantime it feels like every time I look at this thread there are ten new posts, each more personal and bitter than the ones before. I'll have a go at responding but might not do a great job at this point and tbh, given the government are talking about drawing up lists of foreign workers and schoolchildren while racist/xenophobic attacks (as well as general austerity/cuts) are on the rise, the number of fucks I'm giving about this are decreasing rapidly..

Firstly, Noah, as to why you've not been banned yet, I'd say it was a mix of admin disorganisation (what with jobs, kids, real world political activity in an age of descent into barbarism etc etc) and simply reluctance to do it as it seems like you're going through a shitty time at the moment. That said, if you think us banning you would help your emotional well-being then we'll discuss it..

A couple other things: can you refrain from saying posters were "getting it in the arse"? That's a rape analogy and we don't allow that on the site. Secondly, and even tho you prob didn't mean it that way, I thought your comment about 'the anti-semitism stick getting an airing' was out of order. If you replace 'anti-semitism stick' with 'race card' hopefully you'll get the point I'm trying to make..

Ultraviolet said some stuff I wanted to address. FV was not banned for insults/ridicule or anti-semitism but for constant derailing, which you euphemistically call 'going off topic'. The thing about 'going off topic' tho, is that it happens; conversations stray off in different directions, someone makes an assertion based on an idea that itself is controversial, needs discussing in more detail etc etc. That's not what FV did; FV frequently derailed threads either with long, rambly, tangential posts or just sabotaged threads by talking about unrelated stuff. He was warned multiple times on multiple threads about this. After being warned on the Microaggressions thread, he posted a link to a fucking Andy Pandy video. That's not the same as simply 'going off topic'.

Now, in your opinion that was harmless chit-chat and you quite liked it. The problem is not everyone felt the same way; in fact, some people were massively pissed off (hence why we have the original thread, an 'off-topic comments from the original thread' thread and now this thread!). And indeed, look at the thread; utterly dormant. IMO, that's as good an argument as any that the 'chit-chat' was not harmless.

Ed - thanks but I don't want or need special treatment, I just want equal treatment for all. I say this to the admins but probably more so to a large number of the regular posters.
As for squandering goodwill, well that's a shame I suppose but it's the least important thing here.
I may not have expressed myself very well and I've been more aggressive than I'd like to be, no more aggressive than one or two others though, but accusations of me swerving things are just plain daft, especially in the light of the number of points and corrections I've made that have been completely ignored.
I'm particularly sorry that me and Chilli have butted heads like this, we've been pretty matey for a number of years now, but I can't let that get in the way of calling out what I see(rightly or wrongly) as iffy behaviour. That's the way cliques are formed and there's no way I'm having part of that.
I don't expect to change the mindset that I have been criticising but it's still worth having this out as I know quite a few people appreciate it and hopefully many more lurkers will see Libcom as a broader thinking place because of it. I guess that sounds kind of pompous but I think it's true.
Finally here's an extract of a PM I sent recently explaining the reason for me getting so emotional about Libcom...

'As people have said. It's just the internet but to me it isn't - after 30 years indentifying as an anarchist yet continually finding holes in my own beliefs I finally knuckled down, learned how to use the Internet and set about finding something that fitted my poorly formed position. After much disappointment and frustration I chanced upon Libcom and after a short struggle with ideas of class etc I found that I finally had a concept that covered everything and made a lot of sense to me. Within a few months I was sold, I changed the way I lived, earned a living, how I treated people and many other things. It was like coming in from the dark for me'

Noah Fence

'As people have said. It's just the internet but to me it isn't - after 30 years indentifying as an anarchist yet continually finding holes in my own beliefs I finally knuckled down, learned how to use the Internet and set about finding something that fitted my poorly formed position. After much disappointment and frustration I chanced upon Libcom and after a short struggle with ideas of class etc I found that I finally had a concept that covered everything and made a lot of sense to me. Within a few months I was sold, I changed the way I lived, earned a living, how I treated people and many other things. It was like coming in from the dark for me'

NF, if you are so inclined that sounds like a personal account that might be worth putting to paper, so to speak. By which I mean something in the vein of the ‘How were you radicalized?’ series of autobiographical accounts written by anarchists associated with the Recompostion blog. Perhaps not, but I thought that I'd leave it here as a suggestion just in case you might be interested in writing something like that.

NF, if you are so inclined that sounds like a personal account that might be worth putting to paper, so to speak. By which I mean something in the vein of the ‘How were you radicalized?’ series of autobiographical accounts written by anarchists associated with the Recompostion blog. Perhaps not, but I thought that I'd leave it here as a suggestion just in case you might be interested in writing something like that.

Well thanks for the invite. How long would you expect it to be? I'm a two finger typist and have another writing project on the go at the moment so, you know, something that could take very little time for many can take ages for me.

Noah Fence

Well thanks for the invite. How long would you expect it to be? I'm a two finger typist and have another writing project on the go at the moment so, you know, something that could take very little time for many can take ages for me.

Well, although I really like what they do I'm not involved with the Recomposition blog in any way, shape, or form, and my apologies if I left you or anyone else here with that impression. I certainly have no say on what gets posted to either their Libcom blog or their own website. I'm fairly certain though that such an account could be posted as a general article here on Libcom, (now, here's to hoping the Libcom admins don't get too pissed off at me for perhaps overstepping my bounds as a quest to their site, especially after some of my earlier admittedly sophomoric comments on this thread.)

So the proposal that I made to you Noah was really just an informal suggestion on my part and if it is not something that your particularly interested in doing, for whatever reason that may be, then no pressure from me and I can certainly respect whatever you decide.

As for being a two finger typist I can sympathize with you on that account as I suffer from the same deficiency.