Kevin's Watch

Random thought:

How boring is it to click on a thread and view it, literally, Constantly?

Syl wrote:There's also the possibility that others may think BBF is real and how we treat this (possibly?) fictional identity may lead them to think that is how we normally treat newbies/weirdos/whatever.

Like with Zeph, the only thing to do is ignore them, give them the benefit of the doubt, or give them enough rope to hang themselves with. Giving trolls, if trolls they be, negative attention only rewards them. And trolls are also a lot like the invasive species of stinkbugs around here - smash them and more just pick up the scent and try to move in.

But smashing them is so much fun!

drew wrote:Random thought:

How boring is it to click on a thread and view it, literally, Constantly?

You mean like this?

I, for one, would be deeply disturbed (hush, peanut gallery...I mean I would be offended) if BBF were not real and turned out to be a prank alternate ID by someone who knew better.

Alt IDs are a fixture here. Not calling anyone out...most of those who do this readily admit to the practice, if not the specific identities.

Hassling Lore, Lord Foul, ___ and others is one thing. Not exactly a cool thing to do, but there is some little precedent. Same goes for the various breaches of protocol and the persistent oddities in his writing.

Disrespecting the blue flame icon of Furls Fire? An outsider might get away with that. Allowances for ignorance are reasonable. But if someone knew better and used a false front to act like the did not know what that was about? I really have a hard time with that.

Say it ain't so!

___ wrote:

drew wrote:Random thought:

How boring is it to click on a thread and view it, literally, Constantly?

You mean like this?

Holy Mallories....guess BBF wins the game of Pursuit...

Savor Dam wrote:Say it ain't so!

Don't worry SD. It ain't quite so. He's not an alt and didn't know better. It turns out though that he's just not quite who he claims to be either.

--A

i thought bbf was female.

and this is just my first post here.

and no bbf is not me.

that is all for now.

sgt.null wrote: that is all for now.

oh - and this ...

Savor Dam wrote:I, for one, would be deeply disturbed (hush, peanut gallery...I mean I would be offended) if BBF were not real and turned out to be a prank alternate ID by someone who knew better.

Alt IDs are a fixture here. Not calling anyone out...most of those who do this readily admit to the practice, if not the specific identities.

Hassling Lore, Lord Foul, ___ and others is one thing. Not exactly a cool thing to do, but there is some little precedent. Same goes for the various breaches of protocol and the persistent oddities in his writing.

Disrespecting the blue flame icon of Furls Fire? An outsider might get away with that. Allowances for ignorance are reasonable. But if someone knew better and used a false front to act like the did not know what that was about? I really have a hard time with that.

Say it ain't so!

I must be very naive because all this is beyond what I understand the watch to be about. Sure, there are times when I have posted a contentious idea or post and relished the thought that a few ripples would be created - but never with malice or the idea that one individual would be 'targeted' for abuse. As for 'alternate ID's' and hasseling other Watchers - wtf! - I'd no idea that such things were/are a 'fixture' here. If anyone set up an alternate ID for a joke, spun it for a few posts, then came clean with their hands up, then OK. I'm not so dry that a bit of fun is beyond me, but to string it out for the purpose of creating mischief is beneath what I expect from the people I have come to know and respect through the watch.
Getting to BBF specifically - the name itself is a giveaway. No right thinking member of this, a serious site for the fan's of SRD's TC Chrons, would by choice give himself a name that would be instantly offensive to all but the most blinkered pondlife eco-systems analyst. This individual may be simply mentally-ill, but given the form to date I would bet against it. This has the hallmarks of a deliberate and persistant atempt to sow discord and animosity within the Watch. If so, it's a rotton trick to pull. The site is a rewarding and pleasurable passtime for it's serious members and to maliciously introduce discord into a place where others take a simple and inoffensive pleasure is not a thing to be proud of.
Now to the last, most important area of the quote above. The disrespecting of the blue-flame. No Watcher aware of it's significance would do this unless they had gone so far off the rails in their head that they were boarderline certifiable. So either BBF did not understand what the blue-flame represented in which case he just pushed his mischief making to far - or he did, in which case he overstepped the bounds to the point where only his immediate removal from the Watch will suffice. I hope those who have ultimate controll of the Watch are considering these points VERY carefully.

peter wrote:I must be very naive because all this is beyond what I understand the watch to be about. Sure, there are times when I have posted a contentious idea or post and relished the thought that a few ripples would be created - but never with malice or the idea that one individual would be 'targeted' for abuse. As for 'alternate ID's' and hasseling other Watchers - wtf! - I'd no idea that such things were/are a 'fixture' here.

Them's the perils of allowing a non-discriminatory access to a public podium, I'm afraid. It's effectively a free speech issue, I suppose.

peter wrote:This individual may be simply mentally-ill, but given the form to date I would bet against it. This has the hallmarks of a deliberate and persistent atempt to sow discord and animosity within the Watch. If so, it's a rotten trick to pull. The site is a rewarding and pleasurable pastime for its serious members and to maliciously introduce discord into a place where others take a simple and inoffensive pleasure is not a thing to be proud of.

I'd agree - I had him/her down for an attention-seeking troll from day one in the (now thankfully closed) Noah's Ark version 1 thread. But I know I'm naturally both impatient and cynical - which is partly why I'm actually amazed and also grudgingly admiring of the level of benefit of the doubt, patience and courtesy that far more long-term members of KW than I have extended to him/her.

peter wrote:Now to the last, most important area of the quote above. The disrespecting of the blue-flame. No Watcher aware of its significance would do this unless they had gone so far off the rails in their head that they were borderline certifiable. So either BBF did not understand what the blue-flame represented in which case he just pushed his mischief making to far - or he did, in which case he overstepped the bounds to the point where only his immediate removal from the Watch will suffice.

Because I've taken a look around, I'm aware of what the blue flame represents and the esteem in which it's held - it's something that I am completely unqualified to offer any comment on and that's the exact same respectful position I would expect others who are too new to have been involved to take as well.

peter wrote:I hope those who have ultimate control of the Watch are considering these points VERY carefully.

Well fortunately, although he's being a bit enigmatic, presumably because he's got a duty of confidentiality...

Avatar wrote:It ain't quite so. He's not an alt and didn't know better. It turns out though that he's just not quite who he claims to be either.

...so the powers that be are indeed keeping a watchful eye on things.

However, given the ludicrous self-serving title of this thread combined with its largely nonsensical content, I'm also one of several who wish it would be consigned to the garbage pail. Remove the oxygen of attention and the problem fades away.

Essentially BBF is not an alternate identity of another member, but he is an acquaintance of another member and is winding us up for laughs. The member in question (whose involvement was surprising only in its limited scope) came clean about his knowledge of the affair once the dreaded 'blue flame' line was crossed, though I'm not clear on whether that was his reason for doing so.

In general, this sort of stuff is monitored and acted upon behind closed doors, but I feel it's worth clarifying for the general membership what the situation is with BBF, so that no one is under the misguided impression that he's a persecuted innocent or anything of that nature (though I stand by my earlier remarks, despite their manifest unpopularity).

peter wrote:I must be very naive because all this is beyond what I understand the watch to be about. Sure, there are times when I have posted a contentious idea or post and relished the thought that a few ripples would be created - but never with malice or the idea that one individual would be 'targeted' for abuse. As for 'alternate ID's' and hasseling other Watchers - wtf! - I'd no idea that such things were/are a 'fixture' here. If anyone set up an alternate ID for a joke, spun it for a few posts, then came clean with their hands up, then OK. I'm not so dry that a bit of fun is beyond me, but to string it out for the purpose of creating mischief is beneath what I expect from the people I have come to know and respect through the watch.

It started off with one or two pranksters, and ruffled a couple of feathers if memory serves, for pretty much the reasons you've given. But the same people kept playing this same joke, and then more and more people copied it, and eventually it became something of a running joke. I don't find it funny and would gladly see it disappear, but there's nothing that can be done about it really. I do find it a little disturbing, though, that creating alternate identities in order to bait other members is a more acceptable practice than asking that we give people the benefit of the doubt and default to an attitude of respect.

I am not a joke, I am the quantifiable roofer on the night. You sir are jealous of my powers I'm sorry, please have patience and allow me into the fold.

I can't Jim Halpert what I am

As for my association with ANYONE on here,

the only one I seem to get along with and get some fun punches in with is drew. He/She understands on a level most of you do not. Understands that I am a man with the hand in the hand of a man with a hand with a hand in the turlest of friends.

babybottomfeeder wrote:I am not a joke.

Keys cut, three for the price of one
Nothing's free but guaranteed for a lifetime's use
I've changed the locks
And you can't have one
You, you know the other two

The brakes have worn so thin that you could hear,
I hear them screeching through the door from our driveway
Hey love, look into your glovebox heart
What is there for me inside? This love is tired
I've changed the locks. Have I misplaced you?
Have we lost our minds?
Will this never end?
It could depend on your take

You, me, we used to be on fire
If keys are all that stand between,
Can I throw in the ring?
No gasoline
Just star me kitten
You are wild and I'm in your possesion
Nothing's free so, star me kitten

I'm in your possesion
So, star me kitten

BBF, give it a rest. We're on to you. If you truly want to join in here, do as Syl suggested: go read Donaldson's books and then come back.

If you don't do that, then everyone will know for sure that you're a troll.

I'm locking this thread now.