Comments on: Username embarrasses me

Username embarrasses me

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:09:15 -0800

Would it be out of line to ask new member ( . )( . ) to choose another handle? It's annoying and embarrassing to type; vaguely sexist and makes it difficult to address his comments seriously because it's so graphically distracting.
Come on, Jason Kent, do yourself and all of us a favour and choose a sobriquet with some letters in it. It can be as juvenile as you like, but minimally verbal. You seem keen and have points to make. We'd appreciate the gesture, believe me.

By: darukaru

darukaru — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:18:11 -0800

He should do it, but only if you promise to change your username to 'Sweetcheeks'. ;)

By: anapestic

anapestic — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:23:01 -0800

Just how are ass pimples sexist?

By: frykitty

frykitty — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:27:36 -0800

MC, you my elf ho.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:28:09 -0800

I think it's out of line, Miguel. Neither you nor I have any right to tell mr. pimples what to call himself. Matt does, but that's it. Of course, you have the right to tell mr. pimples that you think it's annoying, too.

After all, you didn't rail about "fishfucker" did you?

Oh, and last point: no disrespect intended, but careful with the "we".

By: Avogadro

Avogadro — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:28:47 -0800

Maybe MC meant sexy.

Nevermind. Ass pimples aren't sexy either.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:30:05 -0800

Oh and you could just call him "(" for short.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:31:35 -0800

I think it's a stupid handle, but borderline if I should ask someone to change it. It's such a lame thing to have to argue with someone about.

It appears from the names that Jason Kent is somehow related to Alan Kent, who feels he can do anything he wants on the site unless there is a rule against it.

By: phooey

phooey — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:31:50 -0800

MC, have you tried addressing this person directly and privately? And I second Kaf, be careful with the "we" statements. You aren't the sole voice of the MF community.

By: Skot

Skot — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:32:58 -0800

*Sniff*

I miss UrineSoakedRube.

By: skallas

skallas — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:33:26 -0800

We'd appreciate the gesture, believe me.

We? We who? When did you become royalty?

If someone wants to label himself as something that screams, "look at me, aint I offensive/weird/funny" so be it. That's what handles are all about. Plus, I like the fact that metafilter can handle users named Fishfucker or this guy without getting into a puritan fit.

By: Karl

Karl — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:34:37 -0800

Miguel, on three separate occasions I've mentioned how distracting it is that you only use one carriage return when creating new paragraphs, and even in this post you break your text after the word "distracting". Very very ironic. Your text is frequently all over the place, and visually difficult to digest. Much harder to digest, i should mention, than the nickname (.)(.)

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:35:48 -0800

MC, have you tried addressing this person directly and privately? And I second Kaf, be careful with the "we" statements. You aren't the sole voice of the MF community.

FWIW, the person has no email listed, and even with my admin powers, all I see is that they used a fake email address when they signed up, so my guess is they aren't here to be nice members, and they're here to mess with everyone.

By: Karl

Karl — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:36:15 -0800

PS: would it be less offensive if (.)(.) changed his handle to 8=======>

By: skallas

skallas — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:38:54 -0800

Man I feel like Kafkaesque's parrot. I didn't read his post before mine, honest.

Not to come down too hard on you Miguel as you mean well, but why not try something along these lines:

Ignore his posts.

Email him telling him you find his name offensive and you're ignoring him.

Suggest that if he changes his name you would pay attention to his posts.

If this was done en masse I'm sure something might come out of it.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:56 -0800

skallas wanna cracker?

By: anapestic

anapestic — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:46:05 -0800

I can't help but think that some of you are supporting asspimpleboy more because you dislike MC than because you really think his username is a good idea. I do find it somewhat offensive, and I would guess that a good many of the female MetaFilterians do as well.

By: Avogadro

Avogadro — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:47:39 -0800

While MC might have been exaggerating when he said "we" (and there's nobody here who hasn't used exaggeration ;-), he has a good point. The guy doesn't have the best intentions in mind, and it is impossible to contact him directly to voice displeasure.

I don't think that this thread should be about MC.

By: Avogadro

Avogadro — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:49:20 -0800

(...where "The guy" refers to Mr. Pimples)

By: j.edwards

j.edwards — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:50:40 -0800

I think it's out of line, Miguel. Neither you nor I have any right to tell mr. pimples what to call himself. Matt does, but that's it.

Perhaps Miguel did not choose the best wording for his comment, but I think it is entirely appropriate that this is brought to MeTa. Perhaps we (there I go, with that word) have no right to tell the offender what to do, but we have a right to bring it up for discussion, and a right to debate it, and I for one am glad that we have, and hope that we will continue to do so.

I don't ask Kent to change his username, but I ask him to consider the consequences of having such a username, and what exactly he wants to get out of MeFi. And then he can act.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:51:23 -0800

I certainly didn't mean it that way, anapestic / Avogadro. I in fact like Miguel and communicate with him somewhat regularly. I just meant to answer his question re: was it out of line, and to remind him of the "we" thing.

I do see some piling on Miguel here, and am sorry if I had anything to do with it.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:54:22 -0800

Skallas: "Fishfucker" is wonderful. My point is graphic, not moral. Even numbers would be fine.
Very sorry about the "we", though. Sounds awful. "Some of us?"
It's just I hate the "I for one" construction. Somehow it seems even more narcissistic and hypocritical. Who am I alone to appreciate someone's gesture? I'd read a few comments criticizing the handle and felt it would be more truthful to make it plural.
The point is larger, though: how does one's choice of a handle affect the way one is read? Even good old Wulfgar! got stick for incorporating an exclamation mark. (.)(.) is just off-putting; it skews everything he says.

P.S. If Jason had an email I wouldn't have brought it to MeTa, as a lot of MeFis can attest. If I can warn someone about a double post or whatever, I always prefer email. But this is a community issue as I do think it's impossible to take his comments seriously with a tit(or eye)handle.

By: mischief

mischief — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:59:00 -0800

I would add my thoughts to this thread, but given my chosen username, no one would take me seriously.

By: metrocake

metrocake — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:04:29 -0800

I'd prefer it if he changed it to 8=> , myself...why should he get the penis pump?!

By: rodii

rodii — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:17:11 -0800

It's not the sexism that bothers me, it's the unpronounceability. Once I figured out the ass pimple thing, though, I was cool with it. Yo, ass pimple!

By: luser

luser — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:30:03 -0800

Offended by some parens and some periods? Please, people. Life's waaaay too short. And you really care, Miguel, if the tiny little boobies skew everything he says? Why? Kafkaesque's borderline personality disorder skews everything he says, too, but is it our place to demand he up the dosage?

*silence*

OK, rhetorical question

By: geoff.

geoff. — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:15:29 -0800

I think there should be a "MeFi New Member Discuss". All new members should be reviewed and prodded against a board of those MeFi members whose morals are better than everyone else. Within time our exclusivity would rival the Masons.

By: rodii

rodii — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:17:30 -0800

I'll second tha--hey, wait a minute. That's sarcasm!

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:21:16 -0800

If their morals are really that great, why are they going around prodding people against a board?

By: metrocake

metrocake — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:42:32 -0800

Masons?!

Oh, fnord...

By: Voyageman

Voyageman — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:44:35 -0800

()()()()() when I was growing up, this used to be a
()(.)(.)() drawing of the girl hiding in the grapevine, but ass
()()()()() pimples is way better.

By: andrew cooke

andrew cooke — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:17:13 -0800

Jeez. What small things people get upset over. I read this thread earlier and it made no sense, now it's struck me that maybe Miguel thinks they're (voice hushed in awe) breasts (I thought they were eyes, like the "wot no ...?" Chad thing). Isn't this the same place that flipped someone off for worrying about the public display of tampons and staunchly defended breast feeding?

Or is it just - shock, horror - that someone did something a bit different? MetaFilter - the place we're you can express yourself. But not too much.

(And what's the whining about no email? This is trivial even for email. I've only emailed anyone on MeFi once - and that, ironically, was trying to get someone to cut Miguel a little slack. The moral of that story is depressingly clear....)

By: andrew cooke

andrew cooke — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:18:22 -0800

Oh great. Now I can receive punctuation flames.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:39:04 -0800

How bout annoying, patronizing sarcasm flames?

By: HoldenParis

HoldenParis — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 15:46:37 -0800

I am ( . )( . )

Matt banned my HoldenCaulfield nik due to the events of December 26th, or I like to call it 12.26

I did in fact list a fake email address in the sign up form. If anyone wants to further reach me please send all applicable mail to alankent@telusmail.net with "nik" in the subject field or else it will take the "Junkmail St." route.

Now, you pronounce my nik like so: "I-zzz" or "eyes".
For those that feel offended because of the close resemblance to female breasts go file a trademark infringement suit.

----------------------------------------

Come on guys stop with the BS, if this really ticks you off that much then just skip over my post.

----------------------------------------

BTW, how would you have reacted if I told you I was a woman........AND a feminist?!

-----------------------------------------

Seriously get your act together. Try to picture yourself in the mirror: "I am complaining because some guy on this community site is using ( . )( . ) as a nick!!!........Shit, the shrink was right I really am deranged..."

By: Opus Dark

Opus Dark — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:22:38 -0800

( . )( . )

I see two improbably symmetrical tits. I like 'em. Even in ascii abstract.

(HoldenXXX, your anatomically ambiguous moniker has shrunk a cup size with your unfortunate, ego-driven disclosure. You should've remained Victoria's Secret.)

By: HoldenParis

HoldenParis — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:27:56 -0800

Oh...?

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:40:55 -0800

This alan kent character is now banned from the site, as he was posting under at least three names at once, but didn't think it was wrong because it isn't spelled out in the rules.

Some people lack the judgement required of the site and shouldn't be here.

By: moz

moz — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 16:50:49 -0800

Come on guys stop with the BS, if this really ticks you off that much then just skip over my post.

you don't seem to care that you've been banned (if only symbolically) and that the things you've said and done have upset a lot of people. it is interesting, then, that you should be bothered by the complaints of others about what you say and do. all that i can say is that if you don't like to hear people complain, either you should take your own advice or you shouldn't participate on mefi anymore.

By: rusty

rusty — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:49:16 -0800

Huh. I thought they were breasts. And I thought it was a cute nick. I'm not aware of anyone else posting under a graphical nick of that sort.

Matt: I wouldn't have banned the guy unless he was being actively abusive on all of the accounts. I.e. people on K5 have played multiple-account games, and to some extent, you just have to let them. Posting under more than one name is not, IMO, by itself abusive. Basically, in most cases, I try to judge the account, not the person. I don't think I would necessarily have known that that was not allowed, especially if it's not mentioned in the rules.

There are exceptions, where it's clear that someone has created a whole bunch of accounts for nefarious purposes. I will then disable all the clones I can find. But I still don't usually punish the "original" account unless they've been abusive from that account. What I find is that the harder you try to keep someone out, the more support they get when they come back complaining of how unfairly you've treated them

Anyway, if you ban them entirely, they have no reason to make any attempt to "rejoin society" as it were, nor do they have any means to do so. Then you basically just get yourself someone with the motivation to do as much nasty stuff as possible, to get back at you for your "unfair censorship."

( . )( . ) as a nick is a silly reason to ban someone. Posting (non-abusively) under a couple different names is also a pretty silly reason to ban someone. Before you decide to give up and make someone an enemy, do consider how much trouble they can make for you when they decide they don't like you anymore. On MeFi, my impression is that the amount of trouble you're buying from a motivated enemy would be quite a lot.

By: rusty

rusty — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 19:53:31 -0800

Er. I forgot: how, also, do you square banning ( . )( . ) with allowing "fishfucker"? Would "fistfucker" be allowed? How about "boobs"? Where's the line? I know the line is where you say it is in any given situation, but that only works up to a point. There's an agreement of good faith with everyone here, where they agree that you make the rules, but they only stay as long as they think you're making the right rules. If you get too arbitrary, that faith weakens.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 20:23:04 -0800

Rusty, I agree there aren't clear, egregious abuses, rather it's a whole lot of little things that have made today a big pain in the butt, and I would guess more would follow in the future.

After the font size fiasco, both on the site and over email, it was clear this person doesn't have very good judgement and insisted that I write down more rules. They didn't understand that their behavior stuck out and they didn't look to how other people acted to get an idea of what is acceptable. I discussed it over and over with the person and they still didn't see how they were in the wrong and since there wasn't a rule saying don't screw with the fonts, it was ok for him to do. With their new, goofy username (for the record I find it sophomoric but some people emailed me before this thread saying how juvenile they found the nick) they posted trolling, antagonistic comments regarding others' userIDs (I deleted them). I'm not a big fan of multiple usernames, especially when people make the profiles appear as if they are separate people with different names. I don't see any good reason for a user to be deceptive in that way, and in the past people have used a similar method to post links to their own things (on multiple occasions). When they kept posting after some timeout bans, it seemed they created the names knowing they did something wrong but not wanting to ask about it.

I'm getting tired of dealing with people that suffer from judgement impairment, and talking over things in email wasn't productive either. If I let this guy go, I could see him being a problem for a long time, and I just don't have the patience for it.

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:51:00 -0800

Ok, the guy's a complete co.. [err, fill in a word that doesn't offend you] (maybe yes, maybe no-- more likely he's another person who becomes asshole given the anonymity of the 'net), but that was still the coolest handle on here. Anybody offended by four parentheses and two periods of the punctuation sort should be out stopping Flag Burning or burning books. Christ, offensive punctuation? On the site that provided the world with this?

By: holloway

holloway — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 02:17:13 -0800

Oh well, maybe next time you'll do better.

By: rusty

rusty — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:47:30 -0800

Matt: Well, I guess you had reasons. :-)

How come the rules aren't codified -- that is, why is "no screwing with fonts" even supposed to be a rule, rather than a property of the system? I never wrote down many rules because the firm rules are just coded into the software. You can't (under normal circumstances) break them.

Well. This is just one of those pain-in-the-ass situations, where there's no particularly good answer. It sucks that some people go out of their way to make life difficult for other people, especially when those "other people" are doing them a favor. Makes you want to kick humanity in the head and yell "Shape up, you assnugget!" But then you remember all the good things... keep remembering the good things... you will go insane if you don't focus, constantly, with all your will and patience, on the good things... ;-)

By: kindall

kindall — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:33:55 -0800

How come the rules aren't codified

Because it's nigh-impossible to codify courtesy and common sense. If you find yourself having to try, it's time to close down the site...

By: skallas

skallas — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:41:43 -0800

. I.e. people on K5 have played multiple-account games, and to some extent, you just have to let them.

I think you're a little too lax on this. From what I've seen with multiple usernames/accounts on BBS's, USENET, webboards, etc its usually a case of 'me backing myself up.'

In a emotionally charged thread be it political or whatever its real easy for someone to post something inflammatory or stupid and then create three dummy accounts to agree with him. Its par for the course for trolls and flamers. Also, if someone is so insecure about their views then they probably shouldn't be posting at all, let alone creating a gang of dummies to fill the thread with their views x10.

Is there a good reason to have multiple accounts per person that you can think of? I can't.

By: D

Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:47:33 -0800

Multiple personality disorder?

By: whatnotever

whatnotever — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:59:39 -0800

On K5 somebody made a separate account to make a fictional diary for a spacefaring cargo-ship captain. He gave full notice and explained it all beforehand. It was actually somewhat entertaining.

Now, it could have just as easily been done somewhere else, so it's not necessarily a good reason to allow multiple accounts, but it is an example of non-abusive multiple accounts.

By: D

Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:25:33 -0800

And baby_jessamyn, of course...

By: dlewis

dlewis — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 17:10:40 -0800

I am ( . )( . )

Matt banned my HoldenCaulfield nik due to the events of December 26th, or I like to call it 12.26

Huh? Now I'm confused.... I asked boobies / pimples / brackets if he or she was a new user, or just an old user who signed up for a new nick to make a joke. He / she said that they were a new user that had been trying to sign up since September. So then who's HoldenParis? Is he impersonating the real boobies, or is HoldenParis / HoldenCaulfield / Boobies all one in the same devious evil mastermind?

I don't find ( . )( . ) offensive, but this multiple account thing is completely unnecessary. For instance who is dead_horse?

We are what we post. Our readers rely on our usernames to tie sometimes disparate comments into a coherent whole of an identity. When everyone starts using multiple accounts, that all goes to shit. There's really no excuse for anyone to be doing that.

By: baby_jessamyn

baby_jessamyn — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:00:32 -0800

* cries *

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:07:18 -0800

There's really no excuse for anyone to be doing that.

I will happily retire baby_jessamyn in the interests of MeFiHarMoNy, though she never posts more than one word and two asterisks.

By: rodii

rodii — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:13:47 -0800

I love baby_jessamyn.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:38:10 -0800

I love baby jesus.

No, really.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 20:58:59 -0800

I ♥ ♥ ♥ 's baby_jessamyn, myself.

By: y2karl

y2karl — Sat, 29 Dec 2001 21:35:46 -0800

As for stavros the wonderchicken , well, need I say more?

By: j.edwards

j.edwards — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 00:35:04 -0800

If baby_jessamyn goes... Well, let's just say:

"That'll be..." (by Buddy Holly)
"... the day ... " (Buddy Holly, Don McLean)
"... the Music Died." (Don McLean)

By: rusty

rusty — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 08:14:35 -0800

kindall: By "codified" I meant "put in the code" not just "written down". Like, if font screwyness is not allowed, why isn't it just not possible to do?

You can't program courtesy and common sense, but you can make anything that isn't allowed explicitly forbidden.

By: Forest

Forest — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 09:44:02 -0800

rusty, you hit on the nail in your first comment of this thread. I will not go outright and say that this is slowly turing into a communistic community but it might seem so to a new user.

By: rusty

rusty — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 09:50:19 -0800

Communistic?

By: rodii

rodii — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 10:05:06 -0800

How does someone with a user number of 13326 know what this community is "slowly turning into"? Oh, look, it's Ass Pimple himself!

People, including me, give Steven a hard time for harping on the "it's Matt's site" theme. But it is useful to remember that when the "hey, it's a free country, I can do what I want here" types like Pimple start piping up.

By: machaus

machaus — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 10:30:31 -0800

hmmmm, I look into my crystal ball and see a range of IP addresses being redirected to plastic.com.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:04:08 -0800

You can't program courtesy and common sense, but you can make anything that isn't allowed explicitly forbidden.

I know it ends up being more work to watch over, but I prefer to leave things open and let people use their judgement. 99% of the time, changing the font size is lame, but once in a blue moon someone uses it for a good reason. I also hate to punish everyone due to the actions of a few bad apples (I'm trying to remove the apples instead).

By: rusty

rusty — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 11:09:50 -0800

That sounds like the <PRE> debate on K5. I'd like to have left <PRE> tags enabled, because they're useful for posting code. But inevitably, some idiot would come along and make a <PRE>formatted string 1200 characters long, and screw up everyone's display. So I banned the tag.

I don't know what the right answer is. I think ultimately the right answer is it's good there are different places with different philosophies, so people can find one that suits them. I wish there were more good communities online, and more people really thinking about how to make them work. MeFi kept me sane while K5 was down in November. Imagine if there was no K5 or MeFi. The web would suck.

By: gleemax

gleemax — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 12:58:43 -0800

Imagine if there was no K5 or MeFi. The web would suck.

You're forgetting interactive porn.

By: owillis

owillis — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 15:17:39 -0800

But those would still suck.

[i'll be here all week, tip your waiter]

By: fuq

fuq — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 16:52:23 -0800

As someone who has been the center of a debate such as this before, I would like to say that as long as ___(insert name here)___ isn't trying to grind up babies to make spam brand meat product as part of a communist plot to bring down the financial structure of Matt's long lost brother, Sally (She was his brother @ birth anyway). In other words, No harm, no foul.
But
There has apparently been some harm.
Or has there? I'm so confused. I can't tell that ( . )( . ) is trolling. So what if someone's names is offensive? Other than Holden____'s trolling, ( . )( . )'s comments are better than mine.

Also, where is my spellcheck button?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 17:37:31 -0800

my god, MiguelCardoso, pull yourself together. I mean what's the deal here...on MeFi, I've seen threads on everything fom serial murder to kiddie cheesecake sites(all of which I assume you endured just fine) but a couple of ASCII hooters has you all afluster. That's just incomprehensible, unless...oh god, you've never seen boobies before have you?
Now admittedly ( . )( . ) is a bit of a troll, but there's a little troll in all of us, otherwise we wouldn't be here. So just cut us all a little slack, we're big boys and girls, we can handle dirty emoticons.
Quite frankly, anyone offended by ( . )( . )'s name desperately needs to be offended, if for no other reason than to make them reconsider their PC smugness.

By: Mick

Mick — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:00:43 -0800

jon the 'mc' in your name reminds me of the Marine Corp, whose job it is to kill people and break things. This offends me!

Matt, please ban him...and about the pony

By: Mick

Mick — Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:02:13 -0800

I almost forgot about my username, it was once a derogatory term for us damn potato eaters. Please ban me.

By: insomnyuk

insomnyuk — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 07:31:36 -0800

Wow, Reuters is great: Firm to Pull Ad of Three-Breasted Woman

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 07:52:29 -0800

Oh insomnyuk, you should have never brought that up. Don't give them new boys ideas! Now we'll have to take it to 9622, if it existed, which of course it doesn't. :)

By: Carol Anne

Carol Anne — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:17:25 -0800

"And God created Women, giving her three breasts to succor her young...

Read on, all ye MetaMales afflicted with mammary envy!

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 09:31:39 -0800

Carol Anne: Carol Ann Duffy, one of my favourite English poets, was yesterday awarded a CBE in the Queen's New Year's Honours list. There's a poem of hers in The World's Wife, one where she imagines she's Mrs.Darwin, that you just reminded me of:

"7 April 1852
Went to the Zoo.
I said to Him--
Something about that Chimpanzee over there
reminds me of you."

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 10:35:43 -0800

"Read on, all ye MetaMales afflicted with mammary envy!"

Envy, nay. Fixation, aye.

By: Carol Anne

Carol Anne — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 13:10:13 -0800

MiguelCardoso: Thank you for tipping me off to Carol Ann Duffy! I will go to a bookstore soon in search of poetry by this "...lesbian who was inspired to become a poet after she 'fell madly in love' at the age of 11 with another girl at her convent school." (She and I have much in common, it appears.) While it's a shame that Tony Blair chickened out on naming her poet laureate, the resulting publicity probably has brought her more readers.

By: Steven Den Beste

Steven Den Beste — Mon, 31 Dec 2001 15:45:44 -0800

I confess that I have two accounts here. The reason is really rather prosaic, though. I signed up once, and then forgot the password. So I signed up a second time, and that's the account I've been using ever since.

As to a reason why this guy was banned, it seems to me that a sufficient reason was that he was making Matt's life miserable.

By: rushmc

rushmc — Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:46:53 -0800

Stupid nick = loss of credibility = ignore input.

What's the problem?