|
Post by strange on Sept 17, 2007 18:12:12 GMT -6
I don't hang around where I'm not wanted because my time is valuable. If you all want me off, go to it, vote fair and square and I will abide the board's decision at the end of a few weeks or until this board is put to rest and it has its decision. Decide what you will, I have my own coin and I'll put myself to the deepest of research elsewhere if that be what ye all wish.
Strange One is real, and will not, and has not, come back in another form once he is gone. Stick up for me if any of you like, strike me down if that be as you all please. This is as I am, and no personification whatsoever.
Some of the old hens aren't being very nice to me. But I'll let you all speak and discern whether you all feel I've been to valuable use or not.
Take care, beware, have blessed............................................
I'll miss these boards very much, but I can't force you all to like me. And I'm sure as hell not changing my unique perspective for any one. So have your decisions and let them be final.
Sincerely the Strange One
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Sept 17, 2007 18:48:21 GMT -6
Strange One, as the Bible sort of said, "Greater love hath no man than this, that a Strange One lay down his boards for his friends'. Personally I welcome all shades of opinion although your more extreme fantasies don't really add much to our understanding of matters to do with the 1876 Sioux Campaign. Still, as Joan Baez once said, "If you've got an opinion, why be humble about it?"
Hunk
|
|
|
Post by "Hunk" Papa on Sept 17, 2007 19:03:39 GMT -6
Strange One, I've just seen the posts under the 'Exhumations' thread. Having fantasies about the likes of Custer and Crazy Horse is one thing. Being crass about the dead is another. Stick to Monster films my friend, where I am sure that you will find many like minded people. We can and do have whimsical moments on these boards, but there is neither humour nor any maturity in being flippant about those who lie in peace. Get you kicks on Route 66, not on these boards.
Hunk
|
|
|
Post by strange on Sept 17, 2007 19:51:17 GMT -6
Strange One, I've just seen the posts under the 'Exhumations' thread. Having fantasies about the likes of Custer and Crazy Horse is one thing. Being crass about the dead is another. Stick to Monster films my friend, where I am sure that you will find many like minded people. We can and do have whimsical moments on these boards, but there is neither humour nor any maturity in being flippant about those who lie in peace. Get you kicks on Route 66, not on these boards. Hunk Dually noted, Hunk. Thanks for the constructive feed back. On the 'Exhumation' thread I really wanted to offer something for history in general, and if I have my way, and not just for kicks, I'd still like to have several individuals dug up for good insight (though I cannot lie about the fact that I have a thing for bones). This poll is still wide open so, while I value Hunk Papa thoughts, I'd still like to have my membership to a fair vote and find if I'm getting anyone anywhere. I have a certain style of written word, some don't get it, but I hope others do. Frankly I didn't mean for the 'exhumations' thread to get so carried away but be that as it may its still there and if I'm such a pest to everyone here, and if I am to be "ignored" so I'll go away, then I'll let you all be alone with yourselves if that is indeed the case. But personally a couple persons were far out of line to actually put my "mental health" into the topic which I take great offense to, particularly 'cause they were wholly serious. I frankly don't see why I'm such a bad guy there, I don't go around throwing insults at any of you, especially if one of you guys had an interesting project to propose. They were shutting me up in a straight jacket! How in the world do they expect me to respond? And even when speaking in my very own defense, I never said anything mean about them and suddenly they all want me off the board! So the votes still open, the decision will be final and I will not come back in alternative forms with any different usernames. When Strange is gone, he's out. I'm not spending my valuable time on people who despise me. Lay it all out there and I'll go quickly if thats the action to be taken. I have no regrets, I gave things my best shot as I always put in as much as I can offer. For some reason everyone freaked out at the 'exhumation' thread and started chewing me out over something I consider to be wholly sound and worthwhile. And now suddenly I'm like a BIG OGRE terrorizing all of the villagers in Custer land!GRRRR! I am still honored to say that I have never said anything insulting to any one else here and that I have never attempted to throw any one off a board. Unlike others. But if people can't play nice with me, then I'll take my two cents elsewhere and put them to more constructive use for some who care. Possibly farewell, no real regrets other than occasionally straying off topic, at least I've never called any one stupid, and I'm happy with that. Speaking negatively never gets any one anywhere. no matter how strange or bizarre I always have SOMETHING to say. I could just as easily protect my credibility by simply perching myself somewhere and cutting people down with negative, but I adhere to the idea of Say something or Say nothing, and speaking negative doesn't quite get any of us anywhere, yet critics are so widely accepted in this wretched world we dwell. Strange One
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Oct 4, 2007 12:39:45 GMT -6
I don't think it's a really great idea to get into the habit of banning people from message boards because some folks don't like or are annoyed by them. There are occasionally cases where banning might be justified, but I would personally consider them to be very rare. If you don't like/aren't interested in what somebody writes, nobody is forcing you to read it or to respond to it.
|
|
|
Post by Montana Bab on Oct 5, 2007 0:43:15 GMT -6
From one of the "old hens" you refer to, to one strange little chicken. You might as well hang around, but it sure would be nice if you would grow up a little. I can think of so many ways you could get attention other than digging up old bones. You have a good mind, now fella, use it to impress us, not distress us!
If the good people on these boards were really into banning people, I would probably be one of the first to go. I have added very little here , but one of the things that I have noticed. If the others don't like what you write, they pretty much ignore it, unless it is offensive.
Bab
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 5, 2007 13:26:01 GMT -6
Sorry, y'all, but am I missing something here? I have been away too long.
What's up?
And Montana, who would ever consider banning you? You have contributed a lot more than you know.
The only ones I would ever like to have seen banned, have been, and actually, as I think about it, it was self-imposed exile. Some guy named "George" way back in 2005 when Diane made registering-to-post mandatory, and some clown named "q," who self-immolated. Our Swiss buddies are probably better off, off, but even that I am not sure about.
So, Strange, what's so strange?
I'm voting to keep you on, unless of course you pillory my post on that Custer-born-again thread. Then I'll have to introduce you to "q" who was last seen standing next to some burning bush.
Best wishes, Fred.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 5, 2007 13:30:17 GMT -6
Strange--
I just saw your choices up there. Very strange! Couldn't you have just included one that said something like, "Keep him"?
I voted for that "needs more experience" thing.
Also, have you thought about changing your name? Maybe something like "Jonah" or "Noah." Even "Unicorn" would work. "Strange" is... well... you know... odd.
Best wishes, Fred.
PS-- The "boot someone else" thing is very funny. It shows a good sense of humor. The Duke of Wellington.
|
|
|
Post by alfuso on Oct 6, 2007 3:38:48 GMT -6
I generally don't like to ban unless someone has blatently broken the rules and keeps doing it after being warned.
First warning - week suspension.
2nd time is Bye.
What rules is "Strange" breaking?
alfuso
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Oct 6, 2007 20:52:54 GMT -6
None. He's been a little over the top on some of his posts, but I just skip them when they start to turn too weird. Strange started this thread himself.
For the record, Fred, even CSS was only given a three-day ban this last time. He could get back on if he wanted to, but I'm not encouraging it.
IMHO, both are young guys who are screaming for attention.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 7, 2007 7:15:15 GMT -6
Hey, Lunar Lovely--
Sometimes I think you are too generous. What the hell drives some of these guys?
Best wishes, Weasel Fred.
|
|
|
Post by clw on Oct 7, 2007 8:48:34 GMT -6
I have my weaknesses. I'm not proud of it, but I'm just not thick skinned enough to withstand his insults and I don't think we should provide him with a platform. So 'let the record show'.........I hope he never, ever comes back.
Other than that, I'm very open minded. ;D
|
|
|
Post by fred on Oct 7, 2007 9:59:57 GMT -6
I guess I am just a bit ambivalent about this whole thing (notice the dumb interplay between "bit" and "ambivalent"; God!, I wish I knew how to write!). I just cannot understand what drives idiots. And I am not saying "Strange" or the devil-does-care twins are idiots, but this is a "generally" "specific" (there we go again!) site and I don't know why it has to be invaded by people with such strict, nonsensical agendas. I guess it is a sub-mentality that even drives organizations like the LBHA. Is it power?, because if it is, it is power in a teacup, and I would rather have no power than be an ass of that magnitude, ass being inversely proportional to power: the bigger the smaller, the smaller the bigger.
I know this is not the thread, but I'm going ahead with it anyhow. Despite the fact that I am on very good terms with some of the LBHA's "Old Guard," I find the organization-- in general-- extremely short-sighted when it comes to these boards. Yes, you have a couple of lunatics here. And yes, others-- far more thin-skinned than one of my favorite brains on this site, "clw"-- have been so offended they have departed for dustier pastures, but there is a remarkable coterie of interest, experience, intelligence, and desire on this site. And this is from someone who has not been able to get along with everyone, but who has tried to mend broken fences every time he has had the opportunity. We all tend to get carried away-- in the beginning-- but then we become a little more humble as we meet our equals and our superiors. I certainly have. The fun and the brilliance of this site is not just the discussions about what happened to Custer once he left everyone's view, but the banter about his intentions, his pearl-handled revolvers, the pictures of Indians, the discussions of books, the interests of so many others in other aspects of the "Wild West," the Billy Marklands, the Frank Boddens, the Tricias, the incredible knowledge of people like Elisabeth and Ephriam, the marvelous writings of people like Scout, and yes, even the incessant demands for critical evaluation flung at us by people like "darkcloud."
I feel sorry for some of my friends who have left these boards. And every time I get furious about some of the snide or snappy commentary directed at me and I pout away, swearing I'll never return, I find myself overwhelmed by the brilliance of language and skills shown by people like "George Armstrong Custer" or Elisabeth (there's that name again, popping up in every example involving skill and knowledge); the everyday common sense and experience of people like AZRanger; the overwhelming knowledge of Gordie. I am sorry for the LBHA as an organization-- and I am a little bit sorry for us, as well, "us" being the boards, that we have had to split apart. I would like that little, two-word phrase to mean what we would all like it to mean. It is a shame it isn't.
I do think Moon Goddess was done a great disservice, especially knowing the amount of work and time and heart and soul put into this. The brilliance and knowledge of all of us rather pales in the light of the foresight of Diane. This site is truly remarkable. I would hope that those who would sully its pages with trash would kindly reconsider and join an honest, decent, civilized debate. Every time I think of "civil" and "decency" I think of "Hunk papa." Diane knows why.
Best wishes, Fred.
PS-- I add this after reading Elisabeth's post, below: "civility" and "decency" also = Elisabeth. FCW
|
|
|
Post by elisabeth on Oct 7, 2007 10:11:29 GMT -6
[Ooops -- posted while Fred was posting. Thanks, Fred!]
I'm with you. I can't say I was ever too bothered by his silly insults, which were mostly sexist and just showed him up; but the most tedious thing about him -- apart from the stridency and loudness -- was his total lack of curiosity. He'd made his mind up; Custer was God, Benteen and Reno were the Devil, and anyone who questioned either stance was in the pay of Al Q'eda; and no new information, or alternative argument, was ever going to make him re-examine any of this for a second. Now certainty is, I suppose, the unique province of the young. But to have no interest in discovering more ... well, there was no point in his being here. (We may, many of us, have our own entrenched positions, but I like to think most of us are prepared to emerge from or extend those trenches when occasion demands ...) So yes, I think it's better for both parties that he stays away until he grows up.
He's got his own website, after all -- so he's hardly being denied a voice.
Agree, pleased he's gone. Like clw, I'm open-minded -- but there are limits!
|
|
|
Post by strange on Oct 7, 2007 11:36:56 GMT -6
Thats a very good point Elizabeth, I won't take any stand against the swiss man but I will definitely state my fondness for curiousities. I think the questions should keep flowing and that everything should stay fired up. But don't think that I'm taking any one of your immediate sides.(!)
I'm continuously bothered by historians. Particular in the sense of William Wallace they have no grounds to second guess his height. Edward I, Long Shanks, has been dug up and proven to have stood exactly as he was stated all along, so if Long Shanks turned out to be his rumored height of 6'1" to 6' 2" to even nearly 6'3", then why must we all doubt Wallace's height of 6'7"?
I'm seeing EVERY historian, including some of the rest of you, go about as if every one was a little pygmy and saying that no one over 6 feet ever existed and and all this cold logic is thrown around. Th record states Wallace at 6'7", and from what I know its one of the only existing records of William Wallace. Speaking of Europe, there are apparently some kind of records of it once being ruled by a race of blonde haired, blue eyed "giants" that would later become one of the 'precepts' (is that the right word?) for Hitler and his Aryan extremists. I don't know how credible the to thoughts and legends of of these "aryan Giants" are, but if it holds any water then it would not be entirely unlikely that Wallace could have been descended from these larger peoples of Europe. In fact, Wallace is descended from among the high of the Scottish "blue bloods" and nobles. The fact that he is of the nobles are one of the clearest indications of his height because look at all the world leaders from these older times, it seems nearly every one in power were large and it is proven again and again by portraits and exhumations! Genghis Khan was a big man, Ivan the The Terrible, Peter the Great,Shaka ZuLu, many kings were of size while others weren't and size is not exactly lied about. Alexander is said to be very short, now if such was said about some one of Alexander's power than why can't any one agree to at least the POSSIBILITY of Wallace being 6'7' since that is what is recorded?
When we debate Custer's size we're usually kicking and scratching over mere inches and pounds, we know he's above 5'9" and well below 6'2" , Custer MUST be 5'10", 5'11", or 6'1/2" at his tallest, of coarse thats a whole 'nother keg of worms.
So always keep digging and maintain intense childlike knowledge of things, thats the best thing about children is that they keep growing and can perceive things a hundred times better than any adult. My tiff with grownups is a struggle with myself as I feel myself hitting 18 and suddenly it feels as if everything stops coming. I hate getting older because I can't watch or read anything the way I use to, so thats why i lift weights to keep myself growing bigger and better and ever increasing in all my exploits so as I do not strike in at a dead end like one of my favorite Heroes Captain Hook. I always hated Pan, and I'd look at Hook hoping that his very own childlike spirit could spark up so that he could finally give those damned lost boys a piece of his hand that they fed to the Crocodile. Custer reminds me of a youthanized captain Hook or even a bastard hybrid of Hook and Pan all rolled into one package which makes the Boy General of the surely most dangerous once you realize how he's sitting on the best of both worlds in that regard.
|
|