Recently I put Blogger's comment moderation on, and now one of the trolls that I recently banned, "Guy Fawkes" thinks he's the reason:
"Guy Fawkes" or "Jim" or "James S. Ross"... or whoever he is was not banned because he was asking questions. Rather, he was banned because he was rude and obnoxious. This person did not provoke me to put blogger's comment moderation on (it was a different person displaying troll-like behavior), but once it was turned on, his comments continued to cross my line, so he was banned. He still continues to leave rude comments. This is classic troll cyber-behavior. This guy also trolls another blog, and here's a sampling of some of his comments.
Posts
6 comments:
"You will know them by their fruits" comes to mind.
Ken said...
"You will know them by their fruits" comes to mind
There were some positives of the "Guy Fawkes" months: I did learn to appreciate those cordial Roman Catholics that stop by. I did learn to appreciate those Roman Catholics that leave comments from time to time and don't simply change the subject when things don't go their way.
The irony is that I do enjoy Reformation-related dialog, even the questions raised by "Guy Fawkes." He was so rude and obnoxious though, particularly towards the end, that interaction with him wasn't worth the effort. I thought of posting some of his more recent comments left here (those I did not post), but the link above to the other blog where he leaves comments says more than enough about his fruits.
Guy/Jim had a pathological need to control the conversation. He was a human denial of service attack.
I myself went the distance with his unreason-able and specious Roman rhetoric, which is actually an argument against being an RC, though they are blind to it. You gave him the rope by which he basically hung himself in my exchange, effectively nuking the NT church based upon his affirmations and argumentation.
Of course, choosing a handle such as the infamous wannebe murderer Guy Fawkes , a terrorist who sought to blow up House of Lords and everyone in it, indicates the manner of men and warfare he affirms.
But speaking of rope, "immediately before his execution on 31 January, Fawkes jumped from the scaffold where he was to be hanged and broke his neck, thus avoiding the agony of the mutilation that followed."
Both Fawkes are sad examples of defenders of Rome. Hopefully this Fawkes will be granted repentance unto the acknowledging of the Truth (2Tim. 2:24) before his final leap.
EA said...
Guy/Jim had a pathological need to control the conversation. He was a human denial of service attack.
It's interesting to me that I've noticed at least one defender of Rome patting him on the back for being an obnoxious troll over here. Anyone credibly trying to defend Rome should really distance themselves from such people.
PeaceByJesus said...
I myself went the distance with his unreason-able and specious Roman rhetoric, which is actually an argument against being an RC, though they are blind to it.
Noted. There were a few people who were kind enough to offer responses to him. I noticed when he did get cornered, he would change the subject or move on.
Post a Comment