Mr. McGehee asks:

Why is Anonymoron still allowed to crap all over this blog?

At least two reasons. First, the trivial one. Because in his cowardice (and viciousness), he not only uses no name, but also changes his IP more often than he changes his underwear, there's no obvious easy way to block him. I could delete his posts after the fact (and I suppose if I did that for long enough, he might eventually get discouraged and go away, but I'm afraid that the creature would just retaliate by spamming me or something when I was away from the computer). But there's no way to preempt them that I've figured out, short of shutting down comments completely, a cure that I think (at least for now) worse than the disease.

Additionally, it would set a precedent. Though I've threatened to do it in the past in a couple cases, I've never banned anyone here. In general, there's been no need, because usually the trolls get bored and go on to harass someone else. Anonymous Moron, unfortunately, seems to be quite persistent. I continue to hope that he is just a little more persistent than most, and will not become a permanent featurebug of this community. Unfortunately, he's too stupid to realize that he convinces no one of anything except that he's an idiot (I suspect that many people who might agree with him on the issues are tired of him as well, because he's a caricature of their side, and makes it difficult for them to argue their own points, even when legitimate--I'd in fact be interested in feedback from that community on the subject).

However, I am getting more than a little tired of it myself (particularly since I'm generally on the receiving end of his vile attacks). If anyone has any ideas as to what to do about it, I'm receptive to hearing them.

Rand, I would just let him/her hang around. It's not that big a deal and the fact that you have done so for so long says something about the fact that this site attracts a diverse group, and in addition says something very good about you.

Well, I correct myself. It is a big deal about the personal attacks, if anyone treats them seriously. However I think regular visitors here have come to expect this as a normal feature here so that it doesn't have much effect one way or another..

Rand,

Give a few others admin privies and they can remove his crap when you are not around.

Rand...
you are doing the correct thing.

Just ignore him/her. REspond when it suits and pleases you and ignore the rest.

Robert

Rand, you're going to have to bite the bullet and remove the posts. Any open forum that achieves more than a modest level of traffic either has to have some sort of control or it degenerates to uselessness.

Never banned anyone, eh Rand? I seem to recall differently, but then people like you never were limited to the realm of truth.

...people like you never were limited to the realm of truth.

Great. I bring an old troll out of the woodwork.

I'm sure that if you "recall differently," you'll be able to tell us who I banned. I'm sure that you'll also be able to make a solid case as to why, if you're correct (I highly doubt it), it's because I'm lying, and not just because I'd misremembered something. You'll also be able to point out other issues on which I wasn't "limited to the realm of truth."

And yes, I know that you'll now whine that you didn't explicitly say I was lying. But everyone else will know exactly how we were supposed to interpret that.

Well, thanks for pointing out that disagreement and trolling are ideally strangers to one another. I had the advantage of some remarkable parents who taught me a lot about how to be civil when you disagree. They took it to a rather extreme degree - rabbinical argument needed to get that second piece of ruggelah - but I'm glad they did. I recognize that not everyone gets that advantage.

I guess I feel a need to speak up on the subject because of the point Rand referenced in the Ann Coulter post this morning - if you're silent in the face of bigotry, rudeness, and so on, you condone it. And I don't.

Still, there's the "do not feed the trolls" concept. I would recommend not banning your anonymous commenter, in the interests of rising above it.

They took it to a rather extreme degree - rabbinical argument needed to get that second piece of ruggelah - but I'm glad they did.

We're glad they did, too, Jane. And it's a shame that more parents don't.

I see nothing wrong with establishing a Code of Conduct and enforcing it fairly. Even a Nazi like our anonymous friend can appreciate rules.

Way to invoke Goodwin Law, Mike.

Rand,
You banned me, remember? I didn't bother changing my IP to break through because your cowardice was victory enough, blocking my posts instead of asking me to leave like anyone with self-respect would have. But I've kept reading the space-related discussions because they remain as interesting as ever, and then this post caught my eye--basically, you wankingly portraying yourself as a thoughtful site host.

Polish your tin-foil Kaiser helmet all you want, post endless volumes of hate prnography and paranoiac sputum to your spleen's content, but don't insult even your own toadies with the old "I'm a reasonable guy, but..." routine. If there were no "trolls" for you to hate on, you would make sport of your own friends and end up alone. What a sad, sad joke.

PS, yes, I am explicitly saying you lied. I also proved so in several other cases leading up to the ban, which was probably urgent as a result. As for failing memory, sorry, no Reagan defense, Rand. You're a silly ass 'winger with delusions of adequacy. Just wanted to drop a greeting card. Have a nice day.

You banned me, remember?

No, Brian, I don't remember. Obviously, if I remembered, I wouldn't have said I've never banned anyone. Did I say I banned you, or did you just find yourself blocked one day? And if so, did you ask me about it?

When I do a search for "Swiderski ban Transterrestrial" I only come up with one relevant hit, from August, in which I wrote in comments:

As I said, you're amusing at best, and not worth my (or really, anyone's) time, though some may further entertain themselves by sparring with a fool. Consider--if I were really concerned about what you write, I'd ban you, as so many leftist web sites ban anyone who tries to talk sense to them. Why do you suppose I don't?

I can tell you that if your IP was blocked, it was by accident. I didn't do it with the intent of banning you. Or at least I have no recollection of having done so.

I can also tell you, though, that if I were to start banning trolls, you'd be number two on the list, after Anonymous Moron, exactly because of kind of vile nonsense demonstrated in your latest drive-by here. But continue on in your hate-filled delusions.

I'd recommend leaving him alone, Rand.

Mr. Anonymous makes nearly anyone else look sensible and measured by comparison, and he's so personally obnoxious that even a saint would curse his wretched self-hating impotently shriveled-up soul, from time to time.

Hence I find him quite useful. If I happen to be in a surly mood and want to say something personally insulting, I can always say it about Mr. Anonymous and not feel the least twinge of conscience. Refreshing! Everyone gets in a bad mood sometime, and if you let him stay around Mr. Anonymous will provide a lovely guilt-free target for all of our occasional needs to vent some spleen.

changes his IP more often than he changes his underwear

Now there's a mental image I didn't need. ;-)

Rand,
Philosophically, I feel that banning someone should be a 'last resort' method of dealing with trolls.

Realistically, it sometimes needs to be done to allow the entire forum to keep some semblance of decorum.

One idea (I don't know how easily you could implement it) would be for you to have anyone who wishes to post simply register with you. Mr Anonymous could read but not write (not that he has been able to 'write' here). Just a thought.

how would the banning work, exactly ? There is an invention called Tor network, which is a traffic anonymizer. It makes the original IP truly nontraceable, i.e. cryptographically so:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)
Its pretty easy to use once you install the plugins in firefox.
There is no way you can ban based on IP. If you were using a blog soft that uses some sort of central registration and accounts, which of course makes commenting that much more annoying for everyone, banning per account would be feasible.

Another annoying option is to force all comments through moderation, which kills the liveliness of discussions.
Does anyone know of a blog soft with slashdot-style user moderation system, where registered user posts get automatic approval and unregistered ones have to be modded up by others to be really visible ?

So much for Rand's commitment to free speech.
Strike a blow for free speech, until you disagree with it.

This speech isn't free, Rand pays for it out of his own pocket and you disrepect his property and abuse it. You are simply a rude and inconsiderate houseguest.

In spite of having the Constutionally correct concept of free speech explained to you at least a half dozen times, you show yourself to be incapable of self-improvement to the slightest degree.

puckett

Let me know when Simberg starts paying for the Internet.

So, by your totally warped logic, because Rand did not pay for the public road leading to his domicile, you are entitled to enter his house, abuse the host and remain on the property he owns as long as you wish.

Again, you lack of logic, reason and courtesy is beyond the pale.

mike

The man who discusses anal rape on a routine basis,
doesn't have a franchise to discuss courtesy.

I have plenty of franchise. You long ago unsearned ay claim on courteous treatment you might have initially had. Your franchise long ago went bankrupt.

You see, the rest of this board considers you lower than whale sperm, a petulant, arrogant, self-indulgant coward. You worked very hard to achieve your status, stop whining and deal with it.

Cancer is not worthy of courtesy, a parasite is not worthy of courtesy and you are really anally fuked in your head if you think you deserve even a sliver of coutesy. You are a wholly negative force with zero redeeming characteristics.

Rand,
First you deny knowledge of a ban, despite having threatened one immediately before my IP was blocked, and then you go on to threaten one yet again. This is the point in the cop show where the interrogators glance at each other and chuckle.

But there is one point of your comment that I can easily believe--you would indeed ban me again rather than publicly asking, like a man, for me to not post here anymore. Especially because you know I would leave, and you'd rather not have your own behavior held up to that kind of civilized standard. A climate of respect would destroy this little microcosm of barbarism and orgiastic hatemongering you've built around yourself.

Brian, I didn't threaten to ban you. Then or now.

If you were banned, it was probably from posting too many times in too short a period, which results in an automatic banning, to prevent spam. This happens without my knowledge, other than an email telling me some IP has been banned, which I generally ignore. Despite your ugly and stupid slanders, if you'll tell me your IP, I'll remove it from the list.