Open Question: What is LGF’s Current “Banning Level”?

Now that the BRC has released the registration stats, we thought it might make sense to follow with a resurrection of a Johnson comment that rests in the “hidden” portion of the LGF archives. The following is from back in a day when insta-banishment wasn’t something that was celebrated:

This is a screencap that can be tossed around, and rubbed in some faces, because we know that if we fast-forward to 2012, the current level is much, much higher than 0.02%. Certainly, it is high enough to preclude Johnson from bringing it up voluntarily like this. These days, we’re guessing it would take some arm-twisting.

Given the current environment of sock hunts and troll “roastings”, a more interesting question might actually be whether a current loozard would have the temerity to ask. But we probably know the answer to that one.

Nevertheless, I think this is worth pressing. Tweet and retweet, spread the word.

In the meantime, we might as well give it a whirl, right?

OK, well, we know that the level is at least 12%, since we have a confirmed list of 4,253 blocked accounts that Engineer no. 2 grabbed nearly a year ago, and we just mentioned that the total accounts currently sit at ~35,580.

Unfortunately, this is where our conjecture begins. Here’s what else we know:

The ~4200 banned nics was the total gleaned from a sample of ~20,000 nics about a year ago. Assuming that this is a statistically sound sample we should deduce that the overall level should be closer to 21%.

However…

The sample we grabbed represents nearly all the accounts that have registered at least one comment*. Lurker accounts and stunt socks weren’t included, due to the methodology. So, I suppose the debate could swing either way on how this effects our findings.

But maybe CJ will just give us an update, yeah?

*According to our data, ~37% of all LGF registered accounts have never commented.

_________________________

Update: We’re embarrassed to say it, and I can’t believe that nobody checked CJ’s math there, but 381/15000 = 0.0254 = ~2.5%.  Johnson was only off by 100x (which is probably par for the course with regard to LGF’s statistics)

Advertisements

159 Comments on “Open Question: What is LGF’s Current “Banning Level”?”

  1. rightymouse says:

    Please don’t jeopardize my nice, clean socks, m’kay? :mrgreen:

  2. rightymouse says:

    37% of registered accounts have never commented? Holy smokes! 😯

  3. “I’m a 37%’r too.

  4. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    I don’t think instabans count? (if I read the post right)

    • Calo says:

      No, I was not an instaban, I was registered for over a year and was banned with a lot of nics one night. IIRC, it was shortly before Iron Fist got banned from LGF.

      I said nothing during my registered time there.
      I’m sure ISTE can verify the info when he reappears if you need him to.

      • Lily says:

        Banned for just reading the site even though you were registered…..yep happened to me. But I did comment not a lot…mostly on over-night threads….banned for reading a thread. That’s how I got the boot. If cj or any loozirds say different they are lying. You don’t have to post anything at all to get banned.

      • Anat says:

        I was banned after a long period without comments, but I did downding Charles twice, on issues concerning Glocal Warming.

      • Anat says:

        “Glocal”??? totally unintentional but, with hindsight, I quite like it.

      • dwells38 says:

        But did you ding? That might have done you in. Charles might have thought to himself much like De Niro on SNL “I here dings”.

  5. Mis-match your socks.

    Posting from Calif. as a liberal is a have to.

    Posting from S. Fl. as odd is required.

    Posting from Texas is almost impossible, but uptown Dallas will let you fiddle around.

    Posting from NYC requires that you agree with the NYT’s editorals.

  6. Zeus Crankypants says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :

    It can actually be a quite hostile place for newbs.

    And conservatives.

    • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

      It used to be the opposite though, It’d be interesting (but probably impossible) to chart these ‘ghost’ registrations vs year and bannings…

      the former would show what eras were more intimidating/offputting, and the latter would speak circumstantially to the number of ‘banned socks’

      • Bunk X says:

        Film at 11.

      • dwells38 says:

        Nice one Bunk! 🙂

        The situation is way beyond analysis. I do it sometimes anyway but let’s face it. It’s purely mock fodder at this point. Chucks attempt to make some lunatic lurch without a real explanation or plausible cause makes him about as interesting and compelling as a car wreck on I-75. Right up there with why is Charlie Sheen a drunken drug-addled asshole? Or why would a rich, famous, pretty celebrity like Britanny Spears marry an obvious useless tool, show her naked snatch off to paparazzi scum and then shave her hair off? Who the F… knows? Who cares? These people are whack. Why does the ‘reverend’ MC Hammer do marketing seminars now? Because he lost all the fucking money having squandered it on mansions, cars and bitches and hoes like a moron. They aren’t like us. None of us would have fucked ourselves so thoroughly in their situations. So they deserve derision.

  7. You guys lgf’s is going open minded, why just now they are talking about how bad the Southern Proverty Legal Foamatthemouth people are.

    Just take a look for yourselves and I’m there just now with one of my socks from Southern Fl. and I’m agreeing with them that SPLC is just like this Vdare group.

    Its fair and balanced now. So see.

  8. Mandingo Warrior says:

    I was purged at some point in silence. I went to sign in one day (this would be about 2007-8) and found out my account had been blocked. I was never redirected to the IDF website, but I heard that was a common practice by Foster the whale.

    Probably a good way to cross reference exactly how much purging has gone on is to pair it with traffic stats. At the very least it would encompass the lurkers.

  9. Open season on liberal kooks for an asshole like me over at lgf’s now.

  10. Watch I’ll have Gus liking my post.

    He all down on the Pope, I’ll agree with him now.

    Watch

  11. Oh, and bye the by, lgf’s has its vft. open now, aka registration is open now.

    I just had a bud from L.A. register me another spare sock.

    enjoy

  12. I’m going to guess that a significant number of the 37% are blocked, perhaps enough to put the overall banning level at closer to 30%.

    1) With announced registrations, there was typically a handful that were reported as “blocked socks” right from the get go (these are part of the total ~35,600).

    2) Then you have the socks that CJ presumably knew about and tolerated, until such a time that the main nic got banned and the socks got nuked with it.

    3) plus an unknown number of steath bans, especially with recent socks (since Johnson doesn’t mention “hatchlings” any more.

  13. I think wrenchwrench likes me once more, sort of had a falling out (ie dumped in the shit can by chunkey soupbone) back in the day. Several times wrenchwrench almost caught one or two of my socks posting due to the over use of ,’s and stuff.

    I’ll say hit to wrenchwrench in a bit.

    • dwells38 says:

      Gosh I feel left out. I was never a sock. Always posted honestly but I felt several times as though they were watching me. I even had an amiable interchange with WW once or twice without knowing she was Igor to Charles’ Frahnkenshteen. What a friggin’ creepshow.

      Fuckin’ mess I never would have been involved with had I known.

  14. Cool, when “Red Sea,,,Tang” post up on the header bar it shows Natso Tang,

    cool cj, your spying on yourself.

  15. Zeus Crankypants says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :

    It used to be the opposite though, It’d be interesting (but probably impossible) to chart these ‘ghost’ registrations vs year and bannings…

    the former would show what eras were more intimidating/offputting, and the latter would speak circumstantially to the number of ‘banned socks’

    Oh shut up… what the fuck do you care? You’re one of Charles’ little lap dogs, over here to dig up some shit and bring it back to your master. Leaves a taste in your mouth.. huh?

  16. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    Lily :
    Banned for just reading the site even though you were registered…..yep happened to me. But I did comment not a lot…mostly on over-night threads….banned for reading a thread. That’s how I got the boot. If cj or any loozirds say different they are lying. You don’t have to post anything at all to get banned.

    There’s gotta be more to it than that, like at least something that brought your account to his attention.

    • Lord Nazh says:

      heh, I was banned for posting here 🙂 and Dork claims he didn’t do it and that CJ reads this site (and at the time, I wasn’t talking bad about Chunk, just testing to see if he read here)

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        that’s drawing his attention in some manner though, different from what Lily’s saying :p

      • Calo says:

        Lily got banned for reading a secret thread IIRC.

        I got banned for nothing – for just existing – for posting NOTHING AT ALL on LGF.

        However, I was posting on Weatherunderground about a hurricine at one time and my IP is in Texas. Maybe that’s why I was banned
        .
        Who knows? Who cares anymore.

    • Stonemason says:

      LOL…even when faced with the truth you can’t figure it out. There were many banned for just reading, or just searching the wrong words. (Not me, I was banned by the weasel for not apologizing for a well deserved ‘fuck you’, and I didn’t even say sideways. Bitch). There are way too many ‘anecdotal’ accounts of the Lily type banning for all of them to be “more to it than that.”
      But you keep believing that.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        well I’m saying he’s not psychic, people are saying he’s monitoring every single person that *goes to* his page watches them like a hawk and magically knows they’ve done ‘wrong’.

        Say posting over here and going back over there and finding out you’ve been banned is an entirely different thing.

        Surprisingly you guys are giving Johnson too much credit.

      • Bunk X says:

        When you’re logged in over there on any given thread, you can see all the others who are monitoring the same. Similar stories of stealth banning and arbitrary blocks for reading show up on many blogs, not just this one.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        yeah I know, but that’s a MASSIVE amount of work, constantly monitoring it.

      • Bunk X says:

        Not when you have some codies running in the background to alert you.

      • dwells38 says:

        Oh Jeez. This one is strong with the sycophantly naiveness.

        Seriously Grand whatever? The dude’s an old fat guitarist computer programmer blogger. WTF else does he have to do? I multi-task more watching old episodes of Sliders, reading emails and watching NCAA BB games. Plus I work a corporate job that scores me 6-digits for the fam. This dildo CJ is more-or-less retired from what I’ve seen. He really has nothing more to do than feverishly monitor his declining blog. This is not ‘A lot of work’ regardsess of what he says.

    • Bunk X says:

      Nope. Happened just recently with CroMagnon. Logged in to read some old post and got zapped for reading.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        you sure he wasn’t already banned and didn’t just notice?

        That honestly makes more sense.

      • Bunk X says:

        Paranoia outweighs making sense.

      • Bunk X says:

        If Cro were already banned he couldn’t have logged in.

      • CroMagnon says:

        Indeed, somewhere in mid-january I could and did log in to be able to easily read the older comments (after not having visited LGF or having logged-in there for some years), then after 1 or 2 days I found my account was blocked.

        I twittered @ lizardoid to ask why he blocked me, he twittered back saying he just checked and that I wasn’t blocked, and indeed I could log in again.

        Then a few minutes later he announced that I now was blocked anyway for retroactively being guilty of “raving bigotry”:

        “But thanks for the note, because I just checked your comments at LGF, and now you’re blocked for raving bigotry”

        🙄

        For what it’s worth, and for the record, here’s my little short story about it + my actual comments apparently full of “raving bigotry”:

        (I don’t have a blog, so I thought a g-doc would be quick & easy)

        “Blocked at LGF in 2012 for comments made between 2003 and 2007″
        https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1UOe4ywDoQqfUK8fA1Fg2Zahd9FYIgqg6z4SZtxpTPFU

      • CroMagnon says:

        Indeed, somewhere in mid-january I could and did log in to be able to easily read the older comments (after not having visited LGF or having logged-in there for some years), then after 1 or 2 days I found my account was blocked.

        I twittered @ lizardoid to ask why he blocked me, he twittered back saying he just checked and that I wasn’t blocked, and indeed I could log in again.

        Then a few minutes later he announced that I now was blocked anyway for retroactively being guilty of “raving bigotry”:

        “But thanks for the note, because I just checked your comments at LGF, and now you’re blocked for raving bigotry”

        🙄

      • CroMagnon says:

        For what it’s worth, and for the record, here’s my little short story about it + my actual comments apparently full of “raving bigotry”:

        (I don’t have a blog, so I thought a g-doc would be quick & easy)

        “Blocked at LGF in 2012 for comments made between 2003 and 2007″

      • CroMagnon says:

        (not really important, but just that you know: I posted a link to a google document where I tell a bit more about it, but it seems that post landed in the spam-box?)

    • Lily says:

      You don’t believe what I am saying??? A lot of people got banned that night…I was simply reading the sekrit thread zombie got banned on. Which was my right since I was a registered and a commentor…even though I didn’t comment on that thread. So if you are calling me a liar …so be it. But that is the truth.

      • Bunk X says:

        Ooh! You’re referring to the Night of Long Knives!

      • Lily says:

        Yep…anyone who was reading that thread and didn’t post or did post something contrary to cj…was banned.
        /and I wasn’t nowhere near a new hatchling at the time.

  17. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    well I’ll bow to you guys superior knowledge of the circumstances, its just frankly incomprehensible to me.

  18. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    Bunk X :
    You’re missing out, then. It’s all sparkly and wavy in here.

    I find the girls like it better if I mantain my dark mysterious outsider appearance.

    • livefreeor die says:

      Say what?!? Let’s take a poll of the women on the blog. I vote, “Blech.”

    • livefreeor die says:

      Of course you can-that’s why you’re on this blog almost 24/7.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        can I term that a ‘massive exaggeration’?

        How about I can do better than military fetishists?

      • garycooper says:

        Grand Galactic Inquisitor :can I term that a ‘massive exaggeration’?
        How about I can do better than military fetishists?

        That word, “better,” doesn’t mean what you think it means. It is not the same as “more,” nor does it equate to “skankier.”

      • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

        Now we have two questions for the philosophers among us:

        1) What is the banning level at LGF?

        2) What level of exaggeration constitutes “massive exaggeration,” and is not “massive exaggeration” exaggerating?

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        massive exaggeration is more than 200%

        I don’t spend more than 8 hours a day with DoD open!

  19. Bunk X says:

    124 Daniel T Boyd Wed, Feb 8, 2012 7:22:41pm
    -8
    down
    up
    report

    The government is compelling a religious organization to violate one of its fundamental tenets. There are disturbing First Amendment implications here. Just because we may disagree with the church doesn’t mean we should disregard religious autonomy. By the same token I disagree with what a Klansman says, but I support his right to say it. The Constitution is everything. It is all that matters in this country.

    127 Charles Johnson Wed, Feb 8, 2012 7:24:32pm
    4
    down
    up
    report

    Incoming.

    GGI– Example: Now is not the time to register a sock.

  20. ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
    yeah I know, but that’s a MASSIVE amount of work, constantly monitoring it.

    You have no fucking idea of what you are talking about.

    Like most others on the Internet – the ones you are so proficient at complaining about.

    • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

      and back to bitterness.

      I do have some idea though, its not as straightforward as you guys are letting on.

      Specifically, if he or his proxies (or a bot) are just watching whose looking at a thread just to ban them, why take the extra effort? Seems like it would be safer and save risk of something unpleasant to just ban them before that point, given that you’re explicitly saying he’s not waiting for an overt act.

      • Minnow says:

        Oh dude, you used the word “proxies”, and “bot”.. then babbled a little.

        God, you really know your shit.

        Must be about time for a drag off your menthol CIG-arette.

        Yawn.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        will say I meant ‘proxies’ in this case in the old sense not the tech sense; namely the idea that KT or DF or someone is watching for him.

    • dwells38 says:

      Oh it’s just such massive work! Only a genius polymath could do that. It’s a wonder he has time to make an almost paragraph comment with each post about right wing nuttery or jazz guitar or AGW righteousness or whatever.

  21. ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

    ChenZhen, as The Minotaur :
    I’m going to guess that a significant number of the 37% are blocked, perhaps enough to put the overall banning level at closer to 30%.
    1) With announced registrations, there was typically a handful that were reported as “blocked socks” right from the get go (these are part of the total ~35,600).
    2) Then you have the socks that CJ presumably knew about and tolerated, until such a time that the main nic got banned and the socks got nuked with it.
    3) plus an unknown number of steath bans, especially with recent socks (since Johnson doesn’t mention “hatchlings” any more.

    Seems you could figure out the “last post date” stat for all users if the sources/methods you used for “hide the decline” are the ones I suspect.

  22. doppelganger says:

    the cool people are blocked.
    the dorks and the socks and the mutes and autistics are active

    simple

  23. Stonemason says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
    well I’m saying he’s not psychic, people are saying he’s monitoring every single person that *goes to* his page watches them like a hawk and magically knows they’ve done ‘wrong’.
    Say posting over here and going back over there and finding out you’ve been banned is an entirely different thing.
    Surprisingly you guys are giving Johnson too much credit.

    you are not giving his level of obsession credit. I am nothing, I know that, I once had over 100 hits on my blog in one day!!! and yet, whenever I said anything at LGF he replied. I fought Salamantis, he replied, I egged on the weasel, he replied, I up-dinged Mandy, he replied. Like I said, I was nothing, 2500 comments in 4 years or so, but, he was obsessed with ridding his blog of me. Odd…

    • doppelganger says:

      that salamantis is a sick individual!

      no doubt he’s a registered sex offender or even worse, an unregistered one. a real nut

    • Stonemason says:

      But for some reason, he needs justification, he needs to be able to point out to people like you that I ‘asked’ for it, so that when 100 others say they were banned for no cause, you, and the rest of the cult, will point to my banning, mandy’s banning, or any of the others who were ostensibly banned for ’cause’, all the while ignoring the dwindling rolls reflecting those banned for no cause.

  24. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    Why not preban then though… ie why wait until they log in to ban them? That’s the question none of you are willing or able to answer.

    • Minnow says:

      I preban every morning before I get in the shower. That way, my shower porcelain does not have to endure the endless, inane b.o. thing…

      and THAT is the question everyone is unwilling to deal with…

    • Bunk X says:

      How do you preban someone you don’t know exists, or are you just burping your carrot?

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        If you don’t know they exist, how do you know they’re the person you want to ban?

        As far as I can tell the thing they’re talking about here isn’t sock banning, but rather old accounts that had been inactive.

        Still you do bring up a plausible way it could happen:

        “Oh hey, I’d forgotten about XXX!”

      • Bunk X says:

        Either you’re playing dumb or you’re starting to get it. CJ has combed through old inactive accounts and disabled some of them, but given the volume, why should he bother until someone shows up to reclaim one of them from pre-2008…

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        For the simple reason that every account he leaves active is a chance that some guy he hates will get a post out and… maybe a few dozen people(!!!!) read it before he nukes it.

        If its as obsessive as you say, why run that extra risk of letting an embarrassing post get out?

    • Pig says:

      I’m not one of the experts here, but he does pre-ban. I’m not gonna look ’em up but I’ve seen lots of posts by Charlie where he’ll say we got x hatchlings but x’ of them were red sox or some such unacceptable thing.

      But he is also paranoid about people who have been registered for a long time without posting. I think he calls them sleepers. I got that one myself so I can assure you he’s a little bit on the nuts side.

      • Minnow says:

        the correct grammar would be “I seen”, not “I’ve seen”.

        Mr Pig – have you been eating the ban roll-on?

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        In my mind I see the sleeper situation going something like ‘sleeper exists > sleeper posts something > sleeper post gets edited or deleted > sleeper gets banned to much fanfare’.

    • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

      Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
      Why not preban then though… ie why wait until they log in to ban them? That’s the question none of you are willing or able to answer.

      When you run a cult you have to catch people in the act when the group is assembled and then carry out the punishment for all to see.

      That creates the tension that gets the others to modify their behavior. When you condition the behavior you then change how people think. Basic Skinner. Or mafia 101. Take your pick.

      When Iron Fist was banned a whole batch got the ax as well as they expressed sympathy, shock, appeals and whatnot. Very much a sort of Jonestown drama and many who wanted to keep their accounts started making loyalty comments and Chuck-up-dings to avoid the same. It was both pathetic and fascinating. It must have been a real ego thrill for Charles.

      It is all there on a thread. I am sure you could use your account to search for it right now …

      Prior to that I didn’t remember people feeling the need to upding Chuck at every turn. he had plenty of comments with “0” and no one thought that good or bad.

      • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

        ‘catching them in the act’ would involve a post, no?

      • Bunk X says:

        Not necessarily. Monitor lizards were/are employed. Don’t know the extent of control, but they were definitely reporting, and there is credible evidence of compliance threats they made to others offblog.

      • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

        Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
        ‘catching them in the act’ would involve a post, no?

        No.

        A query can do it. Also, his AJAX code sends what you are typing back to the server before you have hit post or preview. Google uses the technique with search where it finds crap before you are done typing.

      • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

        Bunk X :
        Not necessarily. Monitor lizards were/are employed. Don’t know the extent of control, but they were definitely reporting, and there is credible evidence of compliance threats they made to others offblog.

        A whole psychological frontier in itself, the “Monitor Lizards.”

        No one knew who they were (though Sharmuta was obvious given the hours she kept).

        Who was a Monitor? How did they get asked? What could they do? Why weren’t YOU asked? Are you wanting in something? Is Charles displeased with you? Why?

        What good is a police state without Secret Police?

      • Bunk X says:

        The question is, were the monitor lizards really in charge of anything, or were they merely snitches? Irish Hose was likely just a snitch, but asswhistle and jimmah may have had banning powers in the off hours. These are unconfirmed rumors.

      • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

        They could delete posts. I know that for a fact. Not sure on stick powers.

      • Bunk X says:

        A whole psychological frontier in itself, the “Monitor Lizards.”
        Several years ago when Rodan axed me to run with the OOT on BlogMock, I’d had little experience on a blog with a large volume of commenters, and the only reference I had to go by was The Swamp. I thought I’d been assigned the job of BlogMock hall monitor.

        It didn’t take long before peeps started complaining about my heavy-handedness, and after one particularly embarrassing ass-ripping (thanks, Possum!) I realized that most blogs don’t operate like LGF and I figured it out.

  25. Minnow says:

    Oh come on – do you use roll-on, or spray. As far as I can tell the thing they’re talking about here isn’t sock banning, but rather b.o. banning that is DEFINITELY active.

    As in active b.o.

    Maybe you know him – ahh, her… ahh… him who pretends to be her….

  26. William Standish Knowels says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
    well I’m saying he’s not psychic, people are saying he’s monitoring every single person that *goes to* his page watches them like a hawk and magically knows they’ve done ‘wrong’.
    Say posting over here and going back over there and finding out you’ve been banned is an entirely different thing.
    Surprisingly you guys are giving Johnson too much credit.

    You stupid shit! Do you not know the power of the Jazzy Code? He has Tools and stuff!

  27. Minnow says:

    And now, Gus8022much is blathering about Shaq and how much wealth he has earned.. and making implications that this is wrong.

    No Gus.

    Bad dog.

    Shaq went and got his own self a job and EARNED that money.

    You lazy no good piece of human excrement.

    • Minnow says:

      oh wait – are you implying that his efforts are not worthy of twelve homes and 6 yachts…

      What the fuck is wrong with you Gus?

      Are you a fucking racist?

      • Lord Nazh says:

        Min: quit posting about what’s going on at the Farm(TM) without posting what is actually going on at the Farm(TM) 🙂 I can’t see the site from here ya know 😦

      • Bunk X says:

        ‘Sokay. He’s just mumbling to himself. We’ll talk him down when he starts throwing things.

  28. Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

    OK I have to quit talkin’ to you guys now, so I’m gonna give myself a little reward since I was good all day… or 2 rewards.

    1) Walter where’s that detailed personal info about ‘me’ that you were gonna post? If you don’t have my address or list of sexual partners I’ll be sad.
    2) Gary why haven’t you gotten me banned yet?

  29. Pig says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :
    In my mind I see the sleeper situation going something like ‘sleeper exists > sleeper posts something > sleeper post gets edited or deleted > sleeper gets banned to much fanfare’.

    I’m not sure you grasp the idea behind the word “sleeper.”

    • Grand Galactic Inquisitor says:

      curse the ‘one last refresh!’

      Just so we’re clear, a sleeper is somebody that has an old account that hasn’t posted in a long long time, thus slipping under the radar and escaping notice.

      You generally notice sleepers when they ‘wake up’

      • Minnow says:

        ….and the world wants to know when you will???

      • Pig says:

        Uh….no.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_agent

        Charlie believes that these are people who created accounts years ago for the sole purpose of waiting until the time was ripe to attack. In fact, it was his use of this term that first convinced me that he was batshit crazy.

      • Bunk X says:

        I know a guy who signed up only because he spotted the “open window” announcement but never posted a word. This was in the pre-dingy pre-spy days. I asked him a year or so ago to check if his account was still active, and he said it was blocked.

      • ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

        Pig :
        Uh….no.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_agent
        Charlie believes that these are people who created accounts years ago for the sole purpose of waiting until the time was ripe to attack. In fact, it was his use of this term that first convinced me that he was batshit crazy.

        This film clip demonstrates what damage “sleepers” can do!

        It could be an LGF instructional video.

  30. Minnow says:

    Gus-ate-oh-2much just said the following….

    “re: #375 HappyWarrior

    It makes one think about why people become socialists. That’s not to say I agree with all of the tenets of socialism but it’s just crazy how insanely wealthy some people are.

    It’s a conundrum. I have no idea how to fix this easily. Other than increasing minimum wages. But even then those middle ground business people are in the hole as well. The master and god of industry and entertainment loom above them. This is a 1000 year old system. The tall men. The good looking. The beautiful people are always rewarded more even if they produce nothing. We wait for their charity which never comes. My dream is that “they” would just do the right thing on their own. But that never happens.”

    Hey dumbass… in your mind, it is the tall men, the good looking, the beautiful people (ad nauseum).

    Funny thing is – all those boogey men you are referring to get up at 5am and work until 9pm at night…. or more.

    Which of course, is something that you cannot comprehend.

    Loser.

  31. garycooper says:

    Galactic Whatever, I don’t “get people banned.” I have no such powers, nor would I want them. I was merely making an observation, that you are an insufferable twit and you’re monopolizing the forum, which is clearly your aim, so congrats. Anyone can do that, if they have endless time on their hands, and a laissez-faire moderating system with which to fuck.

    Now get back to your dancing. I think you were at the “I’d do me”-part. Pardon me if I skip the rest of this evening’s program – I’ve seen it about 1000 times over the years.

  32. ZappaWouldBeVomiting says:

    I think “Telefon” should be the official movie that explains LGF.

    Here Charles (bronson) responds to an accusation of being paranoid

  33. Bunk X says:

    They’re so cute when they get likkerd up and philosophomorical and shit.

    376 Gus Wed, Feb 8, 2012 9:51:19pm
    0
    down
    up
    report
    re: #375 HappyWarrior

    It makes one think about why people become socialists. That’s not to say I agree with all of the tenets of socialism but it’s just crazy how insanely wealthy some people are.

    It’s a conundrum. I have no idea how to fix this easily. Other than increasing minimum wages. But even then those middle ground business people are in the hole as well. The master and god of industry and entertainment loom above them. This is a 1000 year old system. The tall men. The good looking. The beautiful people are always rewarded more even if they produce nothing. We wait for their charity which never comes. My dream is that “they” would just do the right thing on their own. But that never happens.

    LOL GUS! Short, fat and ugly and waiting for a handout from hotties who produce nothing?
    *uuurp*

    • Bunk X says:

      Gus was in rare inebriated form – spittle flying everywhere!

      Here then. Let me be blunt. Most rich people are overvalued idiots. Take the Super Bowl for instance. A bunch of stupid football players making millions per year to play a stupid game with a stupid ball. Then to be entertained by a lousy pop star who once was probably good but now is like a novelty. All making millions and billions total to watch them play stupid football.

      Oh. And baseball and basketball too. Just a bunch of dumb idiots making millions by being stupid fucking jocks while the rest of us live our lame ass lives glorifying these largely illiterate idiots.

      BRB. I have to take a leak.

      The sports scam is just one example. But hey, I don’t care what people do. Let them idolize these men that “throw balls.” And it’s exclusively a mans’ sport. All the spoils go to men since they are by nature more physically strong. It’s an entertainment venue borne of cavemen, Romans and Greeks.

      I am bitter. And why not? Do you think it matters? 50 years from now all of us will be nothing but a memory. And when the human species finally become extinct no one will be here to remember the memories of this lame existence of ours. I’ve decided that I have nothing to lose and I don’t.

      I’m still trying to figure this out though. How one idiot like Tom Brady is equal in worth to one rather large small town. Including his equally ignorant wife. But I guess I should just thump my chest in his ability to throw a ball and his wife’s ability to stimulate my libido and call it a day. They are my superiors. That, I find hilarious.

      And while we were all watching the Super Bowl they were murdering people in Syria? And I’m supposed to care about these idiots throwing balls at each other while making millions a year? As if that matters? The whole thing is absurd. People were talking about M.I.A. giving the finger the next day. While children were being slaughtered.

      • Pakimon says:

        I’d guess the architecture gig that Gus was bragging about a few weeks back didn’t pan out.

        Poor Gus.

        Lego mastery has fallen out of vogue.

        Looks like it’s back to his sister’s garage for the foreseeable future.

    • Pakimon says:

      It’s a conundrum. I have no idea how to fix this easily.

      There is no easy fix, Gus.

      You want to be rich? Let me offer some suggestions.

      1) Get trained in a marketable skill.

      2) Work your ass off.

      3) Work your ass off some more.

      4) Save your money instead of pissing it away on booze and “bling” and whatever is the latest fad that you must have to be “cool” and “hip”.

      Even then you might not succeed, but life isn’t fair. Never has been and never will be.

      Being bitter and demanding handouts from those who have succeeded is a waste of time and energy.

  34. beed says:

    Pakimon :
    I’d guess the architecture gig that Gus was bragging about a few weeks back didn’t pan out.
    Poor Gus.
    Lego mastery has fallen out of vogue.
    Looks like it’s back to his sister’s garage for the foreseeable future.

    Times are rough. We should have great sympathy with architects and “architects”.

    • Pakimon says:

      There’s hope for Gus yet.

      I found out that he’s using his “mad Lego skilz” to create a new sub-genre in the adult film industry.

      • garycooper says:

        Gus…this is just a suggestion, feel free to use or abuse at your indiscretion. I think you should incorporate Lego connector-dots at the appropriate locations in your actors’ physiques, i.e., the crotch. You know which one goes on the male, and which in the female, right?

        Best of luck with the project, Bro! Say hi to Sis, if you run into her up at the house. I heard she was trying to get down to a manageable weight so she could go on “The Biggest Loser,” so good luck to her as well.

  35. garycooper says:

    Gus’s sister says she does a lot of “stress-eating,” for various reasons, not the least of which is her fear that her garage will burn down from “somebody falling asleep with a lit-cigarette next to the lawnmower,” and the unwelcome sight of “ancient hole-y boxer-briefs” in the dishwasher every couple of weeks.

    Hope you make the show, mamacita!

    http://tinyurl.com/83rqszu

  36. LOL check the update. The comments are hidden, so I don’t know if anyone called CJ on it in that thread back in ’07.

  37. Zeus Crankypants says:

    Grand Galactic Inquisitor :

    ‘catching them in the act’ would involve a post, no?

    I don’t know Mac. If Charles has some spiffy routines running the in the background, his code could do a lot of “watching” for him.

  38. PeteP says:

    CroMagnon :
    Indeed, somewhere in mid-january I could and did log in to be able to easily read the older comments (after not having visited LGF or having logged-in there for some years), then after 1 or 2 days I found my account was blocked.
    I twittered @ lizardoid to ask why he blocked me, he twittered back saying he just checked and that I wasn’t blocked, and indeed I could log in again.
    Then a few minutes later he announced that I now was blocked anyway for retroactively being guilty of “raving bigotry”:

    “But thanks for the note, because I just checked your comments at LGF, and now you’re blocked for raving bigotry”

    CroMagnon :
    Indeed, somewhere in mid-january I could and did log in to be able to easily read the older comments (after not having visited LGF or having logged-in there for some years), then after 1 or 2 days I found my account was blocked.
    I twittered @ lizardoid to ask why he blocked me, he twittered back saying he just checked and that I wasn’t blocked, and indeed I could log in again.
    Then a few minutes later he announced that I now was blocked anyway for retroactively being guilty of “raving bigotry”:

    “But thanks for the note, because I just checked your comments at LGF, and now you’re blocked for raving bigotry”

    Did he answer your tweet and define “raving bigotry”?

  39. CroMagnon says:

    Btw, is it usual at LGF that when someone is banned, all his/her posts ever made there will be vanished from LGF as well?

  40. Mr. Tibbs says:

    Bunk X :
    The question is, were the monitor lizards really in charge of anything, or were they merely snitches? Irish Hose was likely just a snitch, but asswhistle and jimmah may have had banning powers in the off hours. These are unconfirmed rumors.

    I can verify that and more. The inner circle of monitors had banning authority, subject to review by Fatazz. That’s why sometimes he would say that he hit the wrong button.

    In addition the monitors could delete and, yes, alter posts. They loved to alter posts as a last ditich attempt to come up with the “smoking gun” to justify a banning.

    And as I’ve mentioned inthe past, they had a hit list of posters that were being targeted for a banning. Pretty much, any intelligent conservative who could hold their own in a debate was targeted for removal. The only so called conservatives who were allowed to stay are those either too stupid to even tie their own shoe laces (Dork Falcon, for example) or too much of a pussy to stand up for their own beliefs (Law Hawk). Ice weasle wanted a hand full of cabana boys and human house pets around to bitch slap from time to time for grins.