Opinion of evergreen

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Mega HP. I seriously think she'll harm somebody.

[This account no longer in use.]

By the way, to the conspiracy theorists who just think Evergreen got banned to even out the Klartext ban ideologically: wouldn't it be more likely that Klartext is the compromise if anyone is, given the history of moderation against the two?

[Antonio the Sixth]

She had serious issues and I'm going to give the mods the benefit of doubt as to whether her ban was justified, but I want to believe her heart was in the right place.

[Mr. Morden]

This makes it very difficult for first-time offenders to avoid becoming repeat offenders, as the only general advice they can give you upon return is something to the effect of "don't be yourself", because even they don't yet know what will end up being justifiable ban material for you in the future. It's why so many people who get temp-bans are then permabanned within one to two months of their return.

It's far more common for people to be banned for repeated infractions than it is for them to be banned for just a single one-off sin.  For those in the first group, yes, I'm often not sure what else to say other than "don't be yourself", because "yourself" is quite often the problem.  E.g., when the jmfcst ban was being debated, and someone asked if he should be given another temp ban, I asked what the temp ban warning would even look like other than "stop acting like jmfcst", since his entire persona is what people found problematic.

People come back from tempbans and then end up getting permabanned because the personality characteristics that sparked their original behavior don't die out because of the tempban.

[dead0man]

sometimes it takes years, but it's amazing how many people on my ignore list eventually get banned

[RFayette]

Basically a cartoon strawman of a left-winger by a not-very-talented right-wing editorial cartoonist.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Trump's victory seemed to drive her over the edge.  And she's not alone in that.  Presumably, ag would still be posting here if Clinton had won.  And of course, IceSpear would still be posting if Clinton had won.

Someone should write an Atlas forum timeline that documents the alternate universe in which Clinton was sworn in as prez this year rather than Trump.  Who gets banned who wasn't banned IRL and vice versa?  Who is posting more or less than RL?  What are the forum memes in Clinton's America, Part 2?

I think I would be posting more if Hillary had won because I pretty much ignore the US General Discussion thread now since it is a giant anti-Trump hysteria zone.  Maybe I would have been more vocal on 2018 and certainly the 2020 primaries too.

[The Arizonan]

I thought that she was amusing.

This makes it very difficult for first-time offenders to avoid becoming repeat offenders, as the only general advice they can give you upon return is something to the effect of "don't be yourself", because even they don't yet know what will end up being justifiable ban material for you in the future. It's why so many people who get temp-bans are then permabanned within one to two months of their return.

It's far more common for people to be banned for repeated infractions than it is for them to be banned for just a single one-off sin.  For those in the first group, yes, I'm often not sure what else to say other than "don't be yourself", because "yourself" is quite often the problem.  E.g., when the jmfcst ban was being debated, and someone asked if he should be given another temp ban, I asked what the temp ban warning would even look like other than "stop acting like jmfcst", since his entire persona is what people found problematic.

People come back from tempbans and then end up getting permabanned because the personality characteristics that sparked their original behavior don't die out because of the tempban.

On another forum, I got permabanned just for calling a moderator a "forum nazi" for announcing that he was going to delete a harmless thread. That is some unfair moderation. If it was a months-long ban, it would have been a different matter. It's not like I posted links to porn or something egregious.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Now that I realize that the Scalise attack was politically motivated, her attitude about it actually sounds downright sinister. Utter HP.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Trump's victory seemed to drive her over the edge.  And she's not alone in that.  Presumably, ag would still be posting here if Clinton had won.  And of course, IceSpear would still be posting if Clinton had won.

     While the coining of the phrase and the reaction to it by the left are both politically motivated and cannot be extricated from these origins, I have seen far too many liberals (including some who were previously quite level-headed) both here and IRL go nuts in the manner you allude to to suppose that Trump Derangement Syndrome is not a real thing. At the same time there are still plenty of good Democratic posters, so I can't say why some people were affected and some weren't.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Evergreen has been one of my most hated posters since I began posting here.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Trump's victory seemed to drive her over the edge.  And she's not alone in that.  Presumably, ag would still be posting here if Clinton had won.  And of course, IceSpear would still be posting if Clinton had won.

Frankly, I was expecting much stronger collective reaction. It's surprising so few people, relatively speaking, left or went nuts.

[Badger]

Not the best, but far from the worst, and occasionally good. Not aware of what she was banned for, so I can't intelligently comment on that.