Daggett,
A few points come to mind on your comment.

The quality of a topic is hardly the justification being a disruptive pest.
It isn’t mandatory to respond to every topic. Therefore there is an argument for some action at the time by the editor. Consider of course he/she is not obliged to tell you of it or are they obliged to do anything if they feel it isn’t warranted.

The other issue is the multiple user IDs game as was noted. This too is against the spirit of the site. Perhaps GrahamY can add an IP exclusion algorithm to eliminate multiple user IDs to the same user or multiple user IDs posting to the same topic.

Bronwyn, Chainsmoker
I have suggested that GrahamY consider the indented system used by http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/ would help commenters follow threads and sub threads. This can then isolate the pest, allow for asides without affecting the flow of the thread. I have seen similar structures in overseas sites.

I’ve also suggested they simplify the way that OLO presents their topics i.e. One click brings up all pages of an article and all its comments rather than the current multiple clicks.
Good natured banter between posters during discussion is one thing but I absolutely disagree with sarcastic shots at someone with whom you disagree. These are often inflammatory and usually spiteful.

One big US site has a user demerit system If a user posts a “not quite bad enough post”, trolling, hijacking etc and gets multiple complaints the editor may issue demerits with explanation privately at log on. Each successive group of complaints incurs demerits to a predetermined limit within a set time frame, until suspension or cancellation of account is automatically imposed. This allows for different levels of unacceptable behaviours and those who deliberately skate on the edge. (like drivers licences.
I think the implementation of these suggestions if policed would clean up your (our) issues and the site without being too overbearingly controlled. Good manners are never impediments to expressing ideas.

Oh come on! There are two types of people...? Ha! Sure.

To me, this is a 'we're the good kids now let's sit in a circle and make special rules to try and exclude the naughty ones.' Well, if you want to do that, build your own Island. Some of the disruptive posters are frankly infinitely more entertaining than you Tsk Tsk, isn't that all terribly uncivilised mob.

Sure, ignore people you don't want to respond to. But I am sure that certain posters would be absolutely lost without having these naughty posters as a platform to lord their pseudo-intellectualism and make condescending remarks. I think they'd have no other reason to get up in the morning if it wasn't for this.

Houellebecq

"Oh come on! There are two types of people...? Ha! Sure. To me, this is a 'we're the good kids now let's sit in a circle and make special rules to try and exclude the naughty ones.'"

I hope you're not referring to my comment about there being two different groups, because you're completely off the mark if you are. The distinction you've outlined here is totally different to the one I made, and that made by examinator too for that matter. I think an apology might be in order, or at least a closer reading of the thread in future and a more careful choice of wording.

"I think they'd have no other reason to get up in the morning if it wasn't for this."

This is the second time I've observed you making this condescending type of remark, and yet I notice you seem to be here as much as any of the rest of us!

Oh don't get your knickers in a twist Bronwyn. I apologise profusely. For the first line of my post anyway. Don't link the two comments as you have in your response. I change the subject when I change paragraphs.

I stand by my second paragraph, and it was not directed specifically at you.

Then, third paragraph, 'no other reason to get up in the morning', I am talking about what I like to term the PolyBoaz chasers. CJ comes to mind. As I said. I think he's in love he's so obsessed. I don't remember you being as infatuated.

hi to all out their , i came to this site by accident a year or so ago , and i have put comments down proberly not relating to the thread not in an attempt to highjack the thread but to put my opinion across

i was once booted of here for a couple of weeks by graem young ,thats right i can not spell, sometime last year

that reason being that my post were being to honest for him to let a post article be made ,

this is a good site to get things off your chest and in hope that some politicians will give real answers to what has been writing

as you can not tell me that the goverment of parliment are not aware of this site and the forum contents

ive agreed on a lot of things and dissagreed on a lot

but my most passion is that of getting justice for us victims whome were raped and abused and neglected in the states run institutions of new south wales of which this state goverment N.S.W still cover up till this day also that of the prime ministers department they know of this abuse we victims suffered is real and true but are yet to stand up and addmitt the truth of what we suffered while under the states control from the 30's till the time we are in now

the goverment is corupt we all know this they have been covering up cases like mine for over 30 years

lets see some justice for once

regards huffnpuff im real and don't hide behind other names as a lot are aware of

hope you all had a good new year

Dear Examinator (and Foxy)

the problem is in the perception and..in the position.

"posters that regularly post their
hate-filled same subject"

Does it occur to you that 'other' posters place information on line here which could have a devastating personal impact on real people in this community and/or support those who wish real world harm on people? (Jews especially)
and...further..that those challenging such postures are doing so do avoid such 'hate filled' behavior against Australian citizens.

Does it also occur to the usual suspects that one persons 'hate filled' message is another mans 'voice of truth'.... and there is always a simple solution to determine which it is.. reasoned, lengthy and exhaustive debate to the bitter end.

You see if a person posits that 'religion x teaches such and such' and it just so happens to involve violence, child abuse and spousal abuse.. it is not only irrational to say 'ur hate filled' it is also insulting.

To adopt such attitudes in place of reasoned rational fact based debates..and to stone wall others when the facts get in the way of one's own sentimentally held (but philosophically questionable)position.... is well.. not exactly healthy.

Examminator.. what you really want here is "information and thought control" you thinly disguise it in the form of a 'progressive/reformist' agenda..but it is still Orwellian.

As for me..I have no "hidden" agenda..it's right out there for all to see.
-No to Multi Culturalism/YES to "Australian" citizen development.
-No to the intrusion of Islam into our legal/cultural fabric.
-Yes to the freedom to expose skunks as skunks.(and to be called one)
-No to 'Human Rights' as they are *interpreted* by those usually promoting them.. which is always in a leftist 'progressive' (debauched) values based direction.
-No to anyone promoting or celebrating any person who engaged in genocide, sexual abuse of women and children, and who calls for world dominion.

If anyone has a problem with that *agenda* them I'm sorry..it's not negotiable for me at least.