Furthermore, Glenn's posts are intentionally combative. He will consistently belittle the opinions of those who do not agree with him and will disregard evidence even when it is backed by hard facts or strong consensus. His presence on the forums seems to be intentionally disruptive.
Despite all this, Glenn continues to be a member and seems to not have been sanctioned in any meaningful way. I suspect that some part of this is simply that different ORCs have dealt with Glenn's threads at different times and are unaware of the pattern.
Is there any way to put Glenn up for review and request that his history of posting be assessed, rather than just his posts in an individual thread?
-SYB
If you click on "Glenn's" profile pic, it will take you to his profile page, wherein you will find an option to "report user." That should be what you're looking for.
Of course, if the mod's do nothing about it, that does tend to be their prerogative.
-SYB
Glenn appears to currently be suspended.
Hmm...
*click*click*search*clickettyclick*
Well, look at that. It was the guy I assumed you were talking about after all. What are the odds?
;)
Be as complete as possible. If someone is making a number of threads, don't click on one and just report "spam". We need the whole picture. Thanks!
Actually, as it turns out the question is moot. Glenn appears to currently be suspended.
-SYB
Personally I find Glenn fairly hilarious along with a couple others. The way I look at it is that even broken clocks can be right twice a day so sometimes they may say something interesting rather than the stuff that usually has me rolling on the ground laughing my butt off. I can also understand if you find him annoying, though.
I'm just glad I won't be subjected to that avatar any more.
Or the signature. If there is something that the ignore function here on the forums fails to do, it's blocking the huge distracting and non-sensical image signatures certain users like "Glenn" have.
Or the signature. If there is something that the ignore function here on the forums fails to do, it's blocking the huge distracting and non-sensical image signatures certain users like "Glenn" have.
Just turn on the Hide Signature under Forum Preferences in your profile.
Or the signature. If there is something that the ignore function here on the forums fails to do, it's blocking the huge distracting and non-sensical image signatures certain users like "Glenn" have.
Just turn on the Hide Signature under Forum Preferences in your profile.
I'd rather not do that for one poster only. Vast majority of the signatures on the site are just fine, and some are funny and useful.
Or the signature. If there is something that the ignore function here on the forums fails to do, it's blocking the huge distracting and non-sensical image signatures certain users like "Glenn" have.
Just turn on the Hide Signature under Forum Preferences in your profile.I'd rather not do that for one poster only. Vast majority of the signatures on the site are just fine, and some are funny and useful.
AdBlock Plus (Firefox plugin) can block specific images. I suspect other browsers have something similar.
As well, I find the situations Glenn's threads tend to create rather amusing. Not constructon in the slightest, but entertaining in a trainwreck sort of way.
I'm just glad I won't be subjected to that avatar any more.
What? His avatar is awesome! Frankly, it's his best feature.
Or the signature. If there is something that the ignore function here on the forums fails to do, it's blocking the huge distracting and non-sensical image signatures certain users like "Glenn" have.
Some forums have a blanket ban on images in sigs. I've always thought that was a good idea (much better than only banning those images some people find 'objectionable'). At the very least, I think it would be a good idea to rule that images in sigs (or sigs over a certain length) have to be sblocked.
And I was able to guess who "glenn" is on my first try.
Glenn appears to currently be suspended.
Hmm...
*click*click*search*clickettyclick*
Well, look at that. It was the guy I assumed you were talking about after all. What are the odds?
Same here. Lol. After reading the OP, I was thinking, "I wonder if 'Glenn' is offensive poster who came to my mind"
It was.
Glenn's suspension seems to have been temporary.
It always is. I don't think they do permabans here, or perhaps not anymore, since I do remember a poster who went through a good half dozen sockpuppet accounts.
I do know the poster in question and I do not think he has ill intent. Rather he has an annoying posting style and really bad argument habits. If you have a problem with his posts, I suggest you look up my guide stickied on the top of this forum.
And of course I would suggest that the poster in question do the same, as they have butted heads with other posters who where less than exemplary themselves and been burned by it.
I do not think he has ill intent.
For what it's worth, I completely agree. Actually, despite the fact that I immediately knew who the OP was referring to, I don't actually think "Glenn" has done anything remotely worthy of perma-banning. There are quite a few people who post on these forums who are far, far more annoying/unpleasant than he is.