Ecology and behaviour of manatees

[DrVolin]

I have had the feeling for a while that Hugh doesn't usually respond to reasonably stated questions and doesn't generally engage in much actual debate, but that he responds very strongly when personally attacked. The numbers are in. In two recent threads (War Whores and Elevator of Death), Hugh responds respectively to 15/8 and 10/22 posts that attack him personally in some way, and only responds to 1/20 and 5/30 posts that address or mention him but don't contain a personal insult. He responds even less often when the post does not address or metion him at all (1/12 and 1/36).

In his own threads, the best way to stop Hugh is to post without addressing or mentioning him. A close second is to try to engage him in reasoned debate on his specific claim or his general theory. The best way by far of keeping him going is to attack him personally. I know from personal experience that he almost never responds to well framed questions free of invective or aggressiveness.

Since the 'one KWH post per non-Hugh thread' rule went into effect, it is hard to do the same analysis for other people's threads. But if anyone has suggestions for non Hugh threads in which he famously intervened, I'll be glad to collect the same data and evaluate quantitatively the level of disruption he causes on the board. So far, I don't see much there. I didn't count it precisely, but going through those threads, I estimate that the cycle of personal attacks involves Hugh and maybe 4 or 5 other posters at most.

[barracuda]

Your analysis demonstrates conclusively that Hugh is a troll-like construct, designed primarily for lulz-battle. My only question is, what is the true scope of that construct?

The conduct of the board wrt username Hugh has been such lately that I've been inclined to give him much more slack than usual. Nordic is out of line here. Anyone who can cause me to actively sympathise with the Blubber Beast is fucking up. Let's not allow the water-mammal to get away with exceeding his KWHJ maximum per non-Hugh thread.

[DrVolin]

Yes, given those numbers, I think the rule is appropriate.

[Bruce Dazzling]

I just gave Nordic a formal warning.

[barracuda]

I think that's good. That was the primary reason I pasted an anti-diagnostic warning label onto the the manatee meta thread.

[Jeff]

I received this from HCE - remember HCE? - this morning:

Well, i logged out several years ago, intending to never return.

Why? Because of Hugh Manatee. I grew weary of his derailing and dominating threads. The Language...DNA thread is a classic example. I really thought after several years he would have shit on enough people, and interfered with their freedom to the point that he'd have finally been given the boot. Nope.

The utter lack of respect, and level of contempt is appalling. And there is no reasoning with him either. further more, his method of distraction is a weak, poor man's version of the CIA tactics he alleges.

Having said that, I'll log out again, and check back in a few more years. Maybe the Manatee will have an unfortunate boat propeller accident, freeing the rest of us from his tyranny.

[DrVolin]

I do remeber HCE. Good contributor. I also miss Attack Ships on Fire. At the same time, I can't quite understand how a poster can get under their skin to such an extent. But obviously, it happens.

[barracuda]

Because of Hugh Manatee.

Yeah, that's a bit of a pisser. Sympathy for Hugh = once again approaching zero. Especially after the complete troll-job he machinated on New Years eve.

[Jeff]

In context of Hugh and with HCE in view, I posted a reminder about the neglected "foe" function:

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board2/ ... =8&t=33814

[barracuda]

Oh dear. Why do I get the feeling that thread was ocassioned by my alerts last night? I should have just suspended his account for continuing to post in the DNA thread. He's had his chances there. If he decides to do it again tonight, he's going to meet my little friend, I'm afraid.

[DrVolin]

There are rules. Everyone knows them, including Hugh.

[Jeff]

Especially Hugh.

And the alerts help. Keep 'em coming. Besides, the mods don't really have the privilege of ignoring anyone.

[DrVolin]

I've been PM'ing people instead of posting reports when I see abusive posts, and having good success getting them to moderate themselves and turn down the heat. I must admit though that I haven't done this with Hugh himself. Perhaps because I have no hope that it would work. I will use reports if I see him get abusive.

[Jeff]

FWIW, I pointed HCE towards our "foe" function, and he says he's rethinking his extended leave. He's also happily surprised to know he's remembered and missed.

[Peregrine]

As much as I think it's rather thin-skinned to leave in a huffy over another poster, I also do not take well to HMW (and honestly, I do like the bloke, even though he's a tad nutter!) referring to barracuda as a liar. Rather than warn him (he's had quite a few already) whattya suppose we do? Chastising seems pointless, he knows the rules.
I'm slightly inebriated. Ignore the misspelling....