To Ignore or not to Ignore?

No you're not. You're fighting with Pep. This entire thread is, from the very first posting, about Pep.

Please, Phil, just leave be.

I know that Rhonda removed some of her post contents but she didn't remove the posts - which would have been pointless because they'd already been quoted.

You wish. If you can't produce the evidence (a quote) it didn't happen, and I can tell you that it didn't happen.

No, that's not the issue, Pap. Your death is what we're talking about, and it's a very suitable topic for such a nice sunny day - all very pleasant . . . I prefer you to die by firing squad, because (1) I can be there to watch it, (2) lots of other interested people can be there to watch it,

Every teacher worth their salt will tell you that the thing the attention-seeking playground tease, clown, straight-out bully or sociopath hates most of all is being ignored. As difficult as it is to do, it's the only strategy that works time and again.

Search the forum for posts made by Rhonda with the word cancer in them.

The incident happened back in mid-Sept, yet the oldest post of Rhonda's that has 'cancer' in it is early Nov.

They are both guilty of deleting posts that give info on how the whole incident happened.
.

Is that sufficient evidence of you expressing a wish that I should die?

Pep (You are obviously being overcome by the same sort of mental malaise as your poisonous protegee.)

if this thread becomes bothersome to a reader, that reader can choose to stop reading this thread.

and i think this thread is very much about Ignore vs Not to Ignore vs ARing and is very valid. the personal potshots aimed at inciting a reaction are simply giving topical examples of why these options are even being discussed.

There are times when putting someone on the ignore list is beneficial to a person, and sometimes to the forum as a whole. One such time was when I eventually put Colette on my ignore list (there was nobody else on it), and the forum noticably quietened down. Prior to that, it had been a hotbed of arguments. Me ignoring Colette was good for me and had a good effect on the forum as a whole.

But there can be times when putting someone on the ignore list can be bad for the forum as a whole. For the past few weeks, Pep has been coldy injecting poison into the forum in his crusade against Rhonda, and he continues to do it. Some people have suggested putting him on ignore, but what would that mean? It would mean simply allowing him to continue with the harrassment, without anyone saying anything against it. The result may be that another person is driven from the forum by the actions of one person, and I don't think that's very good.

Another option is to not respond to the poison, but that amounts to the same thing - allowing him to spread his harrassment with impunity.

A third option is to respond by pointing it out for what it is. But that has the effect of derailing threads, as we have seen, yet again, in a new thread today. It derails threads because it's exactly what he wants, and he responds with more of it - ad infinitum.

So, keeping quiet, either by using the ignore list, or by just not responding, allows him free reign to harrass another forum user for as long as he wishes, which appears to be permanently. On the other hand, responding in any way whatsoever gives him the opportunity to continue with it, which he likes. Either way, it's a win-win for him and a lose-lose for the forum as a whole.

He totally ignores everyone who suggests that enough is enough or asks him to stop. Other people's opinions mean nothing, however overwhelming they are.

If it bothers you, I suggest using the little red triangle icon at the bottom left of each of his 'poison' posts to report him for harrassing another forum user. Harrassment is one of the officailly stated reasons for reporting a post. I've done it twice so far, and I'll do it every time he injects his poison. With a bit of luck, something will be done to prevent him from continuing the harrassment.

If it doesn't bother you, remember that little story where, in the end, there was nobody left to speak for me.

he didn't wish for you to die. he simply said that when you do, this is how he'd like to see it played out, and that he would like to be witness. he did not wish you dead.

The unhighlighted part of this quote below are those sections of the OP that do not contain direct, named attacks on Pep. The highlighted parts do.

This thread was a deliberate provocation. I'm sorry, Phil, there's no other way to see it.

The unhighlighted part of this quote below are those sections of the OP that do not contain direct, named attacks on Pep. The highlighted parts do.

This thread was a deliberate provocation. I'm sorry, Phil, there's no other way to see it.

I see it differently. So you're wrong, there are other ways to see it.

Everybody dies in the end. Doctors have a 100% failure rate. Phil was expressing a wish for me to die prematurely by firing squad, rather than by the painful cancer which his protegee wished on me - although I seem to recall that she also suggested a pre-emptive bullet might be appropriate for me.

Pep (Of course both of them are suffering from virtual delusions, but both have expressed a wish to see me die; is that normal - I don't think so.)

The unhighlighted part of this quote below are those sections of the OP that do not contain direct, named attacks on Pep. The highlighted parts do.

This thread was a deliberate provocation. I'm sorry, Phil, there's no other way to see it.

Is that sufficient evidence of you expressing a wish that I should die?

Pep (You are obviously being overcome by the same sort of mental malaise as your poisonous protegee.)

Waterstar beat me to it - and said it better than I could. Why people respond to attention seekers, giving them the attention they're looking for, baffles me.

I cringe everytime someone responds to the usual trolls on this forum.

Sorry, but that won't do. You said that I wish death on you. Now quote where I wrote it, or zip it.

Out of interest, that quote was me expressing a preference as the way you would go and not a wish that you would actually go. English too hard for you?

The unhighlighted part of this quote below are those sections of the OP that do not contain direct, named attacks on Pep. The highlighted parts do.

This thread was a deliberate provocation. I'm sorry, Phil, there's no other way to see it.

Trying not to respond directly is an uphill battle, isn't it?

If no one reads or responds to the idiot's posts, then it doesn't really matter what it writes, does it?

If no one reads or responds to the idiot's posts, then it doesn't really matter what it writes, does it?

Pep (And she has poisoned *you* into wishing death on others as well; proving my point rather well. )

You wish. If you can't produce the evidence (a quote) it didn't happen, and I can tell you that it didn't happen.

he did, however, request a particular method.

*sigh*

Ok, well, clover it. Have fun, then, kids. I'm gone.

How's that for "over emotional," Pep?