Should have added before I sent...Substack is pretty committed to non-censorship. NO platform is censorship-free but we want the platforms that only engaged in pre-woke censorship, which is only those miscreants who get REALLY out of hand.
Should have added before I sent...Substack is pretty committed to non-censorship. NO platform is censorship-free but we want the platforms that only engaged in pre-woke censorship, which is only those miscreants who get REALLY out of hand.
Just checked him out, briefly, esp the exchange where he called you asinine and without evidence & you said you'd never make the mistake of reading/responding to him again. Checking out his profile (briefly) it looks like he actually does produce his own work and engage actively on SS. He sure does look like a mega-putz but I don't know, is he truly a troll? There are intellectual wankers everywhere who dispute everything, demand ridiculous amounts of evidence, make crazy claims etc. but I don't count them as trolls, customarily, if they're actually contributing with original material. Of course, he could be both, I don't know. I didn't look too closely. But mega-putz, for sure. Yeah, SS needs blocks. I don't consider blocking others censorship. Sometimes you do it for your mental health, and some do it because they're intellectual p**sies. I blocked India Willoughby, some big-name TA from England the other day on Twitter, because she got snarky with me over something or other but didn't allow me to respond. So I retweeted the exchange and tagged her saying I was blocking this person because she was a coward for not letting people respond. She's not a troll IMO but I don't engage with cowards.
He’s a troll. Read more than one of his posts. He has this nutty position that male and female only apply after puberty and that prepubescent children and postmenopausal women have no sex. The host of that SS has a doctorate in biology; Steersman has a two year vocational degree and zero biology.
But. He writes the same words, phrases, sentences and whole paragraphs over and over. He is not only repetitive, but condescends to everyone since everyone thinks his hobbyhorse is absurd. He works in little bits of Latin and endless links to create an intellectual impression which is then demolishes with his ridiculous biology. If you actually read his links you'll see that he has misrepresented and rewritten them, and they do not support his thesis.
And he's been doing this for six years.
The repetition is trolling; the condescension is trolling; posting the same two links to some journal literally hundreds of times is trolling. Calling his bizarre idea “standard biological definitions” in every single post is trolling.
Should have added before I sent...Substack is pretty committed to non-censorship. NO platform is censorship-free but we want the platforms that only engaged in pre-woke censorship, which is only those miscreants who get REALLY out of hand.
It does need a block feature. It has trolls.
Read Reality’s Last Stand. Look for one “Steersman.” Classic stalker troll.
Just checked him out, briefly, esp the exchange where he called you asinine and without evidence & you said you'd never make the mistake of reading/responding to him again. Checking out his profile (briefly) it looks like he actually does produce his own work and engage actively on SS. He sure does look like a mega-putz but I don't know, is he truly a troll? There are intellectual wankers everywhere who dispute everything, demand ridiculous amounts of evidence, make crazy claims etc. but I don't count them as trolls, customarily, if they're actually contributing with original material. Of course, he could be both, I don't know. I didn't look too closely. But mega-putz, for sure. Yeah, SS needs blocks. I don't consider blocking others censorship. Sometimes you do it for your mental health, and some do it because they're intellectual p**sies. I blocked India Willoughby, some big-name TA from England the other day on Twitter, because she got snarky with me over something or other but didn't allow me to respond. So I retweeted the exchange and tagged her saying I was blocking this person because she was a coward for not letting people respond. She's not a troll IMO but I don't engage with cowards.
He’s a troll. Read more than one of his posts. He has this nutty position that male and female only apply after puberty and that prepubescent children and postmenopausal women have no sex. The host of that SS has a doctorate in biology; Steersman has a two year vocational degree and zero biology.
But. He writes the same words, phrases, sentences and whole paragraphs over and over. He is not only repetitive, but condescends to everyone since everyone thinks his hobbyhorse is absurd. He works in little bits of Latin and endless links to create an intellectual impression which is then demolishes with his ridiculous biology. If you actually read his links you'll see that he has misrepresented and rewritten them, and they do not support his thesis.
And he's been doing this for six years.
The repetition is trolling; the condescension is trolling; posting the same two links to some journal literally hundreds of times is trolling. Calling his bizarre idea “standard biological definitions” in every single post is trolling.
Colin won’t ban anyone. SS needs a block feature.