Why is Tony Calderone continually posting inflammatory material?

Tony Calderone has posted numerous messages that are quite inflammatory and not suitable to a forum concerning rock climbing. Looking through some of these past threads it appears that he has been inundated with some fairly harsh words. Not nice. But regardless of how rude these other individuals are acting (it appears several of them have stopped posting so I'm assuming they have either gone back to their Sony Playstations or they have been banned from the site) it should not afford Tony Calderone a pulpit to push a right wing agenda. Trumpeting the war in Iraq, comparing bolt removal to a war, pushing his Christian agenda. I find it sickening and I am appalled at the administrators of this site. I'm not certain if it is true, but someone posted that Nathan Fisher is a very good friend of Calderone. He should seriously consider his objectivity in the performance of his job.

Looking at some of the past threads it would seem the Owner/Operator Andy Laakman only censors certain people. I'm guessing a right wing, Christian agenda is not only encouraged on this site but is promoted.

Mr. Gary Olsen, you are correct. Atlas is shrugging.

John Galt

Nathan Fisher is a great guy who is just trying to keep the peace. However, I wouldn't want to implicate him as being able to contain the Choperone.

Who is John Galt?

Ayn Rand? A character in Ayn Rand's novel? Did Gary Cooper play him in a bad movie? Is he like Kilroy? Is he an alter ego of someone who fancies himself a Russian-American Superman licking the boot of a Russian-American Superwoman who fancies herself a brilliant philosopher?

I don't usually break in on out of state threads, however I felt compelled to enter this one because I had a really shitty day.

Seriously folks, I've been reading these Wasatch threads for about two months ( Stiffler's Mom's Soap Opera, Cranial Prophylactic, etc.) and the one thing I have thought to myself is: if you took Tony Calderone out of the equation, would you have a problem--period?

John, nice troll

Tony Calderone writes:
"I know two people who personally volunteered to die for you. One volunteered to die for your soul. The other volunteered to die for your freedom. When you recognize who those people are they will speak to you. But don't expect them to say another word to you until then."

Mr. Calderone, the religious and war-mongering overtones are plain to see. Certainly there were people flaming you. I don't pretend to understand the convoluted threads that detail some sordid, ugly affair, but clearly they did not follow Guideline #1: don't be a jerk. However Mr. Calderone, you equal or surpass their crassness. By subjecting this site to your religious and political viewpoints you have debased yourself and the climbing community. You have violated Guideline #1: don't be a jerk.

I hope that you are man enough to apologize to the users of this website as well as the monitors of the website. I wait.

John Galt

John Galt = Jesus H. Christ = Satan = Jon Deaux

All the same person. And all accounts were created to provoke and troll (judging from the posts).

That violates rule #1.

John Galt, Jesus, and Satan have been deactivated. Jon Deaux is still active, so this user does still have a voice.

Andy Laakmann

Do you feel like a big man because you are in a position that you feel you have power over other people. As Bart Simpson put it " powerful weak." I personally do not find a problem with John Galt's comment's or any other's. I am speaking from a vantage point of an outsider and if people are trying to get to the root of the problem it seems very clear to let them do so. Why does humanity seem so compelled to determine what is right and what is wrong? Is there in your opinion an unfair advantage when someone uses a alias or do they still speak their mind just the same? I posted before and I stand by it.

This is a community. And this community has a simple rule.

Don't be jerk.

Creating multiple aliases with the intent to provoke is, by most people's standards, being a jerk. All I am doing is enforcing that rule. This is the 4th account this person has created in two days, and judging from the posts - each account was created to provoke and troll. This includes using two accounts to post simultaneously in the same thread (clearly that's to provoke).

To me, this seems like fair enforcement of a fair rule.
Andy

ps. and I volunteer my effort on this site in the hope people enjoy it, not to wield power.

tony outta be able to post ANYTHING HE WANTS
Its up to the climbing community, to avoid the thread!!!!
Wake up and smell the BOLTS !!!!!!!!!hahahahaha

John Galt wrote:Tony Caderone writes: "I know two people who personally volunteered to die for you. One volunteered to die for your soul. The other volunteered to die for your freedom. When you recognize who those people are they will speak to you. But don't expect them to say another word to you until then." Mr. Caderone, the religious and war-mongering overtones are plain to see. John Galt

Religious mongering? War mongering? HUH??? You gotta be kidding me....

Go away, "Mr. Galt"...just go away.

Andy

I do want to apologize to you and I am. I had an interesting day yesterday and I do not feel like I was justified for coming at you with the statements I did. Censorship is a touchy subject with a lot of people and I lost some of my composure. I do understand why you need to do what you do and I personally would not be able to make those decisions. I did not mean to come at you on a personal level.

Jimn

dreed - If Tony should be able to post anything he wants then shouldn't John Galt, Jesus H. Christ, Satan, etc? If you don't like it then don't read it, right? Too bad it's not that simple.

Jimn Seiler wrote:Andy Laakmann Do you feel like a big man because you are in a position that you feel you have power over other people.

Jimn, you're missing the point. Andy, let me know if I'm inaccurate in saying that the point of this site is to provide a community resource for discussion and information sharing about climbing in a non-offensive manner. It's uncool you say things like this to the people who have invested their time and money (and I'm sure that equates into tens of thousands of $ in professional services and cash at this point) into making this kick-ass site available to the public, such as yourself.

Jimn Seiler wrote: Is there in your opinion an unfair advantage when someone uses a alias or do they still speak their mind just the same? I posted before and I stand by it.

I don't believe there's any recognized country on planet earth that allows someone to maintain two legal identities. If someone wants to say something publicly they ought to have the cohones to use their real account. Common sense dictates that.

As a public user of this public internet, yet private, resource (site), my interest is in maintaining it as a resource that climbers *desire* to use -- so that I have somewhere to go where there are other users. When people move from a debating format to a less-mature 'personal attack' or 'invoke personal attack' format, I believe the site tends to lose it's attraction to the average climber, on average.

Those individuals who violate the rule for three strikes -- I personally don't care if they're permanently banned from the site. In fact, that would be awesome. I think it's in the best interest of the site's longevity and usability for the rest of us (99% of the user population). Clearly, I'm self-serving.

EDIT: Jimn, saw your post that happened while I was posting mine. Cool on the apology.

Avery,

You made some statements about using your true identity. I understand where your coming from, because I use mine, or do I? Is there really an N on the end of my name because my Dad was a hippy and I have a twin brother and my Dad thought it would be great, Jim n Scott. Is my name even Jimn? That's the problem with the internet. I'm just glad I have a girlfriend and I don't have to use this thing to date.

I for one would be perfectly supportive of deleting all the threads of this sort regarding tony/etc... With the exception of one thread, they have nothing/nearly nothing to offer this guidebook. I have a feeling the gross majority hear want climbing data, not squabling.

As well as deleting any new threads that pop up related to this.

We're behind you Andy, thanks for your time and efforts.

We should go to the library and burn all the books we don't agree with also. Actually why stop there? I think anyone who has been a member of this site for more than a month and ranks less than 500 in point ranking should be banned from the site for not contributing.

Jimn Seiler wrote:Avery, You made some statements about using your true identity. I understand where your coming from, because I use mine, or do I? Is there really an N on the end of my name because my Dad was a hippy and I have a twin brother and my Dad thought it would be great, Jim n Scott. Is my name even Jimn? That's the problem with the internet. I'm just glad I have a girlfriend and I don't have to use this thing to date.

Ha. well, I personally don't have any issues with using a handle different from their name -- though in my book, leads to a bit less credibility. However, if you have *multiple* accounts for one human (say you are using handles 'Jimn Seiler' and 'Avery Nelson'... and then you're bipolar, too :), then the admins can typically determine that and it's unjustifiable.

As to Shawn's comment, I am personally more a fan of censoring an abusive and uncooperative individual from the site temporarily or permanently, rather than altering or removing a person's postings/comments. Afterall, it is a *privilege* to use this site, and the admins have better stuff to do with their time (i.e. climb) than read every thread.

I'm out. Have a good weekend.

Andy Laakmann wrote:John Galt = Jesus H. Christ = Satan = Jon Deaux All the same person. And all accounts were created to provoke and troll (judging from the posts). That violates rule #1. John Galt, Jesus, and Satan have been deactivated. Jon Deaux is still active, so this user does still have a voice.

The truth is revealed.
And those are only the obvious ones. There are still other ways to hide your identity that are undetectable by the administrators. John Galt was not only hiding something... he was not very good at it.

Whoever I am... I have not provoked anyone.
Whoever Carrie is... she has not provoked anyone.
Andy Laakmann calls it not "being a jerk".
I call it "being civil".
No matter what we call it people are breaking the rule and there are a bunch of climbers on here (including me) who want it to end because it ruins the site. All we are asking you to do is stop being a jerk. If all you guys just ignore (or simply say you disagree with) people (such as Tony or Carrie or Nathan or whoever) this site would be a lot better.

Andy Laakmann wrote:Creating multiple aliases with the intent to provoke is, by most people's standards, being a jerk. All I am doing is enforcing that rule. This is the 4th account this person has created in two days, and judging from the posts - each account was created to provoke and troll. This includes using two accounts to post simultaneously in the same thread (clearly that's to provoke).

Jason Himick wrote:I can't believe I just read this whole thread. Why does this thread even exist? This is not the public square. You do not have any rights here. This is Andy's House, his rules; if you don't like them don't visit. I support any censorship that Andy exercises here (Amen Shawn). And in my opinion, he has been very tolerant of a lot of unnecessary BS.

I 2nd that. And I don't take offense at the "Amen" even though I'm an Atheist. LOL

Shawn Shannon wrote:I for one would be perfectly supportive of deleting all the threads of this sort regarding tony/etc... With the exception of one thread, they have nothing/nearly nothing to offer this guidebook. I have a feeling the gross majority hear want climbing data, not squabling. As well as deleting any new threads that pop up related to this. We're behind you Andy, thanks for your time and efforts.

I 3rd that, too.

James Garrett wrote:How is this being a jerk on my part?

Did Tony ever say you were being a jerk for asking a question? Did Tony ever say you were being a jerk for doing anything?