[Ben Cranklin]

Ben Cranklin, on 28 November 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Well...that escalated quickly. :huh:

MTP Reggie, on 28 November 2018 - 04:36 PM, said:

Quick! Get some jello, whipped cream and a kiddy pool!

Ben Cranklin, on 28 November 2018 - 05:38 PM, said:

Wouldja settle for a tranquilizer dart into the flank of the new woodland creature with the short fuse?

HardRightBambi, on 29 November 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

...I find myself no longer amused and certainly unwilling to pay for the experience further.Should RN elect to raise it's standards and quality control at a future date, I may consider future participation.Sincerely,Bambi

MTP Reggie, on 29 November 2018 - 10:38 AM, said:

Glad we could be of some use to you... <_<

But seriously, about that tranquilizer dart...

[zurg]

HardRightBambi, on 29 November 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

One does not achieve my degree of net worth

I find myself no longer amused

Sincerely,

Bambi

I tried to help things along but you can’t seem to get over yourself.

Shuffle off now. But just FYI, many people who weren’t among the originals (like me) are able to get along here just fine and get over periodic spats.

It’s no one’s fault but your own that you’re expecting people to kowtow to you. Just bugger off and shove that attitude wherever you want to.

Later.

[stick]

MTP Reggie, on 29 November 2018 - 11:11 AM, said:

You had Compuserve.

Probably.
And used Prodigy.

[Wag-a-Muffin (D)]

I apologize for causing Lisa to lose a paying customer.

This post has been edited by Wag-a-Muffin (D): 29 November 2018 - 03:44 PM

[Moderator T]

HardRightBambi, on 29 November 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

Dear Sir/Madam/Moderation Dept. (I note that you have no profile so once again, I'm forced to assume that you are what you present yourself to be, I should think that would be the wiser choice in hiding from online stalkers, all things considered)

Kindly, see that this information makes it up the chain of command, such as it is?

I find RightNation to be severely lacking in quality, especially for a pay site. I had expected better quality. In my limited time here, I've found some higher quality posters worthy of consistent notice but for the most part your population appears to be the equivalent of an early 90s era AOL teen chat room.

I would also suggest considering modification of the "America's #1 conservative community" banner in the interest of avoiding further misrepresentation. Perhaps setting a standard of quality for moderation as well? What might be expected of a paying customer in discovering a "moderator" masquerading as a 13 yro child replete with disclosed location, as an effective means of hiding from an alleged online threat? Where might there be logic in that? It's clearly a lack of judgement and without rationale. I should think both would reasonably exclude any candidate for a moderation position. At the very least, it suggests a quality control issue within RN management. It's no small wonder that RN has radical special interest running amok and terrorizing other paying clients. Yet calling a repulsive thing what it is is a violation of rules? RN's standards are duplicitous and disingenuine. A dishonest misrepresentation and a mockery of genuine conservatives. One does not achieve my degree of net worth by throwing good money after bad, therefore, I have cancelled my subscription to RN. I am wholly disappointed in the low grade quality of RN, it's lack of consistency and certainly with what I can only term as sheer stupidity in allowing anyone to masquerade as an underage minor with moderator's credentials, regardless of how long anyone has elected to pay for the regrettable experience. This is clearly misrepresentation as well as irresponsible.

I find myself no longer amused and certainly unwilling to pay for the experience further.
Should RN elect to raise it's standards and quality control at a future date, I may consider future participation.

Sincerely,

Bambi

Mod Note: RN's "management" consists of the site owner and two active global moderators. That's it. Ours is not a large site, so it doesn't need more than that. That said our membership is loyal and happy with the standard message board format that you seem to think is low quality. Regarding our rules, they work for us and are overall pretty relaxed for posters. Yes, it does allow liberal posters who abide by greater restrictions than the conservative members, but I believe that is one of our strengths. We aren't afraid of debate here.

You are of course welcome to move on to another site and post there. However, you have two realistic options, and I am active on both. One, a conservative owned site that is larger than ours. There you will find more conversation. Liberals are not allowed to post there, and instead the conservatives frequently turn on each other. Don't expect a warm welcome there and don't expect people to be friendly unless you agree with them 100% of the time. The other is a liberal owned massive social media site. It has some conservative pockets with rules protecting them. That said they often silence, shadow ban, or ban conservatives and conservative groups. What's more, as it is a massive social media site, expect to be relatively anonymous and expect to find zero sense of community at all.

Regarding what happened here, lets call it what it is: a massive overreaction. You made an understandable mistake and were called out. The person who could have taken offense chose not to and as an olive branch asked that everyone move on. That's really all you have to do. The membership here would have moved on and you could go on posting. In fact, you're still welcome to do so. Swallow your pride and go back to posting on topic and life will move on if you want it to. If not, I wish you the all the best wherever you go.

As for everyone else, lets get back on the topic of the thread and let this discussion end here.

[Ben Cranklin]

Whoops, sorry for prolonging.

Anyway, I posted this earlier in the thread and no one seemed to notice it, but I think it's pretty remarkable.

Ben Cranklin, on 28 November 2018 - 09:17 PM, said:

Their government may be one thing, but it seems like the Mexican people, themselves, really aren’t that bad.

I guess the Mexicans are anti-Hispanic racists, too?

[USNRETWIFE]

Ben Cranklin, on 29 November 2018 - 03:47 PM, said:

Whoops, sorry for prolonging.

Anyway, I posted this earlier in the thread and no one seemed to notice it, but I think it's pretty remarkable.



I guess the Mexicans are anti-Hispanic racists, too?

They must be racist!

[Wag-a-Muffin (D)]

USNRETWIFE, on 29 November 2018 - 11:49 AM, said:

Well. I don't know what the dust up is/was about and don't want to know. I like Bambi, like her blunt style, her way of "speaking" her mind. I, personally, will miss her.That said, I've "known" Wags since 2004. She is a good person and RN wouldn't be the same without her.Over the years, I have seen people I really like come and go. I miss them, but RN is home and here is where I will stay.

Thanks :hug:

[USNRETWIFE]

Wag-a-Muffin (D), on 30 November 2018 - 09:53 PM, said:

Thanks :hug:

I meant it, Wags. This place would not be the same without you. You are one of the kindest people here. :hug:

[Buckwheat Jones]

HardRightBambi, on 29 November 2018 - 10:23 AM, said:

Dear Sir/Madam/Moderation Dept. (I note that you have no profile so once again, I'm forced to assume that you are what you present yourself to be, I should think that would be the wiser choice in hiding from online stalkers, all things considered)

Kindly, see that this information makes it up the chain of command, such as it is?

I find RightNation to be severely lacking in quality, especially for a pay site. I had expected better quality. In my limited time here, I've found some higher quality posters worthy of consistent notice but for the most part your population appears to be the equivalent of an early 90s era AOL teen chat room.

I would also suggest considering modification of the "America's #1 conservative community" banner in the interest of avoiding further misrepresentation. Perhaps setting a standard of quality for moderation as well? What might be expected of a paying customer in discovering a "moderator" masquerading as a 13 yro child replete with disclosed location, as an effective means of hiding from an alleged online threat? Where might there be logic in that? It's clearly a lack of judgement and without rationale. I should think both would reasonably exclude any candidate for a moderation position. At the very least, it suggests a quality control issue within RN management. It's no small wonder that RN has radical special interest running amok and terrorizing other paying clients. Yet calling a repulsive thing what it is is a violation of rules? RN's standards are duplicitous and disingenuine. A dishonest misrepresentation and a mockery of genuine conservatives. One does not achieve my degree of net worth by throwing good money after bad, therefore, I have cancelled my subscription to RN. I am wholly disappointed in the low grade quality of RN, it's lack of consistency and certainly with what I can only term as sheer stupidity in allowing anyone to masquerade as an underage minor with moderator's credentials, regardless of how long anyone has elected to pay for the regrettable experience. This is clearly misrepresentation as well as irresponsible.

I find myself no longer amused and certainly unwilling to pay for the experience further.
Should RN elect to raise it's standards and quality control at a future date, I may consider future participation.

Sincerely,

Bambi

https://images-na.ss...415Zzeg9cNL.jpg

[Liz]

USNRETWIFE, on 30 November 2018 - 11:21 PM, said:

I meant it, Wags. This place would not be the same without you. You are one of the kindest people here. :hug:

I couldn't agree more. Wags is wonderful!

[Joe the Pagan]

Liz, on 01 December 2018 - 12:36 AM, said:

I couldn't agree more. Wags is wonderful!

+1

As Wag's toonning assistant I might be a little bias.

[Liz]

Joe the Pagan, on 03 December 2018 - 01:37 PM, said:

+1

As Wag's toonning assistant I might be a little bias.

Nah, I don't think you are and besides, you're wonderful too.

[Wag-a-Muffin (D)]

Joe the Pagan, on 03 December 2018 - 01:37 PM, said:

+1

As Wag's toonning assistant I might be a little bias.

:hug: