Poll: Should Cornfed be banned?

[Man With a Plan]

Not really. CF uses red herrings/strawmen and ad hominems often in his debates. He is not "correct in everything he says" nor is he articulate. With free speech you're going to make a trade-off, and the trade-off is that you're giving up stability and progress for an all-is-fair-game community. Which isn't a bad thing in and of itself. It's a bad thing depending on what you seek. Is it bad in this context? Well, yes, because the forum is about how to get overseas and maybe see what foreign women have to offer, and with narratives that CF and his gang often post, that focus is removed. Look at how often he and CE would bicker like girls (despite CE saying multiple times he "would put the race trolls on ignore and be done with them"). Got to a point where CE got himself banned for being a b!tch, making me have to actually defend a Nazi piece of shit like Cornfed. That said, publicdude is right about one thing and that's that Cornfed isn't the sole issue here. I vote yes on his ban, BUT I also say don't stop there.

[Darrell_Johnston]

Not really. CF uses red herrings/strawmen and ad hominems often in his debates.

Funny its not only me who says that

I have called him out on that many a time. He makes no point or argument, but accuses the person of making no point....even when its repeated several times.

And his views on women are weird and creepy....he's an eliot roger type.

Get him out. He is a waste of space here.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Not really. CF uses red herrings/strawmen and ad hominems often in his debates.

Funny its not only me who says that

I have called him out on that many a time. He makes no point or argument, but accuses the person of making no point....even when its repeated several times.

And his views on women are weird and creepy....he's an eliot roger type.

Get him out. He is a waste of space here.

He's a troll with no apparent purpose nor joy in his life.

The sooner you place him on your "ignore list," the better.

[Cornfed]

Not really. CF uses red herrings/strawmen and ad hominems often in his debates.

Funny its not only me who says that

I have called him out on that many a time. He makes no point or argument, but accuses the person of making no point....even when its repeated several times.

And his views on women are weird and creepy....he's an eliot roger type.

Get him out. He is a waste of space here.

He's a troll with no apparent purpose nor joy in his life.

The sooner you place him on your "ignore list," the better.

Oh come on (and I know you're reading this), this Darrell_Johnson guy is a troll that even you can recognise, but you are pretending not to and you know it. This is unbecoming of even you.

[Darrell_Johnston]

He's a troll with no apparent purpose nor joy in his life.
The sooner you place him on your "ignore list," the better.

When you say it like that, it made me think.

I think I will change my vote, your comment made me realize that its not good to not have any joy or purpose in life, if this is true then I think he should stay, because if arguing with people gives him joy, then who are we to starve him of what he needs?. I no longer want him to go.

[Moretorque]

I don't call him Corny the Great for no reason.

[Winston]

Proposal about the Cornfed problem:

Maybe we should put all of Cornfed's racist and violence supporting threads against blacks in the NSFW section? That may be a start in lowering Google penalties against this site. However, even if we did that, there's still the problem that in the Anti-American women rants board, there are countless many threads ranting about AW. Should we put that whole board into the NSFW section too? Would that repair the Google penalties for hate speech on this site? What do you guys think?

[Cornfed]

Proposal about the Cornfed problem:

Maybe we should put all of Cornfed's racist and violence supporting threads against blacks in the NSFW section? That may be a start in lowering Google penalties against this site. However, even if we did that, there's still the problem that in the Anti-American women rants board, there are countless many threads ranting about AW. Should we put that whole board into the NSFW section too? Would that repair the Google penalties for hate speech on this site? What do you guys think?

It won't do you any good because Google and the other tech companies will punish absolutely any non-mainstream political or esoteric content. No amount of adherence to the party line short of 100% is good enough. People on Youtube have noticed that even using the word "coronavirus" causes the algorithm to punish their channel. However, if you don't believe me the obvious thing to do would be to have an entire NSFW section and put boards like the Anti-AW board and Racial board there. Moving a few threads won't make any difference. But generally you have to just accept that the bad guys don't want independent political content to be viewed and want the Internet to consist of mainstream tv content, cat videos and ugly trannies showing girls how to wear makeup.

[HenryGeorge]

Proposal about the Cornfed problem:

Maybe we should put all of Cornfed's racist and violence supporting threads against blacks in the NSFW section? That may be a start in lowering Google penalties against this site. However, even if we did that, there's still the problem that in the Anti-American women rants board, there are countless many threads ranting about AW. Should we put that whole board into the NSFW section too? Would that repair the Google penalties for hate speech on this site? What do you guys think?

It won't do you any good because Google and the other tech companies will punish absolutely any non-mainstream political or esoteric content. No amount of adherence to the party line short of 100% is good enough. People on Youtube have noticed that even using the word "coronavirus" causes the algorithm to punish their channel. However, if you don't believe me the obvious thing to do would be to have an entire NSFW section and put boards like the Anti-AW board and Racial board there. Moving a few threads won't make any difference. But generally you have to just accept that the bad guys don't want independent political content to be viewed and want the Internet to consist of mainstream tv content, cat videos and ugly trannies showing girls how to wear makeup.

Pretty much...

[Yohan]

Proposal about the Cornfed problem:
Maybe we should put all of Cornfed's racist and violence supporting threads against blacks in the NSFW section?
.....
even if we did that, there's still the problem that in the Anti-American women rants board...

I don't think this might result in any difference of rating this forum.

It is already misogynist if there are comments about AW are not good marriage material and the US-male should look abroad for a suitable wife/girlfriend - this brings already radical feminists into action, calling this forum a place about how to find an Asian doormat, a site for mail-order-brides sold by her parents who are full of drugs and sold her helpless daughter to an wife beater and similar BS etc.

Cornfed's few comments about black people will not change anything about the reputation of this forum.

Some comments from him are truly racist (ALL black people are animals etc.) and make no sense at all, some other content is fairly true but exaggerated, similar to comments from Mercury.

Some other comments from Cornfed have the only problem, that they are not politically correct by US-standards (2 % of young black people commit 50 percent of all crimes in USA) but I firmly think, he should be allowed to post them.

However which threads of Cornfed are 'violence promoting'?

BTW, easy access for trolls, sockpuppets, spammers etc. is also a reason to rate a site lower ....
and also unsecure internet connection...

You might shut out any visitor, who is NOT registered, if you disable the guest option to prevent any not-registered person to read this forum...
Insist during sign-up that all new members have to register and to post a first comment into the 'Introduce yourself' section etc.

But otherwise Not much what you can do about, except you change the entire forum into a religious web-page - there is a guy who did that...Rooshv - a forum for Christian men... but I hope, you have no intention to do that...

[Winston]

Even if there were not racist or anti-AW posts here, and every post was all politically correct, there's still the problem that Google likes to deflate independent websites and only promote big corporate sites or big social media sites. So that would still bring us down anyway. So there are multiple factors going against this site. Nowadays, Google seems to like to promote big social media sites like LinkediN and Pininterest ahead of others. It doesn't care about quality content, only about big sites and "authoritative content" meaning some big corporation or government agency is behind it. Or big websites that conform to established views like Wikipedia. So even without any taboo content, we'd still be demoted.

[Winston]

Well it looks like according to the poll, most people prefer Cornfed to stay and not be banned.

Anyhow, I've changed the poll to allow revoting. So if you already voted and wish to change your mind about Cornfed, you may do so by casting a different vote above.

[Shemp]

Also posted in the banning announcement thread:

Faithful old CE, always backing up his Massa, just like his house negro ancestors no-doubt looked down on white yeomen going about their business. I wonder if the dogs of rich men have that outlook. The cats surely do, but that is cats being cats, just like CE is a bred slave being a slave.

In case Cornfed is reading this thread, the problem is not the above paragraph per se, since CE is indeed something of an Uncle Tom, finally rewarded with a nice pension after 30 long years of faithful servitude doing the bidding of his masters. Rather, it's that Cornfed doesn't acknowledge that for every 1 black "house nigga", there's 10 whites who are even worse ass kissers, suck-ups, toadies, sycophants, bootlickers, lickspittles, etc. The very richness of the English language to describe these time-serving pension grubbers is testimony to their pervasiveness.

In other words, stop focusing on skin color, which is a trivial superficial bodily characteristic at the level of eye color, or height, or head shape, etc, and focus on character, culture, etc. And stop harping exclusively on inner city Ebonics culture, since this is surely but one of many lower class cultures that you find disgusting.

[Moretorque]

Winston you claim this site is about free speech.... He used to be much more racist actually....

[StanfordGuy]

Lol, he should have been corrected a long time ago. But it's kinda too late now... your forum has been pretty much delisted from Google :/