I suppose the editors at the HelenaIR decided enough was enough. The comments are WAY down and it appears that most of the regulars are gone. This is likely due to a mass banning. As “Michael” said in a comment under my previous posting, he was banned. He’s probably not alone. I received a email from “James” and he said that he was banned too. He also said he created a new new account which was banned a few hours later. He was more creative in his next incarnation and, apparently, is still allowed to make comments.
So, it looks like instead of outright doing away with commenting, as the Billings Gazette did, they are just cleaning house and cracking down. If this means that the purveyor of idiocy (we know who you are) is banned, then we’ll consider our efforts properly rewarded. Many of the other “regulars” also appear to be silenced: Max, MtMadeMan, twangs, Darth, etc.
This is no loss since it’s not like we aren’t active in many other venues.
Since deitz1963 got booted, we’ll mark this up as a major win. After all, he only has himself to blame. He was the one who kept bugging the editors about what was going on in the comments.
It’s not difficult to miss how calm things are on the HelenaIR the past few days. The rancor is low as is the volume of comments. Most of the comments appear to be on topic and level of sniping is about nil.
What has changed?
It appears to be the disappearance of dietz1963. If anyone were to challenge the idea that dietz1963 was the cause of most of the troubles on that site, the peacefulness present in his absence is pretty good evidence to support that.
Of course, he could reappear and tell us how he just had another case of whooping cause, an excuse he used when PaulMont called him out and wanted a face-to-face. Time will tell whether it’s a cough or if the editors had enough of of his game, not to mention his whining to them about how everyone was bullying him.
In his last comment he said to James, “What goes over your head is, you will never out me nor break me which is your goal.”
It’s pretty obvious, considering all the time dietz1963 was proven wrong by me and others, and now his running away, or being sent to his room, that this is just another one of his claims that is false.
I received an email from a regular commenter on the HelenaIR that told him someone was complaining about his comments and was demanding that he be banned from that site. He said that he answered this by sending a long list of site violations (name-calling, trolling, lies, etc.) that the complainant had committed. Evidently the site owner is somewhat understanding.
That raises the issue of freedom of speech. Yes, we know that does not apply to a non-governmental web site, but in principle, anyone who supports the First Amendment should support it everywhere. This complainer to the HelenaIR certainly does not and this individual claims he is a veteran.
What the Whiner of Helena is upset about is, as has been well-documented here, is that he cannot mount a rational argument about ANYTHING and and is repeatedly pummeled and rounded beaten with the Stick of Logic. What is worse, for him, is that he discloses lots of personal information about himself and this is ultimately used against him.
Here’s some recent dialog, probably what led to his most recent sniveling to the editors.
One would think that after all this time, some people would learn the lesson that’s been brought down on them over and over, but not Michael Di/dietzq963.
He’s repeatedly been school on the rule of logic that it is impossible to prove a negative, yet he still hangs on to this fallacy as a talisman.
On this thread, he asks James to help him prove his claim that James had a deferment from the draft. James effectively falsifies him and does so several times, disassembling dietz1963’s “deductive reasoning” is several swoops.
Bill Bentley Jan 26, 2017 9:51pm
I’m a vet and I don’t care. The M-16 sucked, as a private citizen I don’t plan to buy one nor do I care what the now issue. If I were in the service I would care, but then again I would not have a choice.
James Dagget Jan 28, 2017 11:26am
Bill said “…but then again I would not have a choice.”
Just like the many who didn’t have a choice about joining up in the first place. Do your time, do what you are told, get out and get on with life.
Michael Di Jan 29, 2017 7:16pm
The many that didn’t have a choice? You had a choice atheist, and you chose draft deferment so you could join in marches protesting the war.
James Dagget Jan 30, 2017 6:59am
Michael Di said “…you chose draft deferment so you could join in marches protesting the war.”
And you have evidence of this, sarge?
And why would one need a deferment in order to join a protest?
Michael Di Jan 30, 2017 9:48am
Its called “Deductive reasoning combined with logic” atheist and, you all but provided the proof in a statement. Quote from one of your posts: Bill, I hear you. I haven’t marched in a protest in quite a while but I did quite a few in the past. My first was the moratorium against the draft in fall of 1969.”
Moratorium, meaning suspension of an activity. This concludes that you had a draft deferment.
As a member of the armed services, one is not able to join in political protests so yes, you needed a draft deferment cause otherwise under the MCM you would have had some jail time.
James Dagget Jan 30, 2017 1:40pm
Michael Di said “Its called “Deductive reasoning combined with logic” atheist and, you all but provided the proof in a statement…..Moratorium, meaning suspension of an activity. This concludes that you had a draft deferment.”
Well, no. You see, child, “Moratorium” was the NAME of the nationwide protest against the draft and the war.
Consider your claim falsified, again.
You said “As a member of the armed services, one is not able to join in political protests so yes, you needed a draft deferment cause otherwise under the MCM you would have had some jail time.”
Gosh, you are lame. I didn’t have to be in the military when the protests took place. Both of those big ones took place in the fall of 1969. I could have been in high school when they took place. They didn’t issue draft deferments to high school students.
Care to keep playing? If I was you, I’d cash out.
Michael Di Jan 30, 2017 3:02pm
You saying my claims are falsified means less then nothing atheist. Prove you weren’t under draft deferment and please, don’t insult my intelligence by suggesting you may have been in high school. That’s just ridiculous.
James Dagget Jan 30, 2017 5:54pm
Michael Di said “You saying my claims are falsified means less then nothing atheist.”
But they are still falsified. You’ve been pwned and choaked on your “deductive reasoning.”
You said “Prove you weren’t under draft deferment and please, don’t insult my intelligence by suggesting you may have been in high school. That’s just ridiculous.”
It doesn’t have to be me. It could be anybody. According to your “reasoning” anyone protesting at those events had to have had a deferment.
That is illogical and idiotic.
You jumped the shark, again.
I wonder if this one will end up on that blog?
In what can only be describes as surreal, bizarre, and stupid, we have this. On this thread, Trump admin orders media blackout at EPA:
Max Major Jan 24, 2017 12:05pm
Michael Di Jan 24, 2017 1:07pm
Michael Di added the “Ban?” emoticon to the above comment. It continues:
Max Major Jan 24, 2017 2:10pm
So the blithering troll wants to pretend that his devotee trump is a racial category unto himself. Hilarious…probably the height of your intelligence right there.
I know your trolling…but I’m guessing you actually somewhere think it true too. There is no guessing about some people…but there’s plenty guessing about you Dietz.
Michael Di Jan 24, 2017 3:26pm
spewter, as I’ve said time and time again, your cyber bully skills don’t impress me.
OBTW, I have more intelligence under my pinkie toe then you have in that melon you call a head.
Max Major Jan 24, 2017 3:56pm
Sure you do dietz…you keep telling yourself that one. Your record stand all too well for itself.
Max Major Jan 24, 2017 2:13pm
And he’s forbidden agencies from speaking directly with congress…it’s big brother and the corporate take over rolled into the Kleptocracy of El Trumpo.
Oh, and thanks to Dietz below who’s claiming he’s an entirely separate race from us!
Michael Di Jan 24, 2017 3:30pm
Skooter, just where did I claim Trump is an entirely separate race? You just can’t help your lying streak, can you. But as you are a democrat, I understand. You wouldn’t know the truth if it was a nuke and you were ground zero.
Max Major Jan 24, 2017 3:55pm
Um dietz…are your family members hijacking your account again? You are the ditz that claimed me calling trump President Thin-Orange-Skin was a racist remark below….Or are you having those brown outs in your brain again
So you do understand what ‘race’ – the base word of ‘racist’ means right? On second though maybe you don’t since you misuse the word constantly.
Perhaps we need the ban emoticon for people that can’t even remember the dumb things they say…?
James Dagget Jan 25, 2017 6:54am
Max, I wondered who the “orange race” was. Looks like another example of taking a pejorative and tossing it out there without understanding the meaning.
So, let’s take a look at the heart of this mess by getting to root. Max said
to which Michael replied
Max challenges that the remark couldn’t be “racist” to which Michael says
“just where did I claim Trump is an entirely separate race”
Well, gee whiz Michael, when Max said “President thin-orange-skin!” and you identify it as a “Racist remark” what the heck else could you be doing other than claiming that orange is a race?
In a one-off at the HelenaIR, James Daggett unloaded on dietz1963 who has been particularly annoying recently with his false accusation, etc. This comment from Daggett, on this thread, pretty much lays out the problem we have always known about dietz1963.
James Daggett Jan 20, 2017 9:39am
In a “What does this have to do with the issue” moment, Michael Di said “…Not only are you the biggest hypocrite on here, but outside of James are the MASTER troll and definitely the king of misdirection, deception and projection.”
Michael, for you to accuse others of trolling IS hypocrisy. It is well-known that you don’t simply go and read the articles here but you go to the profiles of others users by clicking on their names (or you have them bookmarked) and step your way through their most recent comments.
How do we know this to be true? Because, AE inserted a commented in a long-dead thread, an article that was many months old, an article that did not appear on any of the current HelenaIR pages, and you inserted a snarky comment directed at AE on that old article. AE had set a trap as a test and you stepped right into it.
And, for you to label someone “the king of misdirection, deception and projection” is simply laughable. There is a blog out there that had documented and archived YOUR misdirections, deceptions, projections” and numerous other faux pas, documentation that clearly indicates that if anyone is royalty around here it’s you.
And, in case you haven’t seen my comment at the bottom of this page regarding veterans, I’ll reprint it here for your convenience:
“I remember when you told us you could identify who is a veteran on this site by the way they write because you can detect “how they roll.” That was about the time you accused me of dodging the draft.
Your continued unsupported claims about your own supposed military service coupled with attacks on others, who just might be vets and who are not interested in wearing their service on their sleeve, is offensive and unpatriotic. You should be ashamed but I doubt that you are capable of that.”
You see, I know your type. If you were in the service you were likely an NCO, and the type of NCO that gave weight to that acronym’s alternate meaning: No Chance Outside. These no-so-bright lifer-drones are tolerated with eye-rolls and sighs and are so lacking in intellectual skills, not to mention curiosity, the last thing one wants is to get stuck on duty with them for hours and hours. One would rather stand duty looking at a wall than to listen to their unsupported pontificating and low-brow spewage. The only time they ever gained something that appeared to be respect, was the required respect afforded the uniform. It’s not like anyone respected them for their ability to think creatively. This is why when they get out they are the classic bores who think that whatever they did in the service gives them more pull than anyone one else. It is a tough transition that many of them are never able to make, and those who do struggle with it exhibit anger toward others, especially others who they, often mistakenly, label an having not served. This description would fit YOU quite well you well. Don’t expect anyone here to salute you.
James must have struck a nerve. Check out this comment:
Atheist liar states “Yes, this is what we can expect for the next 4 year: lies and more lies, all to protect and advance “the brand.”
You should know all about the subject of lying atheist. And coming from the liar that you are, to tout others as liars tops the list of your lies. You’ve openly denied using the aliases of James Daggett, Sam Hammett, Elbert Michou, Timothy Schacter. Then, and what can only be described as lunacy, go back over to your blog and write about you in the third person. This is hardly the work of someone that could even in the most remote possibility be considered truthful.
Did ya honestly think you’re continued lying, trolling and of course, slithering back to your pathetic blog in your usual cowardly way of cyber bullying me was going to go unnoticed? I can see you haven’t learned your lesson.
The HelenaIR covered the story where the city commission changed the city’s restrictions regarding “gender restrictions in public accommodations where people ‘ordinarily appear in the nude.'”
That, of course, brought lots of the fear-minded out of the woodwork in the comments. They range from the “we have to protect the children” types to the “they are all perverts” type.
In an an example of “I’ve never seen it so it doesn’t happen,” we have dietz1963 making the proclamation that:
“I don’t know of any person who feels comfortable taking their cloths off before a person of the opposite sex. It has nothing to do with discrimination and everything to do with not being comfortable with it.”
James Daggett tried to provide him with some examples of people who don’t mind “taking their cloths off before a person of the opposite sex” but he was having none of it. Here’s the dialog:
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 11:27am
I don’t know of any person who feels comfortable taking their cloths off before a person of the opposite sex. It has nothing to do with discrimination and everything to do with not being comfortable with it. That you apparently enjoy this doesn’t mean everyone does.
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 12:37pm
dietz1963 said “I don’t know of any person who feels comfortable taking their cloths off before a person of the opposite sex.”
That only speaks to your own limited life experience. I have had many friends and acquaintances over the years who show no such inhibitions. Some model for artists, some like to skinny dip in a lake.
Do you realize that in most cities there are art groups that meet to do figure drawing from live, unclothed models of both genders? It even happens in Helena.
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 1:14pm
Hardly, I’ve traveled to 35 states and 14 countries. Still doesn’t change the fact that a vast majority of people don’t feel comfortable being changing in front of or being nude in the presence of a person from the opposite sex.
Dan Richardson Jan 10, 2017 2:13pm
James, keep n mind the people here that are against this, are not gay. So only a gay man would be ok with this ill intended action, weird……..
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 3:04pm
dietz1963 said “Hardly, I’ve traveled to 35 states and 14 countries.”
That doesn’t mean much. It sounds like you only associate with PLUs.
You said “Still doesn’t change the fact that a vast majority of people don’t feel comfortable being changing in front of or being nude in the presence of a person from the opposite sex.”
Maybe, but your original comment inferred that no one feels comfortable doing so. The fact is, some people don’t mind, you just know know any.
Do you want to cover up art that depicts nudes?
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 9:12pm
dietz1963 said “Now, care to name some folks you know that don’t mind much? You’ve not provided any proof these folks exist.”
I already did. For one, and that’s all I need to falsify, the models who pose unclothed for artists. They even do this at the Holter.
dietz1963 Jan 11, 2017 10:04am
James, no, you did not list the first and last name of anyone you “say” you know that has no problems changing/being nude in front of a person they don’t know of the opposite sex.
James Daggett Jan 11, 2017 10:49am
dietz1963 “…you did not list the first and last name of anyone you “say” you know that has no problems changing/being nude in front of a person they don’t know of the opposite sex.”
I am not going to list the names of the models. That they exist, and I cited where, right in Helena, is proof enough. What next, do you want to see my drawings?
That morphed into this dialog:
Jeff Driessen Jan 10, 2017 8:02am
Wow! I never thought I would see the day when my children’s right to privacy and safety was given away in a vote by anyone. Since the public schools are in the city, the health clubs are in the city and most businesses are in the city my children can no longer be safe when entering a locker room or rest room. Good job you fools. Good job to the fools who voted for these incompetent, uneducated idiots.
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 8:29am
What is “unsafe” about seeing an unclothed human form of the opposite gender?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 11:22am
So you enjoy unclothing in front of a strange person from the opposite sex?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 11:34am
Or, you’re ok with having one of your grandkids change in the presence of a stranger of the opposite sex?
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 1:05pm
dietz1963 said “So you enjoy unclothing in front of a strange person from the opposite sex?” and “Or, you’re ok with having one of your grandkids change in the presence of a stranger of the opposite sex?”
It’s not a matter of “enjoy,” I really do not care. My children were raised not to care either. Why put those kinds of hangups on a child?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 1:18pm
James, why force people who feel uncomfortable changing or be nude in front of a person of the opposite sex? Or don’t those folks count?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 1:24pm
To me this is going to open up a whole new can of worms called “sexual harassment”. You don’t think so, just wait. I predict at some point in the future a transgender in a womans area is going to check her out and, lawsuit time. In the guys area I think it will be the opposite case.
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 3:08pm
dietz1963 said “ames, why force people who feel uncomfortable changing or be nude in front of a person of the opposite sex? Or don’t those folks count?”
They can cover with a towel, like when one changes at the beach. Duh!!!
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 3:28pm
dietz1963 said “…why force people who feel uncomfortable…”
Since when can YOU use that as an argument. It sounds just like a liberal arguing for political correctness. I see very little difference. The more I point these things out, the more you sound like a liberal.
After all, if someone uses a word that makes someone else feel uncomfortable, political correctness says not to use that word. You have argue repeatedly against political correctness. I suggest that your concern for someone’s feeling “uncomfortable” is no different. Why should we kowtow to prudes?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 3:43pm
Since this still qualifies as a free country and I can argue the point anyway I wish. Since when were there rules for commenting James? Care to show me them?
dietz1963 Jan 10, 2017 3:45pm
James says “prudes”. The flip side of that could be a pervert and if ya think there aren’t going to be some guys or gals abusing this, you’re dead wrong. Just how exactly can you prove if a transgender is who they say they are? Going to mind meld with them James? LOL
James Daggett Jan 10, 2017 9:08pm
dietz1963 said “Since this still qualifies as a free country and I can argue the point anyway I wish. Since when were there rules for commenting James? Care to show me them?”
You are right. There are no rules. You are free to be a hypocrite and be illogical and irrational. And I am not using “hypocrite” as a pejorative. It is accurate since on one hand you decry the basis for “political correctness” and then use the basis for your own argument.
You said “James says “prudes”. The flip side of that could be a pervert and if ya think there aren’t going to be some guys or gals abusing this, you’re dead wrong.”
The “flip side” of “prude” is not “pervert.” I would suggest an better antonym is “uninhibited.”
Why is it that some you automatically link the unclothed human form with crime and depravity?
You do know that says quite a bit about you. You’re probably the type that gets titillated at an art museum.
dietz1963 Jan 11, 2017 10:07am
James, you’re hilarious. Most definitely a hoot!
James Daggett Jan 11, 2017 10:51am
dietz1963 said “James, you’re hilarious. Most definitely a hoot!”
I guess a more thought out response was beyond you this morning.
So, when dietz1963 said “I don’t know of any person who feels comfortable taking their cloths off before a person of the opposite sex,” that provides another clue as to why his ex-wife divorced him.