Like you, I was mostly a lurker around here for the Michael and NEILYNG days. I think the majority of the community here would agree (and if they don’t, correct me) that the problem with those posters weren’t WHAT they were posting about, but HOW they would post it. There are plenty of people here who disagree on a variety of issues, and there are discussions that go back and forth on those issues. Those aren’t hard to find on this site. What you WON’T find on this site are name-calling contests, personal attacks, and “shouting matches”, and I think that this is why a lot of people like this site. This is also the reason why idiots like Michael and NEILYNG got the boot.

I honestly think that people can come onto this site with any opinion about any Reds related topic they want to, and find a place to discuss it. However, when they present an argument and someone else offers a good counterargument, and they have to resort to personal attacks (on the poster themselves, like NEILYNG, or on the posters on the site on the whole, like what you’re doing), that isn’t cool. If you want to have an argument about why Michael and NEILYNG were right, be my guest, just expect to hear a counterargument. And if you handle it in the same way they did, you can be pretty sure you’ll see the same fate.

I enjoy this community because there is such diversity in the opinions and subjects that arise here. Not everyone here is a sabremetricion. I ain’t. Not everyone who participates here loves Dunn – Zach doesn’t but no one has called him out or banned him because he’s in the minority on this point. The only folks banned are the ones who don’t want to engage fairly in discussion or humor. They are the ones who, for whatever reason, are constantly and illogically disruptive of the threads and conversations that are in play.

I offered real life experience in my comments regarding race in Cincinnati and elsewhere. And it certainly is the truth when I posted “You can’t believe the snide shit I hear from some of our ‘friends’. That sir, was in no way disingenuous.

When I 1st came on board at this site I was banned 3 times until I figured out how more objectively post my opinions. And I also learned to respect the opinions of other posters even though I may have thought them wrong. All blogs have a core community and that can lead to the creation of a somewhat specific point of view. I don’t see how a shared point of view is being disingenuous. However bitter incrimination and generalizations like those that you offer certainly could be classified as genuine sour grapes.
I am no CoPat fan, but I certainly don’t want to see him fail. But it is Okay that I can’t help but harrumph around a bit because he does fail so often.
Lighten Up – maybe try a new handle….