Melt down

I had the pleasure of witnessing a bit of one of the more spectacular meltdowns in Skypeland the other night. The drunken Irish/English lout and bully came in and began berating and attacking all and sundry. Instead of leaving as I had previously, I just went idle and let him talk to the ether, befouling the room with his insults. Since I was not present, he got into fights with several others instead (He is an equal opportunity bully). He even attacked his supporters, calling them traitors for trying to calm down the situation and call a truce, apparently. He vomited his venomous detritus at everyone and anyone, in a slurred tirade of invective and expletives. This man definitely knows how to make friends and influence people...

I did hear a little bit before I shut off my audio. Again, for about the fourth or fifth time, I heard him go on long rants about pedophiles, calling others pedophiles, etc. I think this might be a clue to some event in his past or his current activities. Who else gets drunk and starts to focus obsessively on pedophilia?

Finally, after the host gave him several chances, the host started to get the message that this person is pure room poison. I only came back when this person had his microphone shut off, or was banished from the room. He managed to attack, insult and hurt the feelings of several of his allies and defenders who have been constantly claiming that he has a good side (which no one else I know has ever seen). I think that people who think it is unfair of us to berate him or try to silence him should experience him a few times for themselves, and decide if they want to engage in his form of "debate" and discussion. I have had my fill already and I plan to decline to engage him further in the future, aside from a furtive attack or two when he is unable to respond (on the theory that if he dishes it out, he sure better be able to take it, and also as a signal to him and others that I find him reprehensible). Others have suggested that as a silent message to any host allowing this person a platform on which to speak, that when this person has his microphone activated, everyone else should turn theirs off and leave the talking area and go to the listening area, so hosts start to understand that others do not want to talk to this degenerate.

My theory is that several people, such as the assorted "room killers" I described in a previous blog entry, are deadly to a conversation. You might be able to use their input to a skypecast in small doses, but you cannot leave their microphones open or they will destroy a room. The host must manage the room with one of these characters in it very carefully, and turn on their microphones for very short periods only; 15 or 30 seconds, perhaps. They can come up, insult everyone, and then have their microphones turned off so others are allowed to respond unimpeded. This can liven up a room, but it keeps the "room killers" from getting the upper hand. No one wants to hear one of these consummate bores take center stage for 1 or 2 hours, as is their wont. Others will leave out of boredom and frustration, or get into huge fights trying to drown out the nonsense and insults, or go idle, drifting away to other rooms ("room-hopping").

In the case of this contantly-inebriated Irish/English imbecile, I am no longer willing to listen to anything he has to say. He has proven himself to be completely unable to contribute in a constructive manner to any conversation on any subject. I see no reason anyone should subject themselves to the drunken blathering of uneducated losers. What is the point? It might have been funny the first 10 times. It is no longer that funny. It is just pitiful. And the sooner everyone realizes it, the better.