Skip to main content

My Warning from an Uberpeople.net "Moderator."

I just got a message from one of the moderators of the uberpeople.net Toronto driver's forum. In it he states,

"This forum values opinions from all angles. However, being argumentative, name-calling, personal attacks, instigating other members, and any post that can be deemed confrontational will not be tolerated. Please refrain from any posts of this manner, even if instigated. We hope you can tone it back a bit going forward.

Please review the terms and rules http://uberpeople.net/help/terms"

I think he was feeling a bit humiliated after he read my criticism of his limp response to my "Uberpeople Service Animal Discussion" that I posted in the Toronto Uber taxi driver forum.

Things have really changed in the last twenty-five years. It used to be quite the rollicking back and forth in discussion forums. Now, whenever you get the better of some smart-ass who takes shots at you, he threatens to have your views censored.

As an example of my objectionable conduct, the "moderator" cited the following passage by me,

"Are you dyslexic? The individual referenced in my post was not "terrified of driving," he was terrified of dogs. A remedial reading comprehension course might help you in this thread."

I thought I was being kind in attributing the respondent's dishonest and deliberate misquoting of my post to dyslexia rather than the slimy tactic that it obviously was. It seems to have escaped the "moderator's" attention, that deliberate and dishonest misquoting of forum participants is, itself, "confrontational." Yet I doubt the individual who slandered me received any similar warning. I doubt that the thought even occurred to the censorship muscle-flexing "moderator," Mugats, or whatever his real name is.

I could be wrong. Maybe "Mugats" did send a similar warning to "Fuzzyelvis," but I sincerely doubt it.

By the way, and perhaps of some significance, is the apparent fact that this "moderator" uses a fake name and a fake picture of himself.

In my reply to his "warning" I challenged him to reveal his true identity. Any bets as to whether he will have the guts to step up?

I anticipate that Mr. Mugats will use his power to shut me down on the discussion board.

My last reply to him was,


Relevant Screenshots

Did this person receive a "warning" from Mugats for this?

Or this?

Bets?

I am not omniscient, but I remain certain that none of the other "offenders" received a similar warning from the mysterious moderator. Notwithstanding, I will happily recant if Mr. Mugats provides any evidence that proves me wrong.

At this point, I would say the odds that Mr. Mugats uses his power to borf me from the forum is about 99.9 % to the .1 % chance that he will identify himself and provide evidence that he sent the other confrontational users similar warnings.

By the way, I love it when people are confrontational with me. It gives me the opportunity to work on my debating skills. If no one ever confronted me, I would be bored as shit.

Unfortunately, these days, it seems that whenever you challenge the crooked scumbags that spew their fraudulent effluvia on social media, rather than engage, they run and hide.

Well. That didn't take long.


Also of interest:

The Fred Eisenberger Comedy Special

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to Save the Ontario Basic Income Program!Background Leftist Ontario virtue signallers have been freaking out over the Ford government's cancellation of the Basic Income free money project that was cooked up by the Wynne government to build up their voter base. I follow a few of these caring individuals on Twitter to study their self delusions. They've all been afflicted lately with Ford Derangement Syndrome, peacocking their indignation at the cancellation of Wynne's free money giveaway "program." But does the program really have to be cancelled? Of course not. All it would require to be saved is for the virtue signallers, and there are loads of them, from Deb Matthews and Andrea Horwath, to a parade of obscure, Twitter addicts, and their offended fans. The good news is that the program can easily continue on a voluntary basis. The only difference is that the leftists would have to reach into their own pockets to show how committed and compassionate they …

Hamilton's Check Engine Light Crisis and Other News

Unanimous Pro-Uber City Council Vote: The Damage "Check Engine Light" Crisis Uber MADDness Uber Hamilton by the Numbers Working with numbers can be a lot of fun. At least, I think so. I once took an in-house course, back when I had a real job, called "Strategies of Experimentation." I can't remember anything I learned in that course, but it made an impression on me that impacts my thinking to this day. It says that if you don't have solid data to work with, use the next best thing. Try to build a cloud of probability. Use whatever information you do have and think about whether it falls within the realm of reasonable expectation. The following analysis attempts to use this approach to some degree. What is known for sure is the approximate amount each taxi operator pays to the taxi broker for the service of matching riders with drivers - just like any other "technology company." That is $500 per month, per cab, or $6000 per year, per cab. With 44…
Poor Uber Driver Oh my. This is a sad story. Here is an Uber driver voicing his concerns in the Uber driver's forum about whether or not his "sharing economy" gig is paying off. It's possible that this is not a genuine post from a genuine Uber driver. I see that. It's the kind of schlopp I would write if I were in a mischievous mood. On the other hand, given what I already know about the Uber scam, and the people it exploits in order to get them to employ "assets they already own," in Tim Hudak's famous phrase, it's entirely reasonable to believe that this is a REAL Uber driver, who is just beginning to figure out who is making money, or should be making money, and who is getting royally boned. (See my story about the Uber driver who drove a football player from Chicago to Buffalo for minus $38.50.) I knew it was a scam from the beginning. That is why, when people asked me why, instead of tolerating the City of Hamilton's demonstrably abs…