Can the mods confirm whether or not teh Baba Returns is the original Baba?

I ask this since duals are agains the rules and the spammer that nuBaba is doing is getting in the way of catching up on new posts, particular if like me you use the new posts button whenever you log in.

Flashlight was driven off for spamming negs. Is this not essentially the same thing under another guise?

I'm inclined to agree.

nuBaba isn't funny and the number of threads it starts are beginning to get out of control.

This.

This question should be answered.

How does nuBaba know who Tererun is? Someone who popped up while "he" was gone and has been relatively low profile since "his" return. That's another reason I'm not convinced.

I'm fairly convinced new baba = old baba, and for reasons beyond posting style. If it is not the same person, then it is somebody who knows a lot about the original, including things not revealed on the public user profile. As such, I don't think any action should be taken regarding the dual accusation (not against the rules anyway). As for spamming, I don't favor doing much, but I'll abstain from voting if @Anna and @shootER want to box it up or address it in some other pro-active manner.

Teh baba is teh baba. What can be done?

If we're going to go so far as to box up Baba spam, can we box up gturner spam as well? Baba's spam threads are at least rarer than gturner's spam threads, so it wouldn't make sense to box up the less extreme of the two.

Maybe we can just put gturner himself in a box, then store it next to the Ark in that big warehouse of boxes.

Done, for both.

Wow. Really?

Baba I could see, but gturner? Just because you guys don't like him? Pretty sad.

Yeah, this is no bueno.

Chad brought up a good point about both of them spamming up the room and I agreed.

As I asked in the Red Room, how can people support boxing one spammer and cry foul when done with a different spammer? Can anybody answer that question?

Can someone explain to me how gturner's Ahmedinejad thread is spam, yet Ramen's duplicate post of it is not. Or are you going to box that one, too?

Can gul explain why he tells a member not to bother posting and then tells him to "hit the road, asshole?"

Oh fuck off with that shit. It was the Red Room, he fed me the line. As for Ramen, if he starts spamming the place up, get back to me. But is the issue that one particular thread? Or is it the whole boxing? Because those might not be the same issue.

You fucked up, dumbass.

Weren't you the derp-boxer?

No, my sin was thread-merging. Not the same thing.

Was this not a thread merge?

Boxing is an indiscriminate merging of threads on multiple topics so as to consolidate spam in one place. Thread-merging is intended to streamline a discussion by keeping all the posts on a single topic within a single thread.

Not the same thing, not the same intent.

And you said The Help Desk is useless...The system clearly works!

What the fuck is wrong with you!? Seriously!? Just because you don't like him?

Well, not quite in the way I intended. I'm 100% against boxing gturer's threads. NuBaba's threads are just overt and basic spam. I don't think the same can be argued for gturner. As much as the latter's constant tinfoil lying shtick is tedious, it still has some level of content and still contains discussion of issues that people could talk about if they wished. That's a lot different from an "Oldfella had an affair with Claudia Christian" thread.

I think that is true for some, but not all of his threads, and @shootER didn't box all of them, only a specific subset.

No, it wasn't remotely a specific subset. He boxed up ALL the threads, from ones about the Univ of New Hampshire to the Smithsonian Museum to an investigation into the Administrations attempt to unseat Netanyahu to the comeback of Iran's old president.

1) Obama creates vast marine sanctuary off Hawaii.
That thread had a whole lot of discussion.

2) Penn State progressives upset at being charged a lot of money to see a Chelsea Clinton event (but they could work phonebanks for free).
That one had a lot of comments and discussion.

3) New Smithsonian African-American museum a powerful statement
That one had absolutely nothing to do with Hillary Clinton or the election.

4) Exclusive: Hillary Clinton Campaign Systematically Overcharging Poorest Donors
That one was about people having their bank accounts repeatedly hit by the Hillary campaign, up to the $99.99 limit that triggers bank fraud investigations.

5) Congress Investigating Obama Admin-Funded Campaign to Unseat Israeli PM
That has nothing to do with Hillary, it was to do with a Congressional investigation into the Administration's attempt to unseat a foreign leader of a close ally.

6) Trump Rickrolls the media - who are Rickrolled.
That was one of the top stories of the day and generated a lot of discussion.

7) Dems Want Sanders to Run if Clinton Replaced.
That's about an extensive poll of Democrat voters on who they'd want to replace Clinton if she has to drop out.
And of course the Hillary folks would make sure Sander's supporters never clicked on it by lumping into the middle of a bunch of merged threads.

8) Trump's Army of Deplorables on the March
That was a thread about how Hillary's crucial mistake, the basket of deplorables comment, worse than Romney's infamous "47%", has been taken up as a badge of honor by Trump's followers, just as the American Colonists adopted Yankee Doodle Dandy during the Revolutionary War. The election might swing on this.

9) Iran: Ahmadinejad continues political comeback as candidates prepare for presidential election
That's a thread about how Ahmadinejad may again become President of Iran, showing that the attempted reset failed, and that the Administrations claims that Iran was moderating were false.

10) University of New Hampshire shows their academic priorities
That was a thread about how the Univ of New Hampshire took a $4 million dollar bequest from one of the schools devoted librarians and were going to spend it on a new scoreboard for the football field - instead of books for the library.

11) MIT's Technology Review closes comment section
That's about science journals that end up with journalism majors in charge, who start filling the pages with political views and then end up having to ban comments from actual scientists and engineers who call them out on the bullshit. Scientific American has already gotten rid of comments.

And I may have missed one or two others.

It's still based on someone's personal opinion on the content of the thread.