Customer Discussions > History forum

Boycott Amazon if it doens't bar Cleo


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-48 of 48 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on May 1, 2012 10:45:13 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 1, 2012 10:50:29 AM PDT
Diva,
I disagree. Cleo is a crank and probably has severe psychological problems. I don't know the other two, but I debate Bookish on a regular schedule. He is a typical evangelical convert. He can't see the evil in the religion/social system he has converted to and builds imaginary Islamic castles in the sky where things are like he would like them to be rather than the ugly truth of unrestricted Islam.

Cleo annoys me, but she is essentially harmless, and censoring her would be wrong. Every time she posts, she harms her case.

In reply to an earlier post on May 1, 2012 10:59:04 PM PDT
Sutekh says:
Calm Down Or Go Home says:
All right I've finally had it. I spend thousands of dollars a year at http://Amazon.com and my money is being used to finance hate propaganda against Germans and Japanese. We all know by whom.

I was about to announce my intention to boycott Amazon last September when she "fired" herself from the history forum anyway.

She is back with a vengeance, and I am very concerned about the effect of her rantings on other unbalanced or young minds.

I find Amazon shockingly irresponsible for allowing and indeed supporting Cleo's hate speech. They have deleted posts from other posters which are in no way offensive and allow her self-described hate propaganda to fester. Please see her third post in the "Il Volo when the rightful owner finally steps forward" thread.

Don't suggest that I ignore her. I will not ignore hate propaganda.
=====================================================
Compared to some of the things I've seen on the politics forum on Amazon, Cleo is relatively mild. And the truth of the matter is that Amazon is primarily about selling goods, not these forums and don't want to take too much time policing these forums.

In reply to an earlier post on May 1, 2012 11:29:37 PM PDT
Jawwaad says:
Well, if you want to ban people for "hate propaganda", all those who paticipate on these other hateful threads should be banned also. How about the "Eye on Israel" thread, or the "Eye on the Muslim Threat" thread or the "A Place for Pro Israeli Propaganda " thread. Amazon's own "What I shouldn't post" guidelines say:

"Repeated unwelcome messages that harass or embarrass other customers or participants"

"Messages that abuse, denigirate or threatens others"

http://www.amazon.com/gp/forum/content/db-guidelines.html/ref=cm_cd_f_h_help

These thread titles alone fall under these categories but are still allowed to remain. If you are a adovocate against those that hate, then you should be for these threads being removed. They don't even have anything to with history but are rather masked as so to spread hate.

In reply to an earlier post on May 3, 2012 7:00:46 AM PDT
anne says:
Richard: <Anne has asked a number of questions that I think are honest probes at acquiring some knowledge, some useful information, some grasp of history.>

anne: Thank you for saying, Richard. That's much appreciated. I believe I have acquired some useful history information.

In reply to an earlier post on May 3, 2012 9:24:54 AM PDT
Anne:

You're very welcome.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:26:24 AM PDT
reply to Calm Down Or Go Home's post:

either hit the ignore button or see a shrink

you are way too worked up over something that is too trivial
and that you can do little about except raise your blood pressure

file your complaitn with amazon
they will do what they will do
you will have to accept their dumbbleep decision whatever it is

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:28:27 AM PDT
reply to Diva's post:

i think there are other nutcases out there and not all cleos alternates

do the names specialise in what they hate ?
that would be interesting

or does she just keep changing names to get around the ignoring when nobody is listening any more

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:32:20 AM PDT
vreply to Yog-Sothoth's post:

not deleted

just hidden with the warning that people think the message is nfg
you can still see it if you unhide it

if the thread is started by someone you ignore they warn you about the whole thread initially in the index page

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:33:34 AM PDT
reply to S. Kessler's post:

well...

*if* she is schizoid
then the other personalites could have different characteristics

but it seems like an act
i think cleo is sane and enjoys tweaking you all

i wish she would go do it to the meet the authors forum

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:34:15 AM PDT
reply to Calm Down Or Go Home's post:

and when a compnay donates to the political party you dont like
would you boycott them for that too ?

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:36:04 AM PDT
reply to S. Kessler's post:

one thing to ban someone completely

and another to bar them from a forum that they only try to disrupt because they do not believe/belong/relate to that forum and only want to sabotage it with their disruptive messages

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:37:43 AM PDT
reply to Robert Miller's post:

aaaamazing !!

a test for a NK AI program that will be unleashed (after perfecting it) to take down every forum world wide

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:04:20 PM PDT
General Orc says:
whomper says "you will have to accept their dumbbleep decision whatever it is "

I say: I don't have to buy anything from them, though.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:05:39 PM PDT
General Orc says:
whomper:"and when a compnay donates to the political party you dont like
would you boycott them for that too ? "

Maybe. It would depend on the circumstances.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 7:37:43 PM PDT
Colin Platt says:
cobaltspectre: I disagree with your comments on anne. I write in house software user guides at my work and find people like anne invaluable. That is, while what I write may be brilliant and clear to me (of course it is!) It might not be so clear to everyone else. Doesn't make them idiots, and certainly doesn't make them trolls. But when I hand out my draft user guides, I find people like anne, turn off my ego and wait for their comments. Invariably, the result is an improved user guide.

Admittedly, this is not work, but hopefully a form of enjoyment for us all. However, in the past when anne has questioned something I've posted, I usually find it pushes me to hone my response and write something better.

Just a thought.

In reply to an earlier post on May 4, 2012 9:13:34 PM PDT
Leslie Funk says:
Hi John...I have never made any sense out of what Cleo has posted, but we all need a standard in which to compare. I hope she, or he, gets the help they need.

Cheers, Les

By the way, my sons and I are planning to visit Custers Battlefield on or about August 31 to Sept. 3. I will find you on one of the forums, and give you a more definate date once we get all our ducks in a row. I look forward to seeing you, and I hope your book is going well.

In reply to an earlier post on May 5, 2012 12:27:54 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 5, 2012 12:28:53 AM PDT
ThorBjorn says:
I'm with you in spirit, Calm Down...
...However, I DO support the 1st. Amendment to its fullest possible potentials, no matter how offensive, or even "threatening".

I was on riot-control duty for an "occupy" protest. I'm pretty sure it was "Cleo" who tried to bite me when we were hand-cuffing the "99%".

In reply to an earlier post on May 5, 2012 5:11:59 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 6, 2012 1:35:21 AM PDT
Colin Platt:

If anne were simply an ignorant, inquisitive person, I wouldn't fault her. But, the first time that she went on the offensive and tried to defeat me with her army of autistic polio victims armed with unloaded wheel lock blunderbusses, I considered her a combatant and mowed her down. There has never been an armistice signed, since.

In reply to an earlier post on May 5, 2012 1:01:22 PM PDT
anne says:
Colin: <when anne has questioned something I've posted, I usually find it pushes me to hone my response and write something better.>

anne: Thanks for saying, Colin!

Posted on May 5, 2012 7:04:48 PM PDT
Colin Platt says:
cobaltspectre:It's an interesting choice you've made to view the forums as a place of combat. I'm not sure it is necessary, but that is up to you.

It is perhaps worth pointing out that anne and I frequently disagree. I'm quite conservative in my take on history, but we get along especially on questions of pre-history because I agree there is simply so much we do not know.

I have no combat, and more precise posts.Which makes me quite happy! And anne, I am quite grateful for your contribution to any worthwhile posts I may have made over the last couple of years!

All of which takes us rather far from the origin of this thread. Which is banning Cleo. I don't see much coherence in the postings of Cleo that I've seen. I think it would be much easier to argue in favour of banning the rational than the irrational.

In reply to an earlier post on May 5, 2012 7:30:39 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 5, 2012 11:29:12 PM PDT
Rachel says:
Colin:

Respectfully to you. I side my answer to you supporting Cobalt.

Since I have been if the Amazon fora, and I met anne, I have perceived her "innocent" questions as an attack. She definitely doesn't like Jews, questions the Hebrew Canon. Furthermore, she interested in race, skin colors, and other "esoteric" trivia, which in my mind has an ulterior motive. Categorizing people in such a way is prejudiced. I consider anne a quite unique individual ready with an innocent question that has a sharp knife ready to be used underneath the question.

There are many ways to skin a cat,and anne is an expert on that subject and nothing else.

I have been in the fora for close to four years, and I have never ever ever perceived anne as kind or useful in any forum.
Furthermore, She is good for a laugh and nothing else!

Do I remember you,vaguely, siding with her on some issues? Am I correct?

Rachel
Your reply to Rachel's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
 

In reply to an earlier post on May 5, 2012 8:39:09 PM PDT
reply to Colin Platt's post:

cleo can be ignored

there are feminazi bullies here that need banning more than cleo

In reply to an earlier post on May 7, 2012 1:03:23 AM PDT
Colin Platt says:
Hi Rachel,

Each to their own I suppose. You have your experience of anne, I have mine. That said, I have not been on any threads involving anne and Jews or the Hebrew Canon.

I think the thread you are referring to was one about a year ago on origins of early civilisations, which at times did raise questions about race, skin colour and I know I was at least one of the people raising DNA questions, which I find far more instructive than skin colour than I only know the very elementary basics.

The issue we sided on, specifically in that thread, was a willingness to say 'I don't know'. I enjoy prehistory, and have no problem admitting that there are things we don't know and probably won't know. I think this is an essential mindset when considering prehistory, yet it seems to upset no end of people.

Colin
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the History forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  History forum
Participants:  21
Total posts:  48
Initial post:  Apr 28, 2012
Latest post:  May 7, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 3 customers

Search Customer Discussions