• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Katsung47, a mobile internet troll....

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
So I did some research on our pal Katsung... the first indicator was that google actually has a suggested search if you enter "Katsung47" in the search field.

I've found Katsung on numerous internet forums, such as forums for UT San Diego
http://forums.utsandiego.com/showthread.php?t=122947

Also an entry called "Kathaksung" is in the urban dictionary here
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kathaksung

He (they?) have been spreading conspiracy theories for the better part of several years, in 2011 he proposed the government of norway was allying with Arabs on Christianforums
http://www.christianforums.com/t7580954-3/

He's even posted his stuff on a forum dedicated to high speed sport motorcycles!

http://www.speedzilla.com/forums/war-room/74769-amputee-actor-boston-bombing.html#post771673

this guy really gets around.... it's obvious he has nothing to do with the actual subject of the forums he posts on... only that he wants to spread his conspiracy theories.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I don't get why they haven't banned him. He isn't really a member. He never interacts with the membership. He never discusses OC or even carry in general. He exists on this forum to do one thing: Spam us with his Bravo Sierra.

What is really unfortunate is that one of the members of the staff indicated that he had been banned, yet he wasn't.

They should ban him for spamming us and delete all of his posts and threads. If he really wants to discuss his crap with us, he should also post on topic and participate in discussions of his BS, rather than just dropping on us like we were his toilet.

C'mon staff! Do something about this spamming troll!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I don't get why they haven't banned him. He isn't really a member. He never interacts with the membership. He never discusses OC or even carry in general. He exists on this forum to do one thing: Spam us with his Bravo Sierra.

What is really unfortunate is that one of the members of the staff indicated that he had been banned, yet he wasn't.

They should ban him for spamming us and delete all of his posts and threads. If he really wants to discuss his crap with us, he should also post on topic and participate in discussions of his BS, rather than just dropping on us like we were his toilet.

C'mon staff! Do something about this spamming troll!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

With all due respect to you and others expressing their displeasure on this issue.

katsung47 is as much a registered user here as anyone else. Many of his posts are placed in the Social Lounge where there is wide latitude on what is appropriate - some might suggest too broad, not limiting enough. That you (collectively or individually) find his posts not pleasing should not be a call to action.

Not sure why anyone would think he had been banned - the Moderator Control Panel does not indicate any such action has been taken.

To be clear, I am neither defending his Modus operandi nor his content - indeed there does seem to be some sufficient reason to review these. Still a thread like this is nought but a public attack.
 
Last edited:

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
With all due respect to you and others expressing their displeasure on this issue.

katsung47 is as much a registered user here as anyone else. Many of his posts are placed in the Social Lounge where there is wide latitude on what is appropriate - some might suggest too broad, not limiting enough. That you (collectively or individually) find his posts not pleasing should not be a call to action.

Not sure why anyone would think he had been banned - the Moderator Control Panel does not indicate any such action has been taken.

To be clear, I am neither defending his Modus operandi nor his content - indeed there does seem to be some sufficient reason to review these. Still a thread like this is nought but a public attack.

I don't consider it an attack, this is all publically available information.

I don't even think Katsung is a "person" I think it's a group of people... I don't see how one person can regularily troll so many forums of such a wide variety so relatively often... I think there's several people manning the different Katsungs....
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Oh, well, he is registered! So all is OK. Got it.

Like CaP was registered?

Like joannie was registered?

Like kwikernu was registered?

Registration is not the issue. He is spamming the site. He is not a participating user. He is a spammer.

No offense, but I'd rather that John or Mike weighed in on this one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
--snipped--

No offense, but I'd rather that John or Mike weighed in on this one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
<o>

It has already been forwarded/reported for consideration which is the correct way to respond.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Since so many object to his (possibly their) spamming, don't you think it would be appropriate for John or Mike to respond directly in this thread? I do. I hope one of the two of them do too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Since so many object to his (possibly their) spamming, don't you think it would be appropriate for John or Mike to respond directly in this thread? I do. I hope one of the two of them do too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

I don't object. If you are not happy you have the option to ignore.

I don't recall that moniker resorting to personal attacks too much.

Just a person with different ideas and suggestions.

He proposes hypothesis and looks for facts to support them; this is not how hypothesis testing is performed. But he does no different than our politicians.

When easily sent to high blood pressure land .. go here ... and relax .. 100 yrs from now it won't matter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J83SXVjL9M8
 

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
What is really unfortunate is that one of the members of the staff indicated that he had been banned, yet he wasn't.

Cite please? Who said he had been banned? Mike and I are the only ones with the power to ban and I am more than willing to consider doing so but I have not yet taken action against this poster nor do I recall speaking about him before.

Thanks.


John
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I am trying to spare the individual some personal embarrassment. I was asked to stop talking about it because something was in the works and we did not want to alert the poster. But, nothing ever happened, so I continued posting about it. Believe me or don't; it ain't that important.

Anyway, now that the issue has your attention, do you find this "member" to be spamming the site and, therefore, deserving of a ban? I hope so, but it is entirely your call.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I am trying to spare the individual some personal embarrassment. I was asked to stop talking about it because something was in the works and we did not want to alert the poster. But, nothing ever happened, so I continued posting about it. Believe me or don't; it ain't that important.

Anyway, now that the issue has your attention, do you find this "member" to be spamming the site and, therefore, deserving of a ban? I hope so, but it is entirely your call.
A cite which John requested can be sent by PM - protects public disclosure. If a member is going beyond their authorization, John needs to be aware.

It is important, because you have made accusations and continue to stir the pot.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
And that could have been sent by PM also!

I am not going to out the person who made that statement. It is the rest of the staff from whom I am avoiding disclosure. Choose to believe me or not, your choice.

While you are here, is anyone going to deal with the report I have made (twice now) in private on another matter, or do I have to make a public stink about that one too?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
And that could have been sent by PM also!

I am not going to out the person who made that statement. It is the rest of the staff from whom I am avoiding disclosure. Choose to believe me or not, your choice.

While you are here, is anyone going to deal with the report I have made (twice now) in private on another matter, or do I have to make a public stink about that one too?
The suggested purpose of a PM was obviously made to protect the anonymity of the individual.....but you know that.

So you continue to make claims, but won't confirm. One might question your motivation.

You apparently refer (make a public stink) to conversations we have had on how/by what means a poster may be banned. I have no intentions of responding to PMs made in that tone and frankly the tools for accomplishing such are not the subject open for public discussion.

Respond properly and move on. John is aware - move on. You test the limits - suggest that you move on.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
No, I refer to reports (thereby avoiding a public stink) on another matter that has, so far (unsurprisingly) been ignored by the staff, not to any conversation I had with a staff member on how any individual poster might be dealt with.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
No, I refer to reports (thereby avoiding a public stink) on another matter that has, so far (unsurprisingly) been ignored by the staff, not to any conversation I had with a staff member on how any individual poster might be dealt with.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

:lol: :lol:
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If you go back to my "public stink" comment to which you replied quoting those words, you will notice that I brought up another matter that the staff has ignored despite my having repeated the report. So, when you chose to comment on my preferring NOT to raise a public stink, I responded about that separate matter, not about katsung47.

If you cannot figure that out, and choose instead to post a juvenile picture, that's on you.

However, as I told you in a PM earlier, I have come to expect that kind of behavior from you as a moderator, that, while I respect you as a poster on the subject of rights in general and the RKBA in particular, I have serious reservations about the job you do as a moderator and how you use that job to your personal advantage. I am not the only poster who has noticed that and posted about it in the open (usually followed by a threat and a locked thread).

So, have you looked into the reports on that other matter, or do I need to raise that "public stink"?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
If you go back to my "public stink" comment to which you replied quoting those words, you will notice that I brought up another matter that the staff has ignored despite my having repeated the report. So, when you chose to comment on my preferring NOT to raise a public stink, I responded about that separate matter, not about katsung47.

If you cannot figure that out, and choose instead to post a juvenile picture, that's on you.

However, as I told you in a PM earlier, I have come to expect that kind of behavior from you as a moderator, that, while I respect you as a poster on the subject of rights in general and the RKBA in particular, I have serious reservations about the job you do as a moderator and how you use that job to your personal advantage. I am not the only poster who has noticed that and posted about it in the open (usually followed by a threat and a locked thread).

So, have you looked into the reports on that other matter, or do I need to raise that "public stink"?
Circuitous discussion you are having with yourself where only you have the correct answers.

I operate in accordance with John's instructions and at his pleasure - there is no personal agenda. Where there possibly might be some difference in application is the subject of locking threads and editing posts.

I have less patience/tolerance for unbridled noise. Nevertheless I will always yield to him, both out of respect and recognition that the forum is his. You could do worse.

BTW - yes, I would have locked this thread a long time ago, but for acceptance of John's thinking.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I'm of two minds on Katsung47.

I agree with Eye95 that he's not a member. I hinge this assessment not on his registration, but on the fact that he does not share the same goals and activities of the group. Just drive-by postings of conspiracy theory stuff. I've only ever seen him once reply to another poster. EMN's research is interesting.

On the other hand, Katsung47 seems harmless enough. Even nutty people can possess facts. Its how they evaluate those facts that makes them nutty. So, I do occasionally skim his material just to see if he's come up with anything factual but not reported in the mainstream or alternative media.

I think Eye95 reveals his low opinion of his fellow man by thinking he has to warn readers after every single post by Katsung47. I'm betting the only people who would need warning are people like Katsung. And, I can't imagine we have too many of them as regular readers here.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I see my responses as being of benefit in that responses to him on-topic have dropped dramatically as folks realize that his posts are just drive-bys.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 
Top