This all started when Alistair started inserting Sorabji into a thread that was CLEARLY labelled "SORABJI FREE ZONE". It was NOT an invitation to talk about Sorabji, however he clearly interjected and inserted it into the thread anyway.
And it is evident that you cannot take a joke (see below for the reason why I say this).
Given that he can't keep his comments about Sorabji...to threads that are about Sorabji
I started two such and Thal one more; these are where most of my recent references to Sorabji will be found.
and given that his intent is genuinely to start flame wars by antagonising other users
Wrong. I have no interest in doing that kind of thing and, in any case, just how many users have specifically and unequivocally expressed the view that they have been so "antagonised"? You and one or two others or the majority of users here?
given the fact that HE knows there are many users who don't like Sorabji...
Neither of us knows how many members here do or don't like Sorabji but those statistics, whatever they might be, are not a reason to censor threads by omitting mention of him; he was a prolific composer of piano music, after all and this is a piano forum. Moreover, the fact that someone doesn't like Sorabji this year is not necessarily an indicator that they never will; if it were, it would be an indicator of inflexibility.
I feel that if he feels like spamming the other threads where the subject is FAR from Sorabji, I might give him a taste of his medicine.
I'm doing nothing of the kind and you are not giving anything (nor am I asking you to do so).
[I know he's going to claim that the 'SORABJI FREE ZONE' could be interpreted in a way in which people are invited to talk freely about Sorabji; he's WRONG.
That was the joke.
I know he's going to claim he doesn't antagonise people about Sorabji
See above; I am claiming nothing in either direction about this but I do note the paucity of incontrovertible evidence that a substantial proportion of the membership is being so antagonised.
there have been many a thread in the past he's slipped it in where it wasn't invited.
So you would seek to counsel that threads about, say, Medtner, Rachmaninoff, Busoni, Godowsky or Alkan would be the wrong places even to mention Sorabji despite his having championed and promoted the work of those composers when, in at least three cases, it was insufficiently well known? That, again, would be a form of censorship.
As to "slipping" anything in "where it wasn't invited", members do not invite or disinvite others to comment on or include references to anyone or their work on this forum, so your notion is demonstrably misplaced.
I KNOW he's going to claim he's not a troll
Then your knowledge fails you; I would make no claim one way or the other about that and have no interest in so doing.
however I would like to point out that he replied to the exact same comment over a dozen times in a bid merely to take the last word
No; I did so in a bid to point up the sheer stupidity, irrelevance and lack of veracity of both the content and its repetition - no more, no less.
I will agree to leave this thread alone, if he is willing to leave the 'Sorabji free zone' thread alone.
I am pleased to hear it and I have no problem with not contributing to the "Sorabji free zone thread" except for one thing; if that thread is to continue at all, I would be as entitled as you or any other member to contribute to it provided that Sorabji is not mentioned therein.
a poor attempt to subvert the conversation
Oh, come now! What "conversation" was there to subvert in that thread in the first place? How serious might you suppose the intent was in initiating it?
Frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to see both that thread and this one closed to further posting but that's not up to me and, unlike some people, I have no desire to seek to impose my will on other members...
much like louis_podesta does with his idiotic video about practicing the 'correct way'.
I know nothing about that member or his posts on anything, so cannot comment.
Best,
Alistair