Something For Discussion (A possible rule)

[The Hen]

Hmmm. perhaps a little insincere.

I guess you will just have to live with that.

Goodbye

[The Hen]

Perhaps now that the little episode of me posting to Lo is behind us, we can move on and discuss what parameters should be put in place on this Board, if any? (BTW Meade, It was Lo who first raised the issue of time limits on responses. She dragged a thread back from death after three days. So I guess that is TWO of us who have had issues from Board members about that.)

This is the fourth time I have tried to get this discussion going, and I really would appreciate it if people were able to concentrate on THAT issue, rather that Lo's accusations about me giving my virginity away at age nine or whether I should have raised the point about PMS Princess that got Meade's knickers in a knot.

if not, well, you can fuck off too.

[Lord Jim]

I have to say General that what you have posted in this discussion is the most unhelpful, unconstructive, ill advised and potentially damaging stuff I have seen posted by somebody who was well intentioned, (obviously I've seen worse from those who aren't well intentioned) that I've seen posted in these forums in a very long time....

I still can't get over how such a bright fellow could go on for so long with this being completely tone deaf about the only things he is accomplishing...

Engendering ill will and giving encouragement and justification to someone to continue some truly odious trolling....

It so obvious, I just cant understand how you don't get this....

Presumably engendering ill will and encouraging trolling were not your objectives, but those are the only things you have accomplished. Nothing positive. Nothing at all. And with each successive rationale, you make yourself look like a strong practitioner of the obsessive, "just can't let it go" behavior that you frequently criticize.

Suffice it to say this hasn't been a huge reputation burnisher for you....

The best thing you could possibly do to minimize the damage you're causing is to simply not post about this any more, because with each post the hole just gets deeper, and the level of animosity that you are fostering grows.

The more "explaining" you're doing, the worse you're making things. For the board and for yourself.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Thanks Hen - at this point insincerity is better than absolute bilge (not you BTW)

[Lord Jim]

That post is actually an improvement.

It's considerably less damaging than anything else you have posted in this discussion.

ETA:

I originally posted this when Meade's post above mine read "Fuck off Jim."

[MajGenl.Meade]

He's quite right - it did and I'm sorry it did

[Lord Jim]

Apology accepted.

[MajGenl.Meade]

What parameters should be placed on this board, if any? asks Hen

None. People need to place their own parameters

Exception: if a poster starts to become just a nuisance - you know going on and on and on and on about some minor point - they should be lashed with wet noodles.

Meade

[Sean]

Do you mean that people should place their own parameters on themselves, others or both Gen'l?

[Crackpot]

I thought he was being perfectly clear. Now drop it or there will be a noodle lashing!

[Joe Guy]

What parameters should be placed on this board, if any? asks Hen

None. People need to place their own parameters

Exception: if a poster starts to become just a nuisance - you know going on and on and on and on about some minor point - they should be lashed with wet noodles.

Meade

In my experience here & at CSB, most of us wet noodles have always lashed those nuisances.

This thread is swirling in circles...

And going nowhere fast.

[loCAtek]

So, I'm on probation 'cause somebody got butthurt; they should of just filled out the form?

[Sue U]

This thread is swirling in circles...

And going nowhere fast.

Just visualize whirled peas.

[Joe Guy]

This thread is swirling in circles...

And going nowhere fast.

Just visualize whirled peas.

Are you implying that this thread is nothing more than a pea zing match?

[The Hen]

It's a shame.

I would have liked to have discussed the issues.

I guess too many knickers got knotted, including mine. For that I apologise.

Meade, I am sorry. I shouldn't have shouted at you.

[The Hen]

So, I'm on probation 'cause somebody got butthurt

No. That isn't why you are on probation.

[PMS Princess]

I knew that mattress tag thing would bite me in the ass!! So Loca's sore bum (butthurt) would be from the wet noodles???? Break out the Tucks!! There's a pain in the ass somewhere.

[loCAtek]

Why so serious? =>

[PMS Princess]

gosh, how clever. That was a really good one.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Hen, it's OK. I shrank the view until it was just a whisper. Besides I didn't have my reading glasses on.

Sean (thanks CP): "Do you mean that people should place their own parameters on themselves, others or both Gen'l?"
It is a very difficult situation. On the one hand, we all apply varying parameters to our own behaviour. When I swore at LJ yesterday I exceeded one of my own and regretted it. For others using bad language is of no real significance whatsoever. IMO it's so pervasive that when it is meant, that meaning has already been devalued by constant use. But I'm certainly not about to start suggesting that everyone must post like Miss Manners. People set their own parameters. If they want to worry a bone to death (I tend to) that's fine. If they want to ignore people and posts, that's fine too - a pity, but that's a parameter. IMO there are times when not responding is more consistent with sense -as in not pouring gasoline onto a fire that's just about extinguished already. Opinions differ.

The other side of the coin/hand thing is when a poster deliberately takes every opportunity to shadow another and post well.... what exactly is stalking? It isn't reasoned argument. If it is persistent posting of the same question over and over then that could be ignored (if not responding is within a personal parameter). I think Loca's 'what are the rules' is in that category - one can respond or not or do both. The thing itself is not offensive. OTOH I have trouble over real personal abuse - revealing of privileged information, false accusations - especially when these are the sole object of the post as we have seen too much of in recent months. I lean toward getting rid of such a troublemaker. But then I lean toward not wanting to regulate speech.

In the end I think I prefer "I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death my right to argue long and loud against you". So that is a 'no' to setting parameters for others.

FWIW I think that it takes two (or more) people to destroy a board. If Scooter and I fought endlessly like cat and dog in every thread - even if our posts are mostly argumentative rather than offensive - that could drive people away, I realise it. Or if Gob and Andrew did - or if LJ and rubato did. One person posting rubbish usually is not "the" problem (they sure are "a" problem and even a horrible one) - it's all the drag-ins that create a logjam of distaste. I'm not innocent in this

Meade