Do not enjoy this.
5 Likes
Agreed. I try to assume people are speaking in good faith whether or not I agree with them. I try to extend that to both regular an irregular people here but Iâll admit to a bias towards regular posters.
1 Like
thatâs because itâs illogically self referential. Itâs brainwashy. Just. Like. Cherry. Jell-o.
And I rephrased it for clarity now.
2 Likes
Well, to be fair, the original post that inspired this one was a clusterfuck; so itâs not too surprising that this one would follow suit.
The bottom line seems to be that many people donât like change (or even the suggestion thereof) and a few others seem to have some serious personal accountability issues.
Getting back to the topic, I flag egregious bad behavior thatâs in flagrant violation of the code of conduct.
I donât flag people simply because I disagree with them or dislike them. In the same vein, every member here has the same ability to flag me, especially if I decide to flout the rules.
The mods decide from there what actions they want to take, if any.
Virtual food fights or cyber-Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots would be an EPIC suggestion for site conflict resolution, IMOâŚ
9 Likes
Oh! Thatâs easy.
[quote=ânimelennar, post:1, topic:92209â] (actually quoting my own self)
Iâd always rather err on the side of letting things devolve into flamewars (well, not quite) rather than sit at a dreary tea-party of rigid ideological conformity
[/quote]
That one.
5 Likes
Came to the thread to add my reason for not flagging very oftenâŚ
23 Likes
It is definitely clear that some people would be well served by taking a break from each other.
16 Likes
2 Likes
Is that not, ideally, a wetware solution?
Itâs one of those things where taking a break from one another puts some responsibility on the person being wildly misinterpreted, and not enough on the one asserting special knowledge of the intents, wants, and goals of the other.
Throwing matches isnât conversation, and pushing back against such inappropriate gaslighting nonsense isnât bullying.
hi there nobody!
Iâm afraid Iâm done with your gaslighting.
I hope you enjoy having it calmly dissected whenever you try it here.
1 Like
Do you mean when you said this?:
No problem, because that means by your own standards that the following is neither rude nor presumptuous: Never respond to me on the BBS again, no matter what I say.
Because that does look rather like a hypothetical statement, rather than a request/command.
5 Likes
I think that is a valid point. I could have been more clear.
And, I think for me to invoke the un-written rule of âDonât talk to me!â to make a point still risks the issue of whether even a rhetorical invocation is an example of double standards.
The issue Iâm running into with AP is that donât feel that the discussion is being reciprocated in good faith, but rather to score points. Yet I also recognize we all may feel that way about other people. So, dunno.
1 Like
I flag spam and when people cross the line into name calling and such. But I feel I should flag unto others only as I would have others flag unto me. I have seen flagging explicitly used by âRegularsâ on Boing Boing BBS to censor viewpoints rather than to flag for lack of decorum. Iâve also witnessed a number of liberal-minded blog forums I used to frequent descend into militant echo chambers, where the hoard would gleefully dog pile on people for daring question the status quo, with emotions running high and and care for facts and logical argument a distant second. They became, and remain, vicious and reminiscent of Alt-Right crapola. I will continue to be cautious with my own flagging. I donât wish to see the BBS go more down that rabbit hole than it already has.
Except that it doesnât happen, and your complaint about othering is either generic confusion or⌠well shit, you keep posting, so youâre stuck in the mode of skepticism as a pose because you canât tell the community what you really think?
What DO you really think? Câmon, tell us without getting a time-out. I can do it, so can you!
2 Likes
You guys can complicate things about the âshut downâ story.
Without inviting a replay by posting the original now that I know how to retrieve it (uploaded here http://freetexthost.com/w1oavtp3hb), the âshut downâ went more or less along these lines:
Poster 1: I donât like the clown in âITâ, the story could have been done without the scary clown.
Poster 2: The clown was integral as a metaphor, etc.
Poster 1: âIâm not interested in conversing with you, thanks.â (exact words)
Poster 2: whatever.
Poster 3:Iâd like to talk about this, I agree with you 2, I think clowns serve a purpose in horror fiction etcâŚ
MOD shuts down thread since Poster 1 clearly has a sensitivity about clowns, but not such a sensitivity as to prevent her from bringing up the topic of clowns out of the blue, having her say, then shutting down responses.
Regarding my statement of what a Mod can or canât do, IMO the Mod has a responsibility not to oil the squeaky wheel of someone whose flag is on a hair trigger. This is absolutely relevant to the OP because if you believe the Mods will simply delete ANY post that gets flagged without really looking at whatâs going on, you will be more likely to err on the side of caution rather than âflag and let the mods sort it outâ.
2 Likes
First, thatâs not a complete sentence, but I take it to mean that you donât feel the discussion is being reciprocated in good faith.
To that I say that it is being reciprocated. Your good faith is being reciprocated. 100% or more.
Now about those emails which you cite as the basis for your complaints in this thread, the ones which:
Perhaps youâve left some spare good faith under those? If only you could be assed to bother making your own points!
innit just awful when other people deflect and dodge, bullshit and behave rudely?
1 Like
Oh no! The devastating Disproof by Assertion of Imperfect Grammar!!! My points are all invalid!!! Horror!
So, bringing this around to the topic, Iâve been on one forum where criticism of typos or grammar errors will get you flagged and your posts deleted because criticism of grammar is typically irrelevant and meant as an attack rather than logical argument. Should grammar criticism be a flagable offense on the BBS on that basis?
so, if itâs everyone it could also be you, but it couldnât possibly be just you?
Sometimes itâs just one person. Sometimes that person is me, right? So, sometimes itâs you.
where did I disprove anything in what you responded to? And what the fuck is up with the chip on your shoulder?
I offered that you were speaking about yourself, despite not actually doing that. I was correct, so of course youâre offended?
You were talking about yourself, so, Grow up.
The last person I knew who so enjoyed and forwarded the contrary game as youâre doing here, was a a 6 year old girl. Even she got tired of it.
1 Like
