Charles Anthony Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 Let us discuss such accuracy. Maybe you can answer the question that Argus refused to answer: Can we agree that the word "idiot" is either inflammatory and or ambiguous?? HINT: That is a yes or no question.Yes.Good. On to the next step. Recall, you believe Argus' definition is accurate. I am demanding that we pinpoint the accuracy. So, let us remove what is either inflammatory and or ambiguous. Anybody can see quite plainly that the world is flat. Does the above statement qualify as actionable trolling, in your opinion? In other words, do you expect a moderator to intervene upon such a post? I need some of your guidance/clarification here..."Start a new thread." is clear enough. the post from the guy, "the American" responding to your direct question, isn't thread drift, but my post ...... suggests that the double-entendre zipped over your head too. "Shucks. If Texas was good enough for John F. Kennedy, then golly gee, it must certainly be good enough to host anybody! Yuk, yuk." Again, it's clear you see ....It is clear you can not see that there is no need for every single human being to share the exact same definition of "trolling" or of "boring" or of "exciting" or of any other qualifier that tickles your fancy. We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Argus Posted August 25, 2015 Author Report Posted August 25, 2015 I think you know the answer to that. I've decided after my latest suspension for responding to trolls is to follow the rules......report...ignore....rinse.....repeat. That is actually the wise thing to do. I only have one person in my ignore list, and he's there because his continued bitter invective and insults would otherwise inspire me to reply in kind and get suspended. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Black Dog Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 It is clear you can not see that there is no need for every single human being to share the exact same definition of "trolling" or of "boring" or of "exciting" or of any other qualifier that tickles your fancy. This is what you said: Defining Trolling™ is inherently a fool's errand without any poetic value. What matters is agreement upon how to deal with the perception of trolling. That's the question we're all waiting for an answer to because your answer so far can be summed up as: "Meh."
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 ... suggests that the double-entendre zipped over your head too. "Shucks. If Texas was good enough for John F. Kennedy, then golly gee, it must certainly be good enough to host anybody! Yuk, yuk." and this is the part of the statement you're focused on? That's your take-away? It's a shame you settle in on the "aw shucks" and avoid the more salient part... the part about that same "hosted in Texas" theme being a "useful microcosm for the CanAm relationship at many levels."... which ties into the broader theme of "the American's", where he openly asserts his mission/crusade is to reinforce that, "Canadian's define their identity by/with everything that is American". While you choose to focus on "double-entendre", the rest of the forum gets to experience "the American" playing out his "useful microcosm's", ad nauseam, over, quite literally... a brazillion posts! Week after week, month after month, year upon year! It's to the point now where linking to an American source is deemed a "useful microcosm" by, "the American"... and an accompanying post will be dropped with nothing more than some curt/snide remark about using an American source for reference. within the 2 recent posts of mine in this thread that you chose to delete, along with everything else I wrote, I also asked, "the American" how he measures his own success and time/effort spent towards presuming to "enlighten Canadians on their identity". Now that... an answer to that... surely would provide a "useful microcosm" on its own - yes?
waldo Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 It's time for you to move on waldo. GFY... you know... 'good for you'!
G Huxley Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 (edited) OK this is simply censorship. I can't even post my thoughts here and defend myself and the injustices towards me here without my posts getting deleted like I was living in a totalitarian regime or something. Unbelievable. This is what you'd expect in China, not in Canada. The reason you don't want my post here to see the light of day is because it makes clear the abuse of power by the 'moderation' here. Edited August 25, 2015 by G Huxley
PIK Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 So it does not matter what side you are on, the Nazis will ban anybody they don't agree with. I have had a few run ins myself with them and they are all over the board, could they moderate a 1 car taxi stand? Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Charles Anthony Posted August 25, 2015 Report Posted August 25, 2015 The reason you don't want my post here to see the light of day is because it makes clear the abuse of power by the 'moderation' here. Your posts were preserved and formed a separate thread on their own. You raise an important question and I think it deserves attention. I do not want it to get buried in this thread. Now that... an answer to that... surely would provide a "useful microcosm" on its own - yes? What part of "Start a new thread." is unclear? We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
GostHacked Posted August 30, 2015 Report Posted August 30, 2015 That's the question we're all waiting for an answer to because your answer so far can be summed up as: "Meh." This is what is frustrating the most. We've spend over a year discussing this issue, and we still have no definition of what is classified as trolling. And when we do call out the trolling, we get treated like children. The moderation is focusing on bad language when the trolling needs to be addressed first. Swearing seems to be detrimental to threads, but trolling is not detrimental. Most here can agree who are the trolls.. Broken record, see you in another 6 months when we revisit this shit with absolutely NO F'n progress.
BC_chick Posted August 30, 2015 Report Posted August 30, 2015 Off topic - how come we weren't allowed to refer to Harper as Steve on this forum but Tommy and Justin are ok? Admittedly, it was a while ago that the Steve issue surfaced but the point at the time was that it was deemed disrespectful. Yet the same doesn't apply to Trudeau and Mulcair. It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
Charles Anthony Posted August 30, 2015 Report Posted August 30, 2015 On topic - referring to Harper as Steve and Muclair as Tommy and Trudeau as Justin are not ok. That is to be discouraged. When you encounter members being disrespectful in that manner, please report them and ignore them. We tell folks to stop it. If they do it repeatedly, we are more stern. Admittedly, Pierre Elliot Trudeau's son uses Justin as part of his promotional image. That throws a wrench into the cogs. Nevertheless, Greg wants us to use proper names as much as possible. We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
BubberMiley Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 Steve and Tom and Justin are proper names. Are you sure you're allowed to call him Greg? "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Bob Macadoo Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 Steve and Tom and Justin are proper names. Are you sure you're allowed to call him Greg? ....oh snap....
cybercoma Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 On topic - referring to Harper as Steve and Muclair as Tommy and Trudeau as Justin are not ok. That is to be discouraged. When you encounter members being disrespectful in that manner, please report them and ignore them. We tell folks to stop it. If they do it repeatedly, we are more stern. Admittedly, Pierre Elliot Trudeau's son uses Justin as part of his promotional image. That throws a wrench into the cogs. Nevertheless, Greg wants us to use proper names as much as possible. All of those leaders go by Steve, Tom, and Justin. Calling Mr. Harper "Stevie" or Tom "Tommy" or Justin "nice hair though" is not acceptable because they don't go by those names.
cybercoma Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 With regards to "Steve" because I know some will say he goes by Stephen only:
Smallc Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 He goes by Stephen now though. Besides that, you wouldn't call him Stephen or Steve if you met him.
cybercoma Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 I called Tom Mulcair, "Tom" when I met him. I called Elizabeth May, "Elizabeth" when I met her. I called Herb Gray, "Herb" when I met him. So yeah, I would probably call Stephen Harper, "Stephen."
The_Squid Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 I have no issues with limiting the names that politicians are referred to. It's a simple way to maintain decorum on the forum. But the decorum needs to be enforced. And that is severely lacking on this site. First step would be not to allow trolling... but apparently, that's too hard.
Charles Anthony Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 I called Tom Mulcair, "Tom" when I met him. I called Elizabeth May, "Elizabeth" when I met her. I called Herb Gray, "Herb" when I met him. So yeah, I would probably call Stephen Harper, "Stephen."Did you introduce yourself as Cyber or as Mr. Coma to them? Regardless, MLW is not a meeting place. MLW is a writing place. For those of you too ornery to care whether your readers clearly understand what you write, Harper is not the only Stephen in Canada, May is not the only Elizabeth in Canada and Trudeau is not the only Justin in Canada. To those of you who can see the obvious, I suggest you ignore members/posts that do not follow the rules THAT YOU LIKE TO FOLLOW and let those other members converse with whoever can meet them at their level. We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
cybercoma Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 Did you introduce yourself as Cyber or as Mr. Coma to them? Regardless, MLW is not a meeting place. MLW is a writing place. Don't be ridiculous. Why would I introduce myself as Cyber or Coma? My first name is Cy and my last name is Bercoma. For those of you too ornery to care whether your readers clearly understand what you write, Harper is not the only Stephen in Canada, May is not the only Elizabeth in Canada and Trudeau is not the only Justin in Canada.Context matters. In any case, I'm in favour of people using proper names. I just think it's a bit excessive if we can't call the leader of the third party Justin.
Big Guy Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 I was brought up in an era where one referred to others as Mr .... or Mrs ... unless you were asked to use their first names. It was a sign of respect to others - a condition that is not very often found here. The use of the first name is just another way to demean the target politician and therefore throw a stinger at the perceived board adversary. I think it is a silly practice but seems necesary to those who lack a vocabulary to employ witticisms to make a point. So they will use all the tools available to them to agitate others. To Mr Anthony - to get involved in this petty squabbling you will soon have to define what "is" is. What is your experience in herding cats? Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
cybercoma Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 If it's demeaning to be addressed by your first name, then I don't even know what's real anymore. That's the craziest thing I've ever heard. As far as I'm concerned, it's the public servant who should be respecting the public, not the other way around.
Recommended Posts