GostHacked Posted August 31, 2015 Report Posted August 31, 2015 Of all things to be picky about , how we address people in government?
Bob Macadoo Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 Of all things to be picky about , how we address people in government? I think this site has finally passed into the absolute absurd. A Python sketch or a Hitchhiker's Guide chapter....
BC_chick Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 I actually get the logic even if I don't necessarily agree with it. Many posters do use variations of the first-name passive-aggressively to show disrespect and since it's difficult to moderate in context, they are just making it a black and white rule. Personally I don't care one way or another I just didn't understand why several posters were warned years ago about using "Steve" yet "Tommy" seems to be ok. Apparently it's not. 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
On Guard for Thee Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 I'd say there are much more serious flaws in the moderation on this forum.
BC_chick Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 The lack of interest in banning trolls? Indeed. 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
On Guard for Thee Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 The lack of interest in banning trolls? Indeed. Indeed. It seems to matter less what you say, but to whom you say it, at times.
Charles Anthony Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 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.Use your own definition. What difference, at this point, does it make?!? If you ignore trolling, it will go away. You are expected to deal with trolling by reporting it and ignoring it. In your report, saying "This is trolling because..." and provide your reason. Then you should suggest a warning or an intervention like: "I recommend you ban this member permanently from the forum due to this infraction!!!" If you can not give a reason, then perhaps you are wrong. The frustration has nothing to do with the definition of trolling. Your frustration is because you do not want to ignore it. You want to engage it. Some people ignore what others perceive to be trolling and keep the discussion doing. We are telling you the same thing: if you think it is trolling, ignore it and do not respond in kind. Others may disagree. You have it all wrong. Some of you folks are acting like children. We are the ones treating you like adults. In real life, most adults step away and ignore people who are annoying. I dare say that is the Canadian way. Context matters.No, context does not matter. On a long enough time line, an infinite number of Canucks hacking randomly away at their keyboards, it is an absolute certainly that some guy who just happens to coincidentally be called Cyber Coma will run for office and then we will never know the truth!!! Are initials OK? JT? SH? TM? We will leave you alone. We reckon that nobody can reasonably be expected to interpret sarcasm or disrespect through the use of initials. In my opinion, I think it is sloppy. What is your experience in herding cats?They never cease to amaze me. 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.This is nothing more than a simple objective rule that Greg has asked us to follow purely for the sake of clarity and to avoid any miscommunication. Some people will read snide sarcasm when none is intended and vice verse which can then detract discussion. It is not that much extra effort. It is only a little more pounding on your keyboards to make sure your reader does not mistaken a fellow member name with a third-party name. Who said anything about disrespecting public servants? The disrespect is toward your fellow members in this forum, your reader and Greg who is essentially providing this fun opportunity to you all for free. What is with some of you?? Are you just sloppy in your communication and you can not see it?? Do you care so little to make your reader certain of what you are writing?? Help me out here, please. I am getting curious to understand what is with you all. I actually get the logic even if I don't necessarily agree with it.Hey, I am still struggling with the thought that some of you folks would want to meet with these characters, let alone give them a job! 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 September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 Of all things to be picky about , how we address people in government?Yes. It's about the only way decorum is kept on this forum these days, since nobody knows what a troll is anymore.
cybercoma Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 No, context does not matter.You're being incredibly stupid. Words only have meaning in context. Who said anything about disrespecting public servants? The disrespect is toward your fellow members in this forum, your reader and Greg who is essentially providing this fun opportunity to you all for free. How is using someone's appropriate first name disrespectful in any way to anyone? Also, I don't give a flying turd about Greg's benevolence. If he doesn't want to be providing the forum then tell him to shut the doors. I couldn't possibly care less whether or not this site exists. You want me to grovel before the altar of Greg for this bountiful gift he provides? Give me a damn break. There are numerous other venues for discussing Canadian politics and this one is far from the best. What is with some of you?? Are you just sloppy in your communication and you can not see it?? Do you care so little to make your reader certain of what you are writing??Let me put it this way, if you are too bloody stupid to understand in a discussion about Liberal Party policies that Justin is a reference to the party leader, Justin Trudeau, then the problem has nothing to do with the person writing the message and everything to do with the reader. Help me out here, please. I am getting curious to understand what is with you all.Like hell you are. If you were interested in understanding, you wouldn't be so quick to jump in here with condescending and snide remarks about a perfectly reasonable criticism. "Oh please, guys! I Just want to understand!" Who the hell are you kidding? Go ship that garbage somewhere else. Hey, I am still struggling with the thought that some of you folks would want to meet with these characters, let alone give them a job!Hey! We have something in common. I'm struggling with a thought too. I'm struggling with the thought that someone in a discussion of Canadian politics wouldn't understand who you were talking about if you only used the party leaders' first names.
cybercoma Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 As I understand it, that entire third party insult rule was added because it was common for people to address Paul Martin as Mr. Dithers, which is rude, disrespectful, and nothing more than trolling. Referring to a politician by a denigrating nickname is insulting to supporters of that party and does nothing but take the conversation into a mess of verbal attacks. In other words, it's a rule in place to stop trolling. Referring to a politician by their appropriate first name has nothing to do with that and is a ridiculous interpretation of the rule. But then, I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't know what trolling is to understand or interpret a rule designed to limit trolling.
Big Guy Posted September 1, 2015 Report Posted September 1, 2015 (edited) ... There are numerous other venues for discussing Canadian politics and this one is far from the best. ... With all due respect, why do you then continue here? If I found another public access bulletin board that was more to my liking then I would spend most of my free time there. Currently, I access and participate in three opinion boards - because I limit my computer access to two hours a day. You are obviously an intelligent and well educated individual. Why would you do something that does not give you pleasure? Edited September 1, 2015 by Big Guy 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.
Bob Macadoo Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 You're being incredibly stupid. You're like that gay-mo-phobe bus driver......after a rant like that they can't suspend you now....it would be too noticeable.
sharkman Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) Use your own definition. What difference, at this point, does it make?!? If you ignore trolling, it will go away. You are expected to deal with trolling by reporting it and ignoring it. Look, you 2 mods have given the appearance of flying by the seat of your pants with the way you mete out points, deletions and suspensions. You also stoop to calling names which is about the same thing as stamping your feet. You personally have called a title of a thread of mine, and I quote, "stupid". I sure hope you're not expecting any respect with the idiotic approach. I see above you're calling people childish and sloppy. At any rate, I think it's time that you man up and list whatever the hell your agenda is here. I'm asking for this because it's QUITE clear that what you've said thus far, and your actions are not even close. You close down some conversation that crosses the rules, but not others. Just what is your purpose here? And if you can't deal with that, at least try to bring a small amount of professionalism to your appearances here. Take a little pride in your work, you guys really are taking the low road around here. Using foot-stamping terms like "childish" or "stupid" really should be beneath a moderator. Edited September 2, 2015 by sharkman
BubberMiley Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 I would also like moderators who are both omnipotent and unassailably righteous. "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Black Dog Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) I would also like moderators who are both omnipotent and unassailably righteous. Consistent and respectful would be fine too. Edited September 2, 2015 by Black Dog
cybercoma Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 Oh and if we're going to be that pedantic about names being their full and proper first and last name, why then allow terms like "lefties" or "Harpercons"? Are they not similarly disrespectful and not the appropriate nomenclature for those groups?
GostHacked Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 Use your own definition. What difference, at this point, does it make?!? If you ignore trolling, it will go away. 100% Bull. What is this board's definition of trolling? As my definition of trolling seems to be completely irrelevant.
socialist Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 I'm sure Mr. Anthony has better things to do with his time then concern himself with a bunch of juvenile trivialities. Some of you need to grow up. Thankful to have become a free thinker.
The_Squid Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 Oh and if we're going to be that pedantic about names being their full and proper first and last name, why then allow terms like "lefties" or "Harpercons"? Are they not similarly disrespectful and not the appropriate nomenclature for those groups? That's a good question... I have been told by the Mod that the term "lefties" is not acceptable. Whether people are actually getting dinged for using the term, I don't know.
BubberMiley Posted September 2, 2015 Report Posted September 2, 2015 (edited) People who use attempts at fake internet psychoanalysis in an attempt to end an argument they're losing can be funny. Rather than banning references to "derangement syndromes", it should just be recognized that they lost whatever debate they were attempting. It's a lot like when people say you're anti-semitic for criticizing Israel or that you hate blacks because don't hate the police (though I've never heard that one): it's just a pathetic attempt to shut down debate because they don't understand the issues. It's that simple. Edited September 2, 2015 by BubberMiley "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Big Guy Posted September 3, 2015 Report Posted September 3, 2015 .... Rather than banning references to "derangement syndromes", it should just be recognized that they lost whatever debate they were attempting... My understanding has been that there are no winners or losers to an issue in a debate. In competitive debates, the opponents are told which position they are to defend. The winner or loser is based on an objective panel's decision on who best presented their case and rebuttal. When an issue is being discussed by many different anonymous sources, there is really no "debate". Each individual poster states their position (and in most cases again and again and again ... ad nauseam). Once in a while someone may take a refreshing different angle on an issue making the following of that discussion worthwhile. In a civil discussion, everyone is a winner. Either you find your position on an issue re-enforced after hearing from others or you begin to question your own position based on an opposing valid argument or reference with which you were not familiar. Either way you are better for the experience. If that were not the case, why would anyone take precious time to participate on an anonymous board? 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.
BubberMiley Posted September 3, 2015 Report Posted September 3, 2015 Yeah, apparently they don't keep score in kids'soccer anymore either. "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
jbg Posted September 6, 2015 Report Posted September 6, 2015 I think this site has finally passed into the absolute absurd. A Python sketch or a Hitchhiker's Guide chapter.... This may be one of the few times we agree. I used to post an average of 8-10 posts a day here. Now I am rarely here. A combination of the farcical juvenality of the discussion and my own receipt of a barrage of warnings and suspensions has led me to reduce my time here. Google for me as JBG or JBGUSA elsewhere. And NYCNDP on Rabble. Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted September 7, 2015 Report Posted September 7, 2015 Yeah, apparently they don't keep score in kids'soccer anymore either. And what criteria would you use in judging the "winner" and "loser" of arguments in this forum? 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.
Argus Posted September 8, 2015 Author Report Posted September 8, 2015 That's a good question... I have been told by the Mod that the term "lefties" is not acceptable. Whether people are actually getting dinged for using the term, I don't know. I have never heard that the term is inappropriate. It's a diminutive of Left Wing, and not, to my mind, insulting. "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
Recommended Posts