Smallc Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 I don't think I meant exactly what I said. I disagree with him, but when I do, it makes me consider why (there are a few other posters like that - it's not just him). I think the difference is that he does it with humour. I think he, like many conservative posters, have become far less reasonable since the election (and no, it's not because my opinion has changed).
Argus Posted November 13, 2015 Author Report Posted November 13, 2015 (edited) Charles Anthony is certainly not a leftist, and MH is far from heavy handed. I remember Charles Anthony's posts back before he became moderator. He was certainly very much a Left winger then and nothing about his comments since then have caused me to think he's changed one iota. And anyone who suspends me, as MH did, while refusing to answer what words I used caused the suspension, is heavy handed as far as I'm concerned. Edited November 13, 2015 by Argus "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
Argus Posted November 13, 2015 Author Report Posted November 13, 2015 (edited) I don't think I meant exactly what I said. I disagree with him, but when I do, it makes me consider why (there are a few other posters like that - it's not just him). I think the difference is that he does it with humour. I think he, like many conservative posters, have become far less reasonable since the election (and no, it's not because my opinion has changed). I haven't become less reasonable in my political views, just more irritated at the moderation here. Edited November 13, 2015 by Argus "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
Smallc Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 I haven't become less reasonable in my political views, just more irritated at the moderation here. It's not your political views, and it's not just you. It's the hyperbole around what you're saying. It's really based on very little at the moment. I'm not a partisan so things are different for me.
Argus Posted November 13, 2015 Author Report Posted November 13, 2015 It's not your political views, and it's not just you. It's the hyperbole around what you're saying. It's really based on very little at the moment. I'm not a partisan so things are different for me. Perhaps the conflict between the innate cynicism of conservatives and the rhapsodic celebration of the rainbow and unicorns set has resulted in a rise in ascerbic comments. "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
On Guard for Thee Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 I haven't become less reasonable in my political views, just more irritated at the moderation here.You just need to learn how to throw insults around without directing them to anyone specifically.
Argus Posted November 13, 2015 Author Report Posted November 13, 2015 You just need to learn how to throw insults around without directing them to anyone specifically. No, the moderators need to learn to stop people from throwing insults around. "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
Big Guy Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Children require referees, umpires and supervisors to control their actions because they are young, immature and need an adult guiding hand. Intelligent adults, on the other hand, should be mature enough to maintain their tempers and not look to outside supervision and moderation to set standards of civility. If you need some third party to moderate your actions then it is time to review what it is that you are doing and why you are doing it. 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.
Smallc Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Perhaps the conflict between the innate cynicism of conservatives and the rhapsodic celebration of the rainbow and unicorns set has resulted in a rise in ascerbic comments. That could be. I'm of neither set.
On Guard for Thee Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 No, the moderators need to learn to stop people from throwing insults around.Now there's the best case of passing the buck I've heard in a long whiler.
drummindiver Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 Charles Anthony is certainly not a leftist, and MH is far from heavy handed. I never said he was heavy handed. His moderation is. And I can supply examples. And Charles has admitted on this very site to being leftist, so not sure what you are talking about.
drummindiver Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I haven't become less reasonable in my political views, just more irritated at the moderation here. Irritation at the tone of many posters as well. I don't think I meant exactly what I said. So, you don't know what you mean when you say it? Like you don't know what being a conservative means when you vote liberal? Edited November 14, 2015 by drummindiver
Smallc Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 And Charles has admitted on this very site to being leftist, so not sure what you are talking about. Last I talked to CA (not that long ago) he was an anarchist.
Argus Posted November 14, 2015 Author Report Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Intelligent adults, on the other hand, should be mature enough to maintain their tempers and not look to outside supervision and moderation to set standards of civility. If you need some third party to moderate your actions then it is time to review what it is that you are doing and why you are doing it. Unless you have nasty, overbearing pompous ass people insulting everyone who disagrees with them. Then you want to reply and tell them what you think of them, and the conversation tends to degenerate from there. Edited November 14, 2015 by Argus "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
Smallc Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 So, you don't know what you mean when you say it? Like you don't know what being a conservative means when you vote liberal? No, I often have a hard time communicating exactly what it is that I'm trying to say. As for voting Liberal, I'm about as conservative as I am liberal. For me every election is an extremely difficult choice.
drummindiver Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 No, I often have a hard time communicating exactly what it is that I'm trying to say. As for voting Liberal, I'm about as conservative as I am liberal. For me every election is an extremely difficult choice. I've been labelled Liberal by one of those online polls. To my everlasting shame.
Big Guy Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Moderation is just another means of refereeing or umpiring. It is an objective means of trying to create a level playing field for people in competition. Children generally require someone to referee since they lack the maturity to remain civil when goaded. That is why children require a few supervisors when playing in the schoolyard during recess. In most cases, adults do not require referees or supervision when they interact. They realize that they are accountable in the future for their actions of the present. That has a tendency to deter irritating behaviour. Irritating behaviour also tends to result in consequent physical pain to the source of the irritation from the target of irritation. That results in self-moderation. Anonymity changes that balance. Accountability is no longer a factor. Most people who first experiment on opinion boards begin in a default nature of collegiality wanting to gain from the experience. Unfortunately, boards tend to be dominated by unhealthy individuals who require anonymity to spread their unhealthy ideas and satisfy their needs to demean others. These are the individuals who spend hours a day on their machines and continue to test the envelope of acceptability of language and conduct on these boards. Their default nature is adversarial and definitely not collegial. They gain a sense of false superiority by demeaning others and require the use of the edges of acceptable behaviour to out insult "the next guy". When your default position is adversarial then you look for as many tools (or weapons) with which to fight and tend to expand the envelope and/or suffer periodic bannings. The experienced and intelligent posters will treat these folks like Monty Pythons Black Knight - step around the raging, dismembered and impotent clown and continue on their travels. Edited November 14, 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.
Argus Posted November 14, 2015 Author Report Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Moderation is just another means of refereeing or umpiring. It is an objective means of trying to create a level playing field for people in competition. Children generally require someone to referee since they lack the maturity to remain civil when goaded. That's an interesting premise since it seems to presume one should remain civil to someone who is goading them. Wouldn't the act of goading someone be described as childish and uncivil in itself? And don't all adult competitions require refereeing and umpiring? Don't chess and tennis matches, hockey, soccer, football and baseball games? Is there not a moderator during formal debates at Harvard and Oxford? The presumption that refereeing or moderation is only needed for children seems profoundly silly and illogical. Irritating behaviour also tends to result in consequent physical pain to the source of the irritation from the target of irritation. That results in self-moderation. True enough! You would certainly find yourself interrupted in your constant attempts at goading people if you did it in real life. Not that I mean 'You' personally, of course. Because, of course, you would never do that, of course. Not you. In real life anyway. Anonymity changes that balance. Accountability is no longer a factor. Indeed! It lets a person take on a smug, passive aggressive stance of insulting and goading people while pretending not to be referring to anyone in particular. Unfortunately, boards tend to be dominated by unhealthy individuals who require anonymity to spread their unhealthy ideas and satisfy their needs to demean others. These are the individuals who spend hours a day on their machines and continue to test the envelope of acceptability of language and conduct on these boards. Their default nature is adversarial and definitely not collegial. They gain a sense of false superiority by demeaning others and require the use of the edges of acceptable behaviour to out insult "the next guy". You mean like someone who would follow a poster around and add Hitler quotes after their posts? The experienced and intelligent posters will treat these folks like Monty Pythons Black Knight - step around the raging, dismembered and impotent clown and continue on their travels And yet, jeering at their pathetic and pompous attempts at goading them can provide an amusing break in the discussion with people of more equal intelligence and maturity who are actually capable of mature discussion.. Edited November 14, 2015 by Argus "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
Big Guy Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 Thank you for making my point. 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.
Guest Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 Are you above it all? Could you show us how?
Big Guy Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 Are you above it all? Could you show us how? I follow the conditions of this board. I think that insulting people says a lot more about the person making the insulting remarks than it does about the intended recipient. I state my opinions on issues and respond with civility to those who question with civility. I do not report anyone although I do wonder why someone would gain pleasure from creating discomfort or anger in others. That is not a healthy behaviour. I participate here to read points of view from others and sometimes the odd gem appears through the mud. So far it has been worth the time. If/when it no longer is, then I move on. And "above it"? Do you mean staying out of the personal mud slinging? I do not enjoy acrimony or thoughtless argument. Why should I participate in something that I do not enjoy? 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.
Guest Posted November 14, 2015 Report Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I follow the conditions of this board. I think that insulting people says a lot more about the person making the insulting remarks than it does about the intended recipient. I state my opinions on issues and respond with civility to those who question with civility. I do not report anyone although I do wonder why someone would gain pleasure from creating discomfort or anger in others. That is not a healthy behaviour. I participate here to read points of view from others and sometimes the odd gem appears through the mud. So far it has been worth the time. If/when it no longer is, then I move on. And "above it"? Do you mean staying out of the personal mud slinging? I do not enjoy acrimony or thoughtless argument. Why should I participate in something that I do not enjoy? You're more than happy to tar anyone who disagrees with you as a racist, a bigot or a xenophobe. It's your go to comment. I wonder how many you have actually known. I'm in my late 50s and I've known only a few who really fit those terms. To disagree with someone who is not the same colour or religion as you is not the criteria for being one. Edited November 14, 2015 by bcsapper
Big Guy Posted November 15, 2015 Report Posted November 15, 2015 You're more than happy to tar anyone who disagrees with you as a racist, a bigot or a xenophobe. It's your go to comment. I wonder how many you have actually known. I'm in my late 50s and I've known only a few who really fit those terms. To disagree with someone who is not the same colour or religion as you is not the criteria for being one. I suggest that perhaps our criteria for evaluating what statements are racist, bigoted or xenophobic might be different. I am quite comfortable with mine and when I read of someone trying to intellectualize or rationalize or obfuscate or other ways to veil racist ideas that fit my criteria then I post accordingly. There are a number of people on this board whose definition appears to be very different from mine. So be it. They are also free to express their opinions. There are a number of posters who disagree with me. So be it. I wonder why they care. There are a number of posters whose opinion or support means nothing to me. When I read something that I consider to be blatantly racist etc. I have found that stating that it is racist has little value. I try to find a similar view expressed by someone who is considered by all to be racist ( like leaders of the 3rd Reich and White Supremist groups) and post that quote after the original post. If there is no similarity then my method has no effect and is ignored. Considering recent responses, it appears that I have hit very close to the bone and the authors of racist views on this board resent the comparison. They are free to disassociate themselves from those statements. "To disagree with someone who is not the same colour or religion as you is not the criteria for being one." I fully agree. The difference is the reason for the disagreement. That I believe is what pre-judging is all about. I currently reside in a small town in Southern Ontario that is 95% white and the vast majority are British based. I have been at many social functions where I hear terms like Camel Jockeys, Rug Heads and other demeaning terms for any other racial minorities in Canada. That is the case in many small towns in Canada. So be it. The strange part is that many do not think that they are being racists or bigots or xenophobic but Canadian nationalists protecting their culture. So be it too. Thank you for your question. 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 November 15, 2015 Author Report Posted November 15, 2015 I follow the conditions of this board. No, you actually don't. Even by your own admission. "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
drummindiver Posted November 15, 2015 Report Posted November 15, 2015 What a joke Charles Anthony is. I report someone for the first time ("Yeah I somehow missed that. What a piece of shit" Black Dog)...and he tells me to delete the message myself. I'm not a moderator on this site, he continually tells ppl to report, and when you finally do he does nothing and lays it on you. Again, Charles Anthony, you are a joke.
Recommended Posts