RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant)

RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DarkSteven -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 4:55:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MastrVran Assuming you feel as you do, and I think your veiw is a good one BTW, why could you not allow the OP their request and start a post of your own expressing your veiws? In this Forum we all have the right to start a thread. So how would starting your own thread as others often do when they do not want to hijack a thread, in anyway be a problem? Would that not allow the OP their own thread and get just the replies requested? And at the same time allow you to make all the points you would have made anyway? Is it too much trouble in someway to start a new thread? Or is there some secret thread limit I am not aware of and we must keep threads down to some number. (joke) MV Collarme owns the site. That means that they get server space, implement code on it, get paid advertising to support the site, have mods police the site, etc. They own the site, they make the rules, and I abide by them. Another user has as much validity in my eyes as I do. if they specify that Doms cannot reply to their post, I may honor it or I may not - it's not like the site itself made that request. Let me put this another way. If a restaurant decides to put aside separate areas for people who order burgers, another for those who order pizza, etc., that's odd but I'll respect that. If a patron decides to do the exact same thing and only allow burger eaters in a section of the restaurant, I'll tell them to go to hell.

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:01:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact (Fast reply until I have the opportunity to read the content of the thread.) Would you like to have the gender debate, the chromosome debate, or the lifestyle debate? I have said this multiple times when this discussion has entered this particular forum before. I am a person who practices the leather lifestyle. Unlike the Gorean lifestyle, the title of Master is not one held by men alone. This is something that is a significant difference between us. In the leather lifestyle, it is a title that can be held by a man or a woman. In fact, our protocols have much more to do with experience in living this way. Not whether someone has a penis or not, but rather how long they have successfully run their M/s dynamics in their authority. Even amongst Master's themselves, that is what determines whether one is junior or senior to another. Our protocols specifically state that gender is not to be a factor when showing courtesy and respect for each other. There may not be as many leather people on these boards as there once were. That does not make our lifestyle any more or less valid than anyone else's. I probably hold higher requirements for Myself in the title than a heck of a lot of people on these boards do. I was granted My Master's Cap by the leather community in April of 2008 with My husband and My side and My boy at My feet. It wasn't something that I asked for and truthfully, most people who receive one don't think it is something they deserve. My leather family and community thought that I did. I'm not going to disrespect their opinion for some random message board. Thank you for another of your thought provoking posts. Number one since you are by your own statements a Master, even if the point was to limit questions here to Masters, you would be one who should reply. I do not have any issue with Mistresses or Masters, both being Dominant and having similar mindsets. So naturally I would have no problem even if such a request had been made for either to reply. But the focus of this is just if someone does ask for something, would it not be polite to let them get the answer from the source they want? MV

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:04:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wolf2Bear quote: ORIGINAL: MastrVran Every time someone starts a thread they are "forcing" the Mods to watch the thread. And I can understand you feeling like being asked to withhold comment is in some way rude. But when you want to try and understand why a Master does something. You ask a Master. A slave or sub might think they know, they might even be right, but you dont ask a Lawyer how to fix your plumbing. You call a Plumber. But of course this is not the point really. The point was simply that having a right to reply as you will does not make replying the right answer. You feel they have no right to even ask this. If that is your belief fine. I made my point, you disagree. MV Then what about all of us who operate from both sides? Don't you believe that we are able to offer anything from either a dominant or submissive point of view? Of course, but then my view is not the one being discussed. I would not have asked to limit the discussion. The questions is just about if someone asks, why not be polite and allow them to get the type of responses they are seeking. MV

camille65 -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:07:54 PM)
You certainly notice those that respond, do you ever notice the huge amount of those that do NOT respond? Taking it by the numbers you are complaining about a very very small percentage of forum members. Which now includes me [:D]

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:16:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven quote: ORIGINAL: MastrVran Assuming you feel as you do, and I think your veiw is a good one BTW, why could you not allow the OP their request and start a post of your own expressing your veiws? In this Forum we all have the right to start a thread. So how would starting your own thread as others often do when they do not want to hijack a thread, in anyway be a problem? Would that not allow the OP their own thread and get just the replies requested? And at the same time allow you to make all the points you would have made anyway? Is it too much trouble in someway to start a new thread? Or is there some secret thread limit I am not aware of and we must keep threads down to some number. (joke) MV Collarme owns the site. That means that they get server space, implement code on it, get paid advertising to support the site, have mods police the site, etc. They own the site, they make the rules, and I abide by them. Another user has as much validity in my eyes as I do. if they specify that Doms cannot reply to their post, I may honor it or I may not - it's not like the site itself made that request. Let me put this another way. If a restaurant decides to put aside separate areas for people who order burgers, another for those who order pizza, etc., that's odd but I'll respect that. If a patron decides to do the exact same thing and only allow burger eaters in a section of the restaurant, I'll tell them to go to hell. Agreed. However Collarme by setting up Ask a Master, set up pizza and burger sections. They then stated the names are just suggestive. Everyone can eat where they will. But they left the signs up. This really is not the issue though. It all comes down to someone making a request. Followed by everyone deciding sure its fine, I don't care, or Heck no that does not work for me. I simply said for me, being polite, I would allow them this small request. I see this as we all have the right to make comments and posts. We certainly do. But having the right and being in the right, are different. Most of the responders seem to feel even asking this question in some way hurts them. Obviously for those, we will simply disagree. MV

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:28:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mstrjx To the OP, What would happen if it were decided that, in this rant about rights, that you weren't right? Now would you please put on a shirt? You're creeping me out. Jeff You mean if the majority as is obviously against even answering the real point, were to suddenly become clear that they thought I was wrong? Oh my what a horrible thought. Since I have stated I feel that Politeness is pretty much toast, I somehow doubt I will be found "in the right". lol And I am horribly offended by your biased and predjudicial comment about my being without a shirt. I assume you also tell every woman on here the same thing? If not your libelous type comment has been duly noted lol. Or perhaps it is just a phobia of some kind? There are doctors that might could help you with that. MV

VaguelyCurious -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:31:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MastrVran Most of the responders seem to feel even asking this question in some way hurts them. Obviously for those, we will simply disagree. Just to be absolutely clear, I don't in any way feel that the rudeness of strangers on the internet 'hurts me'. But it is what it is - rudeness - and to suggest otherwise only suggests a lack of understanding of the etiquette involved. I find it ironic that the man starting the thread about a perceived lack of manners doesn't understand the basic questions of courtesy involved.

Badmanbad -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:35:17 PM)
For what it's worth, Vran, I agree with your original rant. But I also recognize that common politeness is nearly dead in our society, and really never existed on the internet at all. So, while you're right, you'll be told you're wrong. It goes that way sometimes.

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:37:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WyldHrt quote: I certainly did notice that. Yet if it turns out that doing something a different way was better or would have been better, does it invalidate a request to do it differently? Request? Funny, I didn't see a request in that particular OP, I saw a rude demand that a certain segment of the board not reply. It is also worth noting that the OP was about the very people that were 'requested' not to post. To me, that is the height of rudeness. Were I to start a thread saying that I think Goreans are ridiculous for structuring their lives around a bunch of fantasy books and ended said OP with, "I won't bother replying to Goreans. I am not interested in your opinion" would that not be extremely rude? Would your polite nature preclude you from posting a rebuttal? Many times, the reaction one gets to such a request in the OP depends on how the 'request' is phrased. OPs who say something like, "I'd like to get the Masters' perspective on this one" get a much better reaction than those who say, "I ONLY want to hear from Masters! If you are not a Master, do not reply!!" Expecting people to be polite in the face of an OP that is rudely phrased is a bit much. Perhaps you might want to simply reread the original post. No one said anything like what you described though people often when hearing or reading something pick out part of it and latch onto that as if it was the entire point. And I do laugh when I see people going for the Gorean answer as if that was part of this at all. The only people bringing it up are those who feel it is useful as a way to discredit someone. Or since it is always used in a negative way, that is your intent. And your last paragraph is actually a very reasonable one and has been mentioned. How someone makes a request often makes all the difference to some. Then there are others who simply believe their Right to post to anything, is all that matters. As stated throughout, I simply believe the polite thing to do when requested, would be to let them get the type answer they want. It does not cost anyone anything to sit and read instead of posting a reply. MV

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:41:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Badmanbad For what it's worth, Vran, I agree with your original rant. But I also recognize that common politeness is nearly dead in our society, and really never existed on the internet at all. So, while you're right, you'll be told you're wrong. It goes that way sometimes. Thanks. I feel its just an old fashioned trait and is almost dead. I decided this morning to see how dead. So far my dead horse is pretty beaten up. Which proved the point I made exactly. The point was never about the right to post. But the politeness not to. MV

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 5:57:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: peacefulplace Everyone's heard of the First Amendment, right? Beyond that, unless someone is owned, what restrictions should be put on that person about posting anything? I wouldn't know. No one here has suggested any type of restrictions being put on anyone. I did suggest that someone might decide to be polite and allow the request. I also specifically and repeatedly said there was no requirement not to post. So the only restriction if there is one at all is self imposed and last I looked, there is no amendment banning someone from deciding not to do something. MV

MastrVran -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:01:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Missokyst If the forum was owned and run by the OP, then rules might be set. However, posting a query in a public forum that has no limitations about who is allowed to respond is just being a jackass. They are rude by changing the rules that are already in place by the moderators. Sure they can ask for one or the other person to respond, but that does not mean that ONLY that person or the other should be allowed to respond. Why? The rules were not set in place by the OP. When they wish to create their own forum they can set the rules. Anything less is arrogance. No one may respond to this post unless they are wearing a green paisley shirt. If they do I will throw myself down and have a hissy fit. For the unknownth time, no one suggested any of that. The suggestion was to allow someones request even the green paisly one lol, because you are being polite. You certainly do not have to. MV

SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:02:37 PM)
There is also no amendment banning someone from deciding that they will post somewhere regardless of the rudeness the op shows by demanding that only a certain type of people reply.

Twoshoes -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:04:23 PM)
For 49.99$/hour, I will present your ideas to the world better, MastrVran! No more walls of text. No more proofs by verbosity and other bedazzlements. No more quotes everywhere. No more repeating the same points. No more sweeping generalizations. No more horse/animal/food/water analogies and metaphors all over the place. No. Think about my offer. Think. It's less than your lawyer makes. I'm better than him.* *Not guaranteed. Service only available in Canada. An additional one-time fee may be applicable.

tiggerspoohbear -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:22:52 PM)
I don't consider it to be impolite to answer a thread where I think what I have to say can help. I may have some information that the OP isn't aware of, and may also serve to inform or educate other posters on the thread. Then there are the various jackasses, myriad douchecanoes and assorted asstards who start a thread just to make trouble even though it's in the form of a "question". When the general population responds, and the answers are not to his/her satsifaction, they pull the victim card. The "woe is me" everyone is attacking me, I was just asking a question. In that case, sorry, but they're going to get the sarcastic, the snarky and the funny posts. As long as someone is not attacked personally, then it's the age of the internet and everything goes. I've been approached thru CM with very rude comments from the beginning, I've now taken to ask if they would dare say that to my if we met on the street. I've had one reply amongst the many where the man took his time, thought about it, and apologized. Many cannot come to terms that hiding behind a keyboard does not make them the "me tarzan, you jane" type. They are quickly put into place. I am me on the 'net as in person. Always have been, always will be. Some of my replies may be caustic, but if I were asked the same question in person, the same answer would be given. 'Nuff said. CRAP, I didn't want this to turn into a novel.

WyldHrt -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:45:02 PM)
quote: Perhaps you might want to simply reread the original post. No one said anything like what you described though people often when hearing or reading something pick out part of it and latch onto that as if it was the entire point. Not sure which OP you are referring to. I was talking about this one: http://www.collarchat.com/m_3394695/tm.htm If you do not see a rude demand for female subs not to post in the thread, and that the OP was highly critical of those very subs, then I really can't help you. quote: And I do laugh when I see people going for the Gorean answer as if that was part of this at all. The only people bringing it up are those who feel it is useful as a way to discredit someone. Or since it is always used in a negative way, that is your intent. Or, since I know nothing else about you other than that you usually post on the Gorean forum, I used that to make an equivalent example that you would relate to. Nah, couldn't have been that. [8\|] quote: And your last paragraph is actually a very reasonable one and has been mentioned. How someone makes a request often makes all the difference to some. Then there are others who simply believe their Right to post to anything, is all that matters. As stated throughout, I simply believe the polite thing to do when requested, would be to let them get the type answer they want. It does not cost anyone anything to sit and read instead of posting a reply. How someone makes a request does matter to me. If someone needs to get by me in a store aisle and says, "Excuse me" or "Can I get by you?" I will happily move. If they try to push past while snarling, "Get the fuck out of my way!".... well, not so much. As for it not costing anything, the OP is not the only person reading any given thread. There are usually between 800- 4000 people on this board at any given time, many of whom simply lurk and read what is posted so that they can learn. Limiting the information presented to them simply because the OP only wants to hear from one sex/ orientation/ what have you decreases the value of the thread. Oh, and to your idea about starting a duplicate thread; I believe at least 5 other people have already told you that doing so is a violation of the posting rules for these forums. Has it occurred to you yet that the 'anyone can post anywhere' rule might in fact have come about as a way to end duplicate threads?

BonesFromAsh -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:54:11 PM)
"What is the test of good manners? Being able to bear patiently with bad ones." ~Solomon ibn Gabirol~ What the OP sees as being disrespectful, others see as being helpful. I feel it falls to the original poster of a thread to choose to either accept or ignore the words of others regardless of their request for advice from one specific group. The FAQs thread found under Administrative Announcements has many links to advice on proper netiquette. These are not part of the forum guidelines but added as suggestions for polite posting. It still, in my opinion, falls to the individual to decide whether or not their post is necessary and how people choose to respond. Take this post as an example, I felt what I chose to write held some value. The OP may decide otherwise. What matters is how he chooses to respond to my post. Either he can read it, agree and choose to write a reply or simply leave it as is...read it and disagree enough to comment on his disagreement of it...or ignore it. What it comes down to is what the original poster chooses to do with the information given, regardless of who it came from. I also love the way Zevar put it... quote: It appears after reading your words & then re-reading them again that they are merely a misguided diatribe. I do not say this to offend you, yet to tell you in an honest manner how your words come across when read. It also appears as though you have some underlying agenda that you have no control over thus you vent where others will respond to give you a pseudo sense of control, even if your choice to do so is to your own detriment. Of course, we all have a right to post what we feel is important, no?[;)]

sweetsub1957 -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 6:54:38 PM)
First off, I'm not a Master obviously, but I'm answering anyway. Not because the OP has given me permission to, but because I wanted to add something to the conversation. I don't think I'm rude when I answer someone.....as a matter of fact, I try to be polite. And not always, but a noticeable chunk of the time, OPs will start off w/ a scathing orignal post and then say they want only a certain type of person to answer. When that happens, they are just trying to stir up shit. They are just as rude, or ruder, than I ever dreamed of being. Secondly, i got to this party late, so I'm responding to several at once. quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I post where I like, if I feel that I have something to say. If someone else feels that my viewpoint isn't valid and I do, I post. I'll be darned if I'll sub to a thread. Yea Stevie!!!![sm=cheering.gif] quote: ORIGINAL: angelikaJ You had the right to post this where ever you wanted to... but that does not mean you were right in choosing to post it in this section. [;)] [sm=rofl.gif] General or Off Topic maybe? quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: Or is there some secret thread limit I am not aware of and we must keep threads down to some number. (joke) Actually multiple threads on the same topic in different forums is against TOS. (not a joke) Now this is funny. [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: Twoshoes When and where was paisley ever a trend? I had to google it... The 70s......when I was your age. lol [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Let me put this another way. If a restaurant decides to put aside separate areas for people who order burgers, another for those who order pizza, etc., that's odd but I'll respect that. If a patron decides to do the exact same thing and only allow burger eaters in a section of the restaurant, I'll tell them to go to hell. This. ~sweetsub~

gungadin09 -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 7:03:13 PM)
OP, i think You might've done better starting a thread about politeness in general, instead of using that specific example. It seems that most people don't agree that posting when an OP has asked NOT to hear their opinions, is impolite. i would have to agree. i don't think that it's impolite. It's just as easy to skip over people's responses than to ask them not to post. I think You may have a point about politeness and society. i want to agree and say that people often use bad manners, but i'm having trouble explaining WHY i think that. My dad bemoans the fact that nobody returns their shopping carts anymore. He talks about "the good old days", but i have trouble believing him. i don't see bad manners as being a generational thing. There have always been self-serving, lazy, and thoughtless people, and i think that's where bad manners come from. There have also always been people who go out of their way to help others and receive nothing from it. i don't know. Has anything really changed? Are we behaving worse than we used to? I try to be polite on the forums and in real life. If someone asked me to move my car because they needed the space, i probably would, even though i had the "right" to park where i wanted. Generally, if i can do something to help someone, i will, if it's at no great cost to myself. However, i reserve the right to refuse if i can't, or don't want to comply. If i have the "right" to do something, then it shouldn't offend anyone if i excercise that right. i don't say that out of spite. It's just, having the right means... having the right. pam

Missokyst -> RE: Having the right vs being in the right (Rant) (9/9/2010 7:03:57 PM)
Exactly! I knew I felt a paisley vibe from you. CM is owned and operated and sets the rules. For some OP to come in and dictate what they wish and deliberately insult anyone who does not fit that criteria is RUDE, inconsiderate, arrogant, and demanding. That particular post was a good example of "I am better than you are, so there!" as any I have seen. How the heck can anyone defend requirements presented from somone who has no right to change the rules of forums? If you post it, people have the right to respond regardless of whether or not they want to hear it. If the OP wanted to hear how sublier than thou she was, she should just ask her master.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625