RE: The decline of collarme

RE: The decline of collarme (Full Version)

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

Message

needlesandpins -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 2:18:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heartcream Some huge debate is ensuing of which I grazed a tiny bit over. I spent time last night reading that whole hallucination DID thread and came here to say that in fact that time period really curdled things here for me. I loathed those 'girls' they rubbed me all the wrong way. Yuck, I was sooooo glad to see them gone. As far as the main guy, he behaved so surly and mean, I was embarrassed he was from Canada. Now that I see he is sick, okay whatever move on. Then I saw someone here just now say that calling someone a hypocrite and saying what they said is hypocritical is the same thing. It is not. Calling someone something, like an angry muh fuh is way different than saying you are as angry as a muh fuh. One basically says the guy IS that where the other one says he is experiencing those feelings. He is going through that. If I say something hypocritical it doesnt make me a hypocrite. I am a human, we all are, well mostly anyway. It is important to discern the difference here especially as we talk to ourselves about ourselves in these ways. Big freakin difference. hence CONTEXT. there is a difference between expressing something that is hypocritical, but not your own view...hence the view only is hypocrisy....and expessing some thing that is your own view, and worse than the other you are condeming, then it is you as a person that is being a hypocrite. saying 'that is hypocrisy' is still then personal just back handed and sly. needles

Politesub53 -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 4:47:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VideoAdminChi "That's stupid" is different because it is referring to behavior. "You are stupid" is a personal attack and as such is not allowed. I get that, but my example regards the use of hypocrite stands true in the context I used it. IE refering to someones behaviour in being hypocrytical, is a blatant insinuation that that person is a hypocrite. It is a slight jump from "Thats stupid" to "You are being stupid" to "You are stupid" imo.

Level -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 4:52:42 PM)
Ps is right (as is frequently the case :-) ) It's like a friend of mine, she hates the word "liar", so she says "that's not true"; she means the same damn thing.

Level -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 5:45:47 PM)
It's a frustrating subject, my friend.

Hillwilliam -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 5:56:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You are ignorant in this topic.... is by far different. I am not calling the posters general intelligence into question. You will still get Gold Letters for saying that. Trust me on that one.[8\|] You will also get them for saying "You do not have the knowledge required" Again, It has happened.

Hillwilliam -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 5:59:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: metamorfosis quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam What about borderline (at absolute BEST) posts that were NOT reported but still generated letters for personal attack? Not sure I follow you. "Not reported" by whom? By the person who perceives himself "attacked"? By anyone? How do you know they weren't reported? How do you know a mod didn't just happen to see them? Maybe there is favoritism. But the only thread I've seen criticizing the mods for a specific incidence of favoritism (while providing any kind of detail, instead of just saying "the mods are biased" or "I expect this post to disappear") was written by Karmastic, a while ago. That doesn't mean there haven't been other threads or posts about it, but if there were, I didn't see them. If you have any evidence (even anecdotal evidence, if the post has already been pulled) that the mods are playing favorites, then I would encourage you to complain about it publicly, giving as much detail as possible. If you do, and that post gets pulled, then please tell me about it, honestly. Because if anyone can convince me that that's true, it would upset me and I would advocate for them. I don't know if that would change anything, but if it were true I would be willing to fuss about it, because it matters to me that things are fair here. But you have to pitch a better argument than "the mods are playing favorites". You have to show that that's happening. If things are as unfair as you claim, then it shouldn't be that hard to find an example or two, and explain why it constitutes favoritism. Unless you are willing to take that much trouble to show the justice of your claims, there's no reason for me to trouble myself about them. Pam I know they weren't reported because I emailed the mod saying "Oh, I guess ****** is whining again. The reply was "He didn't report it. I found it on my own" This same Mod actually went back 80 days once to yank one of my posts. 80 DAYS!!!!! Seriously, if something has been dead and buried for 80 days and noone complained................ As for complaining publicly, what do you think my thread of "The Truth is not a Defense" is? When the incident happened, I complained VERY publicly. I think the thread was called "The Mods must be crazy" or something similar.

jlf1961 -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 7:14:07 PM)
there was a poster who I have not seen in months that used to throw insults around quite often when someone disagreed with him. I called him an idiot and got in trouble. I never saw this individual get called on his crap once.

kdsub -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 7:48:51 PM)
quote: It's like a friend of mine, she hates the word "liar", so she says "that's not true"; she means the same damn thing. That could just mean she thinks the poster is mistaken...that is far from calling them a liar... There is just a certain civility that must be followed on this site and is common sense. If people can’t figure out how to do it then they are too stupid to be allowed to post …[:D] Butch

Level -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 7:54:15 PM)
God knows, stupid is easy to find here, Butch [&o] but sometimes civility is tiring!

kdsub -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 7:57:05 PM)
quote: but sometimes civility is tiring Not to me... while being civil I do my best to make my adversary LOOK stupid... that is the real challenge and the real fun. Butch

kdsub -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 7:59:35 PM)
Of course that works both ways... there are some very intelligent people here and often I LOOK stupid...but I live for another day and win more often then not. Because....I know when to shut up. Butch

Level -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 8:03:47 PM)
That's one way, and it has its merits, but when blatant trolls like jessica kaypower, or dollparts, shows up, a nice beatdown can feel awfully good.

descrite -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 8:05:41 PM)
quote: hence CONTEXT. there is a difference between expressing something that is hypocritical, but not your own view...hence the view only is hypocrisy....and expessing some thing that is your own view, and worse than the other you are condeming, then it is you as a person that is being a hypocrite. saying 'that is hypocrisy' is still then personal just back handed and sly. The really big question is: why do you care? Let's say you hate someone here. Let's say they do something --or even are something-- you dislike strongly (like, say, a hypocrite, or an ass). Why bother to post about them? And if they say, "I believe X," and they do Y, why do you care in the slightest? What is your stake in it? Why do you have a pressing need to call them out? You don't have a dog in the fight. If you do, it should really be about X...not Y. This is a conversation; it's about ideas-- not the people having them. Do you somehow think yourself capable of righting all the world's wrongs? Let's assume you're even capable of discerning what those might be...if you have a finite amount of time in your life, and you can post X (the idea) or Y (the person's perceived behavior/self/opinion), why do you spend the time posting about Y, and ignoring X? I think (and this is just my opinion, from what I can see of behavior and written policy) the mods are more concerned with ensuring everyone can discuss Xs, and we're not focusing on Ys.

kdsub -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 8:08:51 PM)
I do understand... there are the thompsonx's in this world that try even my civility but they have their rights as well as I so I just pay no attention to them. Butch

kdsub -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 8:30:06 PM)
I must admit I am surprised at the amount of anger on this site. I kind of started it complaining about the combination of gun threads. I was frustrated but not angry. The powers that be told me to go to off topic and start a thread about moderation. I didn’t do it but many others did and here we are. I am not angry…I am never really angry here, with the moderators anyway. To me they are kind of obstacles to get around when needed. I assign neither friendship or an adversary to them. Just a fact of life to be aware of if I want to have fun here. I worry …not about moderators but about people I like, respect, and or at least like to duel with here on the site that seem to be taking this site, and the people on it, too seriously. Time for a reboot and cool down. Butch

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 8:31:59 PM)
From Aswad: The notion that a personal attack is somehow distinguished by the use of second person reference is, aside from being factually false in a formal sense, and instinctively false in a colloquial sense, also quite bureaucratic. I've had my own very popular chat room on IRC and as such been the main moderator. When personal attacks seriously get in the way of the discussion, we asked those doing that to take it private. When people came in for the sole purpose of trolling, they were warned of the room's rules. If a person did not seem to be able to conform to the rules, they were kicked. Repeated offenders were banned. All moderators had a virtual meeting with me fairly often to go over the rules and make sure moderation was consistent and neither overly harsh nor too loose. One of the problems with CollarChat is that there are so many conversations going on at once, it's hard for the moderators to keep track. (In my example above, the room ran a radio station, so there were always DJs who served as moderators present 24/7.) I don't know how many moderators CollarChat has, or how often they meet to go over standards and such, but clearly that needs to be reviewed. The issue of favoritism that Awareness expounded on also needs to be looked at, IMO. The whole idea of keeping the moderators a secret, except some on the 'inside' know who they are, is just high school cliquishness. I also agree with Awareness' statements as to conflict, and believe that unless things are getting seriously out of hand, it should be left alone. One of the things I learned in running my own room was that new people had to be watched carefully to see if they could follow the rules. Infractions were dealt with swiftly and I think fairly. We had no problem kicking people who's only purpose was to troll the chat room. By troll I mean making personal appeals for instant sex, BDSM, or some other form of fantasy fulfillment, or broaching conversations for the sole purpose of stirring up crap. There was also an idiot tax. Now, I understand the owners of Collarchat get to make their own rules. That's fine. But IMO they need to be enforced consistently across the board, with no show of favoritism.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 10:58:37 PM)
~FR~ I think some of the righteous, stand up against the powers that oppress them types that are posting, are not being 100% up front about truth. I know this because I reported a post, and that person has gone on a crusade, but has not mentioned the portion that was being reported. Removing that portion of their post and spinning it is now making the mod squad look bad. If this is typical of what has been happening, then the posters that are doing this are causing the drama and now owning up to it. Guess it is kind of like those firefighters that set a fire so they can respond? Very interesting indeed. I think this is creating your own drama so you have something to do, kind of like FB drama.

tazzygirl -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 11:11:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl You are ignorant in this topic.... is by far different. I am not calling the posters general intelligence into question. You will still get Gold Letters for saying that. Trust me on that one.[8\|] You will also get them for saying "You do not have the knowledge required" Again, It has happened. Sometimes its not what you say, its how you say it.

tazzygirl -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 11:13:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: needlesandpins quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: read what i said to Descrite I did read it. And I quote. quote: and reading/quoting a whole post for context is better than snipping something to make you own point work. practice what you preach. needles You are ignorant.... means lacking in knowledge in all areas. You are ignorant in this topic.... is by far different. I am not calling the posters general intelligence into question. Btw, I frequently admit when I am not knowledgeable on a topic... such as the Israel/Palestine conflict. If someone were to call me ignorant on that, I would have no choice but to agree. yeah, and some people will twist anything they can to disagree with someone. say what you will. it's still the same thing if aimed at a singular person......backhanded as it maybe. like i said i'm a 'call a spade a spade' girl. tell it how it is and everyone knows where they stand. it you don't like what is said to another person shrug your shoulders and move on. if it's said to you be strong enough to deal with it. if you can't then run to the mod's for help. maybe you love it here exactly as it it. for the most part i like the site. i just don't like people acting on my behalf, or anyone else's when it's not wanted. i don't like the over pc inconsistant non common sense application of the rules. i have every right to say so and i will not change my mind. needles lol.. read my post to HillWilliam.

jlf1961 -> RE: The decline of collarme (1/5/2013 11:37:40 PM)
I have made a lot of jokes in this thread, but I do agree, that some mods on this site enforce the rules in a haphazard way. However, I would submit that, since they are human, they really cannot be expected to be perfect. As for me, Tazzy would have to admit that I am perfect.

Page: << < prev 20 21 [22] 23 24 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.736328E-02