RE: Re: An update on posting style (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

mnottertail -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 10:10:31 AM)

While you two rotters were having your little whoop de doo mutual admiration and agreement party, the world did end. I don't imagine that you guys caught wind of that.



VideoAdminChi -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 12:27:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

SEEKRIT video of the last Mod meeting obtained from the NSA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hostgKc7qV4


[sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif]



VideoAdminChi -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 12:28:53 PM)

FR,

New (mostly) unmoderated thread: ***Unmoderated Gun Rights Debate - Self Defense to 2nd Amendment ***

See the OP for exceptions.



Hillwilliam -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 12:54:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminChi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

SEEKRIT video of the last Mod meeting obtained from the NSA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hostgKc7qV4


[sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif]

Ron's reply. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE



egern -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 2:32:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

I left this one for a while and now I'm back.

First, I don't necessarily see the Mods being partisan as much as I see them being used by a couple of passive aggressive little whiners who use them to get threads locked and deleted. (Sanity was an expert at that. He'd slam the board with a bunch of posts calling people names and then file a score or more of tickets to anything that was posted so instead of zapping him, the mods would just sigh, shake their heads and lock the thread)

I'm not naming names here but if the shoe fits then lace that motherfucker up and wear it.

Maybe if the main whiners were sent on a little vacation then more peaceful discourse would reign.





Isn't there a block function where you can block who persistently make trouble for trouble's sake?



egern -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 2:38:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminChi

FR,

Complaints are starting to come in for this thread. I would prefer to not moderate a thread on moderation, and won't be moderating this one myself, but the reporters do have a point about allowing a debate about the rules that breaks the rules.

Please knock off the nasty digs about each other.

If y'all are interested in having another unmoderated thread as Rho described above, let us know and we will discuss.



You have got to be kidding!!!



VideoAdminChi -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 3:21:03 PM)

I made three points. To which do you refer?



Politesub53 -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 4:36:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


This is the second time in less than 24 hours that me and Polite have agreed on something.

I fear the end of the world is near.

K.



My fault entirely old chap. I havent been feeling too good lately. Hopefully I will soon be back to normal. [8D]



Zonie63 -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 4:57:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: VideoAdminChi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

SEEKRIT video of the last Mod meeting obtained from the NSA. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hostgKc7qV4


[sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif][sm=rofl.gif]

Ron's reply. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7vtWB4owdE


This is how I might reply: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROxvT8KKdFw

Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests—we did. [winks at Dean Wormer] But you can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick perverted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg: isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!
[Leads the Deltas out of the hearing, all humming the Star-Spangled Banner]



NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/27/2013 10:36:10 PM)

PoliteSub53 ~

"Got to love this one. A passive agressive post moaning about passive agressive posting styles. Irony at its finest. "

well of course. it's like when you are at a 'munch' or other such gathering in r/l when you have some pathetic passive-aggressive person *purposefully* speaking at a super-low volume when they know it bugs the sh!t out of everyone, solely for the purpose of annoying everyone and making them lean in to listen to the lispy-whispy "not so sweet nothings" being uttered, the one way to get them to cut-the-crap is to do the exact-same behaviour right back at them. And every time, it works. On the phone, with nurses, with people behind the counter who are being paid to "help you" to the wannabe Truman Capote who has none of the social confidence of the pre-said authour but all of the "let me be bitchy at you but get away with it while being too cockless to cop to it".



DesideriScuri -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/28/2013 5:29:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed
PoliteSub53 ~
"Got to love this one. A passive agressive post moaning about passive agressive posting styles. Irony at its finest. "
well of course. it's like when you are at a 'munch' or other such gathering in r/l when you have some pathetic passive-aggressive person *purposefully* speaking at a super-low volume when they know it bugs the sh!t out of everyone, solely for the purpose of annoying everyone and making them lean in to listen to the lispy-whispy "not so sweet nothings" being uttered, the one way to get them to cut-the-crap is to do the exact-same behaviour right back at them. And every time, it works. On the phone, with nurses, with people behind the counter who are being paid to "help you" to the wannabe Truman Capote who has none of the social confidence of the pre-said authour but all of the "let me be bitchy at you but get away with it while being too cockless to cop to it".


There is that, or there is also the "ignore" option.



GotSteel -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/29/2013 8:06:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: egern
Isn't there a block function where you can block who persistently make trouble for trouble's sake?


Yeah but it's useless. Everyone else still ends up getting derailed by and quoting the trolls so your threads still get wrecked and you still end up reading their trolling.



Kirata -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/29/2013 9:33:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Yeah but it's useless. Everyone else still ends up getting derailed by and quoting the trolls so your threads still get wrecked and you still end up reading their trolling.

Yes, it's very sad. But then, it is often the case that a troll is in the eye of the beholder. For example, when people are continually obliged to call bullshit on someone's posts, thus revealing said poster to be a total and complete ass, they will frequently be labelled "trolls" by the aforesaid aggrieved asshole.

K.




FatDomDaddy -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/29/2013 9:39:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


Yes, it's very sad. But then, it is often the case that a troll is in the eye of the beholder. For example, when people are continually obliged to call bullshit on someone's posts, thus revealing said poster to be a total and complete ass, they will frequently be labelled "trolls" by the aforesaid aggrieved asshole.



Not to mention this is a hedonistic kink web sight, the people who lean right are vastly outnumbered both by regular posters and by regular watchers and readers who rarely or never post who lean left.




NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/29/2013 10:31:42 PM)

"There is that, or there is also the "ignore" option. "

which doesn't actually affect the passive-aggressive at all. One person defending free speech of their pals passive-aggressively slagging others while pretending to be non directly speaking of other posters on threads, still amounts to cocklessly adhering to the letter of the TOS instead of having the balls to enjoy the spirit of it. And others run with the comments and fuel the fires in a passive aggressive way, instead of a direct way that they (clitlessly or cocklessly) complain about what other people are doing/posting.

But hey, as before in this thread, started and fueled by folks that never offered to do the work of a mod, you can ignore anyone who is never willing to 'do the work' while enjoying casting snarkies as asides that were stale over 15 years ago on any message board. THAT is the true "ignore" function. Even the no-ovary or no-testicle passive aggressive can enjoy that option as other people can enjoy looking at a snark-addict and think "worthless" and simply post something with juice-in-it anyway.



Zonie63 -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/30/2013 5:45:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
There is that, or there is also the "ignore" option.


The problem with the "ignore" feature is that it may hide the post, but it still has a message letting you know the hidden post is there. Plus, it doesn't hide others' posts who respond to the person you're trying to ignore, so it's almost pointless to even bother with "ignore," at least as far as the technical option goes, since it's somewhat insufficient. You're still made aware of the other person's continued existence.

I'm still hopeful that science will come up with a fully functional "ignore" button, which not only enable us to truly ignore internet pests and annoyances, but those in real life as well. [;)]

Until then, however, I guess we'll still have to ignore people the old fashioned way, by putting our fingers in our ears and singing "la-la-la-la-la."




DesideriScuri -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/30/2013 6:19:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
There is that, or there is also the "ignore" option.

The problem with the "ignore" feature is that it may hide the post, but it still has a message letting you know the hidden post is there. Plus, it doesn't hide others' posts who respond to the person you're trying to ignore, so it's almost pointless to even bother with "ignore," at least as far as the technical option goes, since it's somewhat insufficient. You're still made aware of the other person's continued existence.
I'm still hopeful that science will come up with a fully functional "ignore" button, which not only enable us to truly ignore internet pests and annoyances, but those in real life as well. [;)]
Until then, however, I guess we'll still have to ignore people the old fashioned way, by putting our fingers in our ears and singing "la-la-la-la-la."


While I do understand the limitations of the "hide" button on a messageboard and have seen it's destruction of flow in a chatroom, I was pointing out that one could ignore that low-volume speaker rather than allowing it to get to one. You can not control what someone else does, but you can control how you react to it.



DesideriScuri -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/30/2013 6:21:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed
"There is that, or there is also the "ignore" option. "
which doesn't actually affect the passive-aggressive at all. One person defending free speech of their pals passive-aggressively slagging others while pretending to be non directly speaking of other posters on threads, still amounts to cocklessly adhering to the letter of the TOS instead of having the balls to enjoy the spirit of it. And others run with the comments and fuel the fires in a passive aggressive way, instead of a direct way that they (clitlessly or cocklessly) complain about what other people are doing/posting.
But hey, as before in this thread, started and fueled by folks that never offered to do the work of a mod, you can ignore anyone who is never willing to 'do the work' while enjoying casting snarkies as asides that were stale over 15 years ago on any message board. THAT is the true "ignore" function. Even the no-ovary or no-testicle passive aggressive can enjoy that option as other people can enjoy looking at a snark-addict and think "worthless" and simply post something with juice-in-it anyway.


Blah, blah, blah...

My response was intended to add an option to your munch example.



NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (9/30/2013 9:17:16 PM)

there's nothing blah blah blah about who puts in the time versus people who cry "crime!"




DesideriScuri -> RE: Re: An update on posting style (10/1/2013 6:00:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed
there's nothing blah blah blah about who puts in the time versus people who cry "crime!"


There's a lot of blah, blah, blah in your response to mine because it had nothing to do with my post.

I get your point. I acknowledge the inadequacies of the "hide" button. In both real life and online, we still have the final say in how we react. Yes, I get there is that person who delights in annoying others and isn't happy until everyone isn't happy. You still have the choice about how you react.

There was a poster in the Alt Ohio chatroom. He made an ass of himself because he wasn't successful in attracting play partners. He did everything he could to derail discussions. He'd be put on ignore by most regulars, but there were some who would actively engage him to make fun of him. He'd get banned by Alt for his activity. Next day, he'd be back in under a new nick. Same guy. Same behavior. Same results. It got tedious. People stopped going to the chatroom. It was too bad, too. I met quite a few awesome people as a result of that room.

So, yeah, I get it. In R/L, however, there is always the choice to ignore the person and not give in to his/her little game.



Page: <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875