RE: No Decency LEFT

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: No Decency LEFT

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: No Decency LEFT

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 3:58:10 PM

Wayward5oul

Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Wayward5oul also proving a touch of decency.

It was my understanding that you have me on hidden, as you stated in an email to me.

In the same email in which you said you were blocking me, leaving me no recourse to respond to some not-so-nice things you yourself said to me.

But thanks for the proclamation that I myself am capable of a 'touch' of decency.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 41

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 4:45:26 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Wayward5oul also proving a touch of decency.

It was my understanding that you have me on hidden, as you stated in an email to me.

In the same email in which you said you were blocking me, leaving me no recourse to respond to some not-so-nice things you yourself said to me.

But thanks for the proclamation that I myself am capable of a 'touch' of decency.

I think you're mistaken about the things I said to you, unless my telling you that you were no different than some of the more vulgar posters, here touched a nerve?

Be that as it may, I looked at EACH AND EVERY response to see if I had misjudged some people. There were a couple that surprised me in each direction. Those that I determined to be sinking pond scum, based upon their responses either stayed ignored or became ignored. Those that surprised me (such as yourself) in a good way, came off ignore.

Fear not, you're still blocked (that would be e-mail on the other side) because once you showed your capability to call people out for shit that you, yourself were doing, it told me all I needed to know.

At least (as I told you in that e-mail), I had the decency to talk to you, privately instead of publicly shaming you. Being decent was my intent from the beginning and I have not come close to mentioning that incident, publicly, until now.

Yes, after the incident that I handled privately with you, your response here showed a "touch" of decency. The jury's still out, as far as I'm concerned.

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Wayward5oul)

Post #: 42

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 5:28:58 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

you do not support what she said, but you excuse it, by the way when did Trump, or the Trumpets attack children?

How did I excuse anything? It makes no difference to me if it is a child or a woman or anyone all are inexcusable...and my comment was not directed at the OP... but it is directed to you.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to BamaD)

Post #: 43

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 6:20:30 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

Of course I will agree, what the tweeter did was indecent but there has been 'no decency left' since 1980 or was it 1968 and the documented and continuing sagas of Oct. surprises

I think there was 'no decency left' in Oct. of 1968 when Nixon deliberately had a national security campaign adviser meet with S. Vietnamese embassy officials to hold off on making peace just before Johnson was going to announce he was going to cut off bombing, claiming they's get a better deal from the repubs. Did take Tricky Dick's advice...many 1,000's more of our troops and Vietnamese...died in [his] continuation of that war.

Or unless of course there was 'no decency left' in the continuing saga of that war criminal Henry Kissinger in Oct. 1972 said 'Peace was at hand' a blatant lie to keep tricy Dick in.

Or was there 'no decency left' in Reagan emissaries when in Oct. of 1980 going to Iranian officials and asking for the hostage release to wait until after the election ? Didn't want the 'decency' of Carter taking credit for having negotiated their release.

Yes, kids should be off limits but in my lifetime even going back to being a youngster, I too would like to know just when it was that there was 'no decency left.'

How's this ? Next year...50 years ago there was 'no decency left.'

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 1/27/2017 6:24:12 PM >

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 44

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 7:11:55 PM

Wayward5oul

Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
Wayward5oul also proving a touch of decency.

It was my understanding that you have me on hidden, as you stated in an email to me.

In the same email in which you said you were blocking me, leaving me no recourse to respond to some not-so-nice things you yourself said to me.

But thanks for the proclamation that I myself am capable of a 'touch' of decency.

I think you're mistaken about the things I said to you, unless my telling you that you were no different than some of the more vulgar posters, here touched a nerve?

No, what touched a nerve is that you sent me an email, asking for clarification about a post I made, a clarification I was fully prepared to give once I got home from work, as I cannot post from work. However, by the time that I made it home, you had decided that since I had not replied to yours within your personal time frame, then I must be one of the knuckledraggers that agreed with a person who, btw, I have hidden on the forum. So you would be hard-pressed to find any posts of mine agreeing with that person, regardless of what you would like to think.

So what touched a nerve is just how badly you had misjudged the situation, yet acted that like i should have been appreciative of you for not humiliating me in the forums but rather handle it privately.

Well let me tell you how I handled it. There was another poster involved in that thread as well. I contacted that person privately and tried to make amends for how my post came across, it was not what I intended but poor wording on my part implied otherwise and I wanted to make that clear to that person. He was gracious about that. That was the same message I had intended to send to you, until you jumped the gun and made incorrect assumptions and were guilty yourself of the things you were calling me out for, and even more. And blocked me so that I could not handle it privately with you.

I then went and made a follow up post in the thread, clarifying the original post I made and apologized for implications my statements seemed to support, as that was not my intent, But the way I expressed myself led to that and I made my apologies. I named the people the post was directed towards, you and the other poster, but I expected no response to the post. I had dealt with the other poster privately and nothing else needed to be said. You had me hidden so I didn't expect you to see it. I made that post simply because I felt I needed to do it for me. There are other occasions that I have apologized for my posts in the forums, if for no other reason than to clear my own conscience. And I counted this one as one of those occasions.

quote:

Fear not, you're still blocked (that would be e-mail on the other side) because once you showed your capability to call people out for shit that you, yourself were doing, it told me all I needed to know.

Fear is not a reaction I have to being blocked or hidden, believe me. All I ask is be consistent.

quote:

At least (as I told you in that e-mail), I had the decency to talk to you, privately instead of publicly shaming you. Being decent was my intent from the beginning and I have not come close to mentioning that incident, publicly, until now.

No, you did not have the decency to talk to me. You had a one-way conversation over the space of a few hours, with no consideration of when people, with jobs and families to take care of, are able to get online long enough to respond to others, as opposed to when they are sitting at lunch and logged on long enough to check messages. When you have decided, not knowing anything about their lives and demands on time, that they should have answered by then, so they just must have decided not to, you go holier-than-thou and make judgments about the person for not having answered already, condemning them and telling them they should be thanking you for not publicly humiliating them. Then blocking them so they cannot respond to your accusations. How convenient.

quote:

Yes, after the incident that I handled privately with you, your response here showed a "touch" of decency. The jury's still out, as far as I'm concerned.

Seeing as I generally tend to piss off groups of arrogant people who think it is their job to judge me, I am not holding out for any positive results here. I would be a little disappointed if i did, considering what you consider as 'handling the matter privately with me', as I never got a word in.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 45

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/27/2017 11:49:20 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

No, what touched a nerve is that you sent me an email, asking for clarification about a post I made, a clarification I was fully prepared to give once I got home from work, as I cannot post from work. However, by the time that I made it home, you had decided that since I had not replied to yours within your personal time frame, then I must be one of the knuckledraggers that agreed with a person who, btw, I have hidden on the forum. So you would be hard-pressed to find any posts of mine agreeing with that person, regardless of what you would like to think.

Well, I'd be tempted to believe you, but I can't. You'd have to work some incredibly long shifts for that to be true. Has it occurred to you that myself and the other poster you mentioned might have some of the people you wished us to denounce on hide, as well? Never mind. Your judging me, publicly is okay. In fact, it seems to be virtuous. My judging you, privately is not okay. In fact, it's some kind of "sin". Liberal logic. I got it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
So what touched a nerve is just how badly you had misjudged the situation, yet acted that like i should have been appreciative of you for not humiliating me in the forums but rather handle it privately.

Handling it, privately, from the beginning would have been the right thing to do, as you seem to be conceding, now. Of course, that wouldn't have the desired "virtue signaling" affect, would it?

... and, again with the judging and the beam in your eye and shit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
Well let me tell you how I handled it. There was another poster involved in that thread as well. I contacted that person privately and tried to make amends for how my post came across, it was not what I intended but poor wording on my part implied otherwise and I wanted to make that clear to that person. He was gracious about that. That was the same message I had intended to send to you, until you jumped the gun and made incorrect assumptions and were guilty yourself of the things you were calling me out for, and even more. And blocked me so that I could not handle it privately with you.

Private apologies for public slights are the cowards way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
I then went and made a follow up post in the thread, clarifying the original post I made and apologized for implications my statements seemed to support, as that was not my intent, But the way I expressed myself led to that and I made my apologies. I named the people the post was directed towards, you and the other poster, but I expected no response to the post. I had dealt with the other poster privately and nothing else needed to be said. You had me hidden so I didn't expect you to see it. I made that post simply because I felt I needed to do it for me. There are other occasions that I have apologized for my posts in the forums, if for no other reason than to clear my own conscience. And I counted this one as one of those occasions.

See above.

Michael

< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 1/28/2017 12:29:46 AM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Wayward5oul)

Post #: 46

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:25:46 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

I think "the left has no decency" and "the right has no decency" is a huge part of the decency problem.

When people demonize their straw men, self-righteousness excuses all kinds of crap.

We can't even acknowledge moderate positions anymore, or people who have some progressive, some conservative positions. All black and white, just that simple, and clearly it's the fault of those people over there.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 47

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:35:23 AM

WhoreMods

Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I think "the left has no decency" and "the right has no decency" is a huge part of the decency problem.

When people demonize their straw men, self-righteousness excuses all kinds of crap.

We can't even acknowledge moderate positions anymore, or people who have some progressive, some conservative positions. All black and white, just that simple, and clearly it's the fault of those people over there.

Isn't stressing that the whole point of complaining about a lack of decency on either side at the moment? It's got nothing to do with bemoaning the loss of civility in political discourse, it's just an exercise in partisan blame passing.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 48

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:43:28 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

Yes, you have achieved reading comprehension. Well done.

(in reply to WhoreMods)

Post #: 49

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:50:51 AM

WhoreMods

Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

Whereas your own comprehension of expediency in a context where such attitudes allow people a license to ignore or deny their own moral and intellectual failings seems a bit lacking, frankly.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 50

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:53:17 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

I get by.

(in reply to WhoreMods)

Post #: 51

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 6:00:37 AM

WhoreMods

Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

Fair enough.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 52

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 8:00:46 AM

Wayward5oul

Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

Well, I'd be tempted to believe you, but I can't. You'd have to work some incredibly long shifts for that to be true.

According to the time stamps in the emails, the first email you sent, asking for the clarification, was shortly before 4am. The second email you sent, the one that I was not able to respond to, was shortly before 1pm the same day. Even if the times are slightly off, I remember at the time being quite surprised that such an email had come so quickly. It was by no means an unreasonable length of time in which I had not yet replied.

quote:

Has it occurred to you that myself and the other poster you mentioned might have some of the people you wished us to denounce on hide, as well?

That, among other things, is what I intended to apologize for. I believed I made an error, and was prepared to apologize directly to you for that, as well as publicly, which I did.

quote:

Never mind. Your judging me, publicly is okay. In fact, it seems to be virtuous.

Isn't that what this whole thread is about, you judging people based on their responses? 'Bestowing' levels of virtue on them? I have a 'touch' of decency? Another poster, for this one moment, receives props? All those who do not outright condemn the actions described in the OP are judged as needing religious admonition, such as you received as a child? This thread isn't just about highlighting the disgusting actions of someone and encouraging discussion about them; it is also about judging posters based on their reactions to it.

quote:

My judging you, privately is not okay. In fact, it's some kind of "sin". Liberal logic. I got it.

No, I just think it was interesting that you told me that I should be glad that you were not humiliating me on the public boards. I think that statement speaks for itself.

quote:

Handling it, privately, from the beginning would have been the right thing to do, as you seem to be conceding, now. Of course, that wouldn't have the desired "virtue signaling" affect, would it?

Again, I made mistakes. Just as I did not consider that you and the other poster might have had certain posters on hide, neither did I consider handling it privately. For which I felt the need to apologize for. But again, you gave me no opportunity. I would have gladly done so, as I believed it was owed to you and the other poster as well. I did handle it with the other poster through private email.

quote:

... and, again with the judging and the beam in your eye and shit.

See above.

quote:

Private apologies for public slights are the cowards way.

And I am no coward. I made public and private apologies. I made private apologies directly to the other poster, which you can verify with him if you feel the need to. And I would have made apologies to you as well, had I had the chance. But an email asking for clarification at 4am, then an email calling me a knuckledragger and blocking me at 1pm leaves no recourse for direct, private apology.

At which time I did go on the board and make a public apology, naming each of you. I did so despite your second email to me, and I did so knowing you had me on hide and would not see the public apology, as I felt it was the right thing to, regardless of anything else.

Back to the topic at hand, I understand that the SNL writer has been suspended. I haven't caught much news the past few days, so I haven't had the opportunity to hear if she decided to delete her tweet herself or if she was prompted to do so by someone else. Whichever way it went, that may be what saves her job, if she doesn't get fired (or hasn't been already, like I said I am behind on the news). If it had stayed up and made the news as a standing tweet, I suspect that repercussions would have been stronger and swifter.

I have been very busy with a new project and haven't been on much, which has turned out to be a blessing. Not paying attention to the news has been quite an uplifting experience these past few days. I am considering making it a habit.

Anyways, I am still busy, just wanted to come in and check on this thread as it is the only one I have posted on, as that particular tweet really got my ire up. A forced sabbatical from current events may be just what the doctor ordered!

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 53

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:39:41 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: BamaD

A. Do you boycott Trump companies? Do you think that all employees are responsible.

Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

B. I can them for not being funny, which they haven't been for years.

Then why do you watch them?

(in reply to BamaD)

Post #: 54

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:42:21 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

This is the kind of shit that frosts my cookies.

There is no way that this is appropriate. I remember some years back, when some member of the press wrote something offensive about the Obama daughters. I was one of the first to denounce it. I believe the writer eventually apologized.

Now, we have SNL, desperately trying ANYTHING to become relevant, again:

Asshole Tweet

ANYONE who doesn't disavow this is a partisan piece of barely human, sinking pond scum.

Thank you for your attention. That is all.

Mikey your problem is that you don't believe in free speech unless the words come out of dumb dons mouth.
You are dismissed.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 55

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:45:47 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Agreed, its great insight into the mentality that has flushed this country down the toilet.

If you were to have ever read a history book written for someone beyond the fifth grade you might have read some of the things said about thomas jefferson's black children

(in reply to Real0ne)

Post #: 56

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:49:03 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I just learned (because of this incident) that ALL rioting in Washington D.C. is, by definition, a felony because of its status as "federal land".

Cite please

Unless I've missed a change, that means that all who are found guilty (rioting being a VIOLENT felony) will have to serve 85% of their time (20 year sentence). That seems fair to me.

That is because you do not believe in the first ammendment

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Post #: 57

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 5:50:29 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Two vote for journalistic child abuse.

Or two votes for free speech.

(in reply to BamaD)

Post #: 58

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/28/2017 6:13:33 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: LTE

Asshoe Presidents. We have had a few of those.

Forty five to be precise.

Take that asshole Washington for instance. He insisted on crossing the Delaware river in winter and damn near froze the Continental Army to death doing it.

Not true.Get a history book.

And that Asshole Kennedy, he wanted us to ask what we should do for our country rather than what it can do for us,

Amerika ws founded for the benefit of the people not the government.

like pass bathroom laws.

Which bathroom law did any president sign?

Now along come another asshole at just the right time wanting to protect our borders

If one crosses the boarder illegally they commit a misdemenor.
If one hires someone who has crossed the border illegally they commit a felony. That felony is punishable by a fine of $250,000 and 5 years in the federal penitentarty.
Now tell me genuis which is more expedient? Enforce the existing law or build a 15billion dollar wall?

and rebuild our infrastructure

So far what have we got on that infrastructure thingie?

and put deadbeats back to work growing out economy.

Dumb don has a history of not paying those who work for him.

Just another asshole.

I have to agree with you.

(in reply to LTE)

Post #: 59

RE: No Decency LEFT - 1/30/2017 5:16:36 AM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

Because of either dishonesty or a serious lapse of memory (yours, not mine), I have deigned to only answer some of your points.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

According to the time stamps in the emails, the first email you sent, asking for the clarification, was shortly before 4am. The second email you sent, the one that I was not able to respond to, was shortly before 1pm the same day. Even if the times are slightly off, I remember at the time being quite surprised that such an email had come so quickly. It was by no means an unreasonable length of time in which I had not yet replied.

I'm granting that this one is probably a mistake, but if you're going to argue timing, you should probably come with accurate facts.

First mail = 4:46 AM. You read it at 11:10. I won't go into your argument that you can't log on, while at work since, you're trying to claim, now that you were at work, from before the first e-mail until after the second.

Second mail = 1:43 PM (almost two O'Clock) You didn't read that until after 5 PM. I'm guessing you can only sneak online at work at certain times?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul

quote:

My judging you, privately is not okay. In fact, it's some kind of "sin". Liberal logic. I got it.

No, I just think it was interesting that you told me that I should be glad that you were not humiliating me on the public boards. I think that statement speaks for itself.

See, now you're going to make me do something I shouldn't have to do. I have to make the text of the e-mail public because you're mis-characterising what I said to you:

quote:

To:
Wayward5oul

Dated:
11/27/16 1:43 PM

No reply. Color me "shocked" I thought you were different than the rest of the knuckle-draggers, but I decided to handle it, privately instead of trying to humiliate you in public.

I wasn't saying you should "be glad that I[sic] ~~were~~ was not humiliating you [sic] on the public boards". I was saying that I chose to handle it like an adult while you had assumed the role of petulant, virtue-signaling, cry-baby.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
And I am no coward. I made public and private apologies. I made private apologies directly to the other poster, which you can verify with him if you feel the need to. And I would have made apologies to you as well, had I had the chance. But an email asking for clarification at 4am, then an email calling me a knuckledragger and blocking me at 1pm leaves no recourse for direct, private apology.

At which time I did go on the board and make a public apology, naming each of you. I did so despite your second email to me, and I did so knowing you had me on hide and would not see the public apology, as I felt it was the right thing to, regardless of anything else.

again, it was closer to 2 PM

I didn't want a private apology, you dimwit. I made that quite clear and trying to handle it that way IS a cowards way out. That's not open to discussion, as far as I am concerned.

That the other poster accepted your private apology is, by very virtue of the word "private", between you and that poster. That poster doesn't tell me how to react to people any more than you do.

Lastly, I'm disgusted that you felt the need to make this a public issue (and forced me to temporarily abandon one of my tenets) when all I did was say something that was (admittedly only slightly) complementary (saying that you'd shown some decency). It was a way of also giving you "props", even though you'd behaved as a jack-ass (or jenny) to me, in the past. So, take your sanctimonious, I'm-a-victim, bullshit and keep it where you like your apologies ... private.

Michael

< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 1/30/2017 5:32:44 AM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Wayward5oul)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: No Decency LEFT

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109