How To Think Correctly

[grantx]

“Doctor” Price,

“It is quite obvious you have been drinking large amounts of alchohol, grantx.”

Very perceptive. How would I differentiate inebriation from senility?

Carry on, Doctor.

Grant.

 

[starspacer]

The real meaning of thinking correctly. :cheesy:

http://zapatopi.net/themes/dactylfractalzoom.html

 

[barjon]

Sorry guys - been concentrating too much on the Christmas pud

Dr. Price = darkwanderer = rudeboy = banned
Orion69 = bulldozer = banned

 

[barjon]

ps: if I'm to clear the thread of the latest bouts of insults it'd take me forever (I know, I know - it's my fault for not paying attention ) and yet the topic seems to be one that people want to pursue - unless they've just been attracted by the lack of moderation .

I'm inclined to close the thread and start a tThinking Correctly part II if there's a general wish to pursue the topic. Any views?

jon

 

[nine]

Let the games continue --- perhaps this thread could set a record for something.

 

[Splitlink]

ps: if I'm to clear the thread of the latest bouts of insults it'd take me forever (I know, I know - it's my fault for not paying attention ) and yet the topic seems to be one that people want to pursue - unless they've just been attracted by the lack of moderation .

I'm inclined to close the thread and start a tThinking Correctly part II if there's a general wish to pursue the topic. Any views?

jon

I don't think that Part II would make much difference. Just keep weeding every so often. I must say that you have just got rid a particularly unpleasant character, for which we are all grateful, I think. It seemed that there was nothing that could be said by anyone that could avoid his malicious attention.

Anyway, A HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL

Split

 

[Mr. Charts]

I would say start a "Part 2", but with a warning that anyone being insulting to anyone else gets an immediate multi day ban. "Insulting" being defined arbitrarily by a mod after the event to stop people trying to be subtle in their insults....
If you want sensible intelligent conversation that doesn't drive people away, then ZERO TOLERANCE in the playground.
Richard

 

[dbphoenix]

I would say start a "Part 2", but with a warning that anyone being insulting to anyone else gets an immediate multi day ban. "Insulting" being defined arbitrarily by a mod after the event to stop people trying to be subtle in their insults....
If you want sensible intelligent conversation that doesn't drive people away, then ZERO TOLERANCE in the playground.
Richard

As long as some members are allowed to get away with "insults" that other members are not, the conflicts will continue.

Aliases seem to be an important issue for the admins. Otherwise, end the moderation. Anyone who can't defend himself can stop posting (which is the case anyway). Anyone who is offended can stop reading the thread.

As for this thread, it should have been moved to the Foyer off the front page long ago . . .

Db

 

[Splitlink]

As long as some members are allowed to get away with "insults" that other members are not, the conflicts will continue.

Aliases seem to be an important issue for the admins. Otherwise, end the moderation. Anyone who can't defend himself can stop posting (which is the case anyway). Anyone who is offended can stop reading the thread.

As for this thread, it should have been moved to the Foyer off the front page long ago . . .

Db

I don't mind being shot down when I deserve it, but the continuous sniping of all and sundry by someone who has no other intention in mind makes for an unpleasant atmosphere and, in the end, unless the offender is curbed, the thead will come to the point when posters are reluctant to comment on anything. The kind of democratic procedure that you suggest does not work. Democracy must be protected by policing.

Split

 

[Mr. Charts]

I agree, db.
An even playing field is what most people want. Even if watching a bun fight in the playground is what gets them off.
Anything of interest or value gets swamped by the mass of gratuitous insults, condescension, arrogance etc. and those with a genuine interest and/or something of value to contribute, merely shrug and walk away.
But we've been there before, plus ca change........
Richard

 

[Mr. Charts]

Split is also correct. Without sensible order and mutual respect, (or at least unspoken loathing), anarchy rules.
Democracy requires not only tolerance, but responsibility.
As for your idea, db, of moving the thread to the Foyer, it's so contaminated it's not even fit for the Recycling Bin ;-)
Richard

 

[dbphoenix]

I don't mind being shot down when I deserve it, but the continuous sniping of all and sundry by someone who has no other intention in mind makes for an unpleasant atmosphere and, in the end, unless the offender is curbed, the thead will come to the point when posters are reluctant to comment on anything. The kind of democratic procedure that you suggest does not work. Democracy must be protected by policing.

Split

"Policing", however, must be consistent. If those who initiate the "unpleasantness" are allowed to do so with impunity, then everyone else is expected to bend over or risk being banned. That's not democracy.

So, either do something about the "legends" who begin this nonsense or back off and let members take care of themselves.

Db

 

[barjon]

"Policing", however, must be consistent. If those who initiate the "unpleasantness" are allowed to do so with impunity, then everyone else is expected to bend over or risk being banned. That's not democracy.

So, either do something about the "legends" who begin this nonsense or back off and let members take care of themselves.

Db

db

You do keep on singing this "deliberate inconsistency" song. Whatever you may think, we do try to be evenhanded. That's not to say we always get it right, but we do our best.

Mind you, it's true that we can only operate in accord with our own perceptions (although "reported posts" are a great help) as well as discussion between us and it's almost certain that there will be a different range of interpretations amongst 60,000 members.

It may surprise you that some members think we let you get away with far too much, but I guess you had a different "legend" in mind

All the best for 2007

jon

 

[Mr. Charts]

chump,
The only problem is they will probably sue t2w for allowing them into the instituition and not providing due professional care..........

Joules,
I shall think about your post later this evening in a different persona.
With 25 minutes to market open I need to slip into my appropriate trading persona.
The two are quite distinct
Richard

 

[dbphoenix]

db

You do keep on singing this "deliberate inconsistency" song. Whatever you may think, we do try to be evenhanded. That's not to say we always get it right, but we do our best.

Mind you, it's true that we can only operate in accord with our own perceptions (although "reported posts" are a great help) as well as discussion between us and it's almost certain that there will be a different range of interpretations amongst 60,000 members.

It may surprise you that some members think we let you get away with far too much, but I guess you had a different "legend" in mind

All the best for 2007

jon

Yes, I do keep singing this "deliberate inconsistency" song when the subject arises and as yet no one has explained why some members are allowed to get away with making insults that no one else is allowed to make. The fact that a member uses the form and style manual from 1603 is irrelevant. And as for my "getting away with far too much", I've received no warnings from moderators at any time and only one comment from an administrator, made this month, and that had to do with a situation I did not create.

I've suggested, therefore, and will continue to suggest that the moderators stick to aliases and advertising infractions and spam and leave the posts alone. No one is required to read posts that they find offensive. But members have to be allowed to defend themselves. If not, they will stop posting, as so many members already have.

Db

 

[barjon]

.......................... I've received no warnings from moderators at any time and only one comment from an administrator, made this month, and that had to do with a situation I did not create.....................

Db

Db

I was merely trying to emphasise the point that there is a wide range of point of view amongst members of what each may regard as acceptable, insulting, over the top, fair, evenhanded, etc, etc.

As far as your suggestion is concerned, I would hate to see the boards go the same way as this particular thread which I think would be inevitable if moderating was restricted to just advertising, multiple nicks and spam.

jon

 

[Atilla]

I don't mind being shot down when I deserve it, but the continuous sniping of all and sundry by someone who has no other intention in mind makes for an unpleasant atmosphere and, in the end, unless the offender is curbed, the thead will come to the point when posters are reluctant to comment on anything. The kind of democratic procedure that you suggest does not work. Democracy must be protected by policing.

Split

I'm a newbie to this site and I can say I have been taken aback by both chump and db by their put downs and OT replies telling me in effect to shut up as I have nothing worthy to contribute to them.

I have responded and perhaps offended them by my responses. I can appreciate how newbies might decide not to contribute.

But as has been mentioned it's up to everyone to join and either join in or refrain from participation.

It's a tough call to judge what is over the line or not but personnaly, I will miss the contributions of the persons banned. A temporary ban might have produced better results.

 

[dbphoenix]

Db

I was merely trying to emphasise the point that there is a wide range of point of view amongst members of what each may regard as acceptable, insulting, over the top, fair, evenhanded, etc, etc.

I understand that. But that's what "Ignore" is for. Reporting "bad posts" does not prevent threads from deteriorating, given the amount of time it can take to remove them and given that all the posts relating to the "bad post" are not also removed.

As far as your suggestion is concerned, I would hate to see the boards go the same way as this particular thread which I think would be inevitable if moderating was restricted to just advertising, multiple nicks and spam.

jon

First, there's nothing in place to prevent any thread from going the way of this thread. If people are angry or feel bullied or just want to be a PITA, deleting a few posts is not going to prevent or stop any of that. They will go on until they run out of steam, even if the individual who derailed the thread in the first place is banned. Moving the thread off the main page and leaving them alone will achieve the same end result.

Second, if the mods and admins elect to moderate behavior, and if some members are allowed to call other members stupid and worthless and idiots and dunces and so forth and other members are not allowed to engage in the same sort of behavior, certain problems will resurface regardless of who's banned.

Therefore, if you're going to attempt to control behavior, be (a) clear, (b) fair, (c) consistent. Otherwise, let the members take care of themselves.

Db

 

[dbphoenix]

I'm a newbie to this site and I can say I have been taken aback by both chump and db by their put downs and OT replies telling me in effect to shut up as I have nothing worthy to contribute to them.

And I was offended by your putdowns, etc, as well. So what? I didn't report you. I just started ignoring you. That's how life works. Otherwise, one spends one's life in court shouting the adult equivalent of "He's touching me!" or "He's looking at me!".

Db

 

[zupcon]

It's a tough call to judge what is over the line or not but personnaly, I will miss the contributions of the persons banned. A temporary ban might have produced better results.

There’s really no need to worry; both rudeboy and bulldozer will be back, as inevitably as night follows day, giving you yet further opportunity to benefit from their particular brand of wisdom.

Both have received temporary bans in the past and both continued to misbehave. Consequentially both have now received permanent bans, yet both continue to return using a never ending guise of alias’s, unsurprisingly their misbehaviour continues and the cycle continues.

regards
zup