Dear fuckers,

[Nessus]

I didn't really want to get involved here but apparently I have to. Even if Loki beat me to the punch. The ignore function is there for a reason and it exercises a useful function. Did not we all BEG Kane and Tear to make use of it? There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking preventative action to reduce the likelihood of unproductive bitchiness between posters. It in no way keeps you from looking in at a blocked post and making a reply if you think the material might actually be worth it. But this is a discussion forum, not every post can or should be a major expounding of a critical idea and it is irrational to assume or passively demand that every post be both read and be worth the reading. Excessive filtering may be bad but it is beneficial to the forum as a whole if exercised in moderation. The moderators of course pose a semi-exception to that but you guys knew what you were signing up for.

Of course not every post, but let's put it this way; you rarely make a joke, but when you do I appreciate reading it because they are rare and sometimes put a more human face to a person capable of also contributing things that evoke new thoughts behind my eyes. As you say, if someone proves they're solely (or to an unbearable percentage) capable of producing white noise, I think it's far more efficient to use any device capable of smelling certain EM bands to generate that brand of 'entertainment'.

Actually now that I think about what you wrote again, I think we're almost perfectly agreed. Gee whiz!

[CitizenCain]

It tells us that Cain is correct on this one: that you have several people on ignore in a small community just means you're more delicate and less reasonable than you pretend to be. In other words, most people here aren't the problem. You're the problem.

Just to be clear, I said Nessie's attitude is part of the problem.

Most of the complaint has merit, even if the source makes it a bit easy to dismiss out-of-hand, there's not much that can be done about it, and it's kinda laughable to claim that it's ever been any other way.

Tbh it's probably for their own good, the internet is bad for people.

Not surprising you'd be the one to say something like that, but fact is, the unpleasant truths are the most important kind, and the ones the internet reveal about people are valuable to learn.

[Aimless]

You seem to be under the impression that jackassery is equal to sharing unpleasant but necessary truths. The unpleasant truth is that you're often wrong about this, but you've a right to your defense mechanisms and I don't think I can convince you of the truth of why no-one but GGT really wants to play with you. Let's just agree to disagree, that's the best deal I can offer you atm.

[Aimless]

That said what I meant was that most of us can probably find more productive and gratifying things to do on our free time if we really have to. See Dread's travels through the USSR and Lor's muscle-quest

[CitizenCain]

You seem to be under the impression that jackassery is equal to sharing unpleasant but necessary truths.

Nope.

Maybe it is one of the unpleasant truths, though? But that's crazy talk; it's not like the internet is rampant with raging jackassery or anything.

The unpleasant truth is that you're often wrong about this, but you've a right to your defense mechanisms and I don't think I can convince you of the truth of why no-one but GGT really wants to play with you. Let's just agree to disagree, that's the best deal I can offer you atm.

How kind, and at the same time, conceited, of you to offer to enlighten me on that, but I'm all squared away, thanks. If you wanted to enlighten me on something I actually need enlightenment on, you could consider telling me why you keep making assumptions and assertions about my motivations and desires when you've been so consistently far off base.

That said what I meant was that most of us can probably find more productive and gratifying things to do on our free time if we really have to. See Dread's travels through the USSR and Lor's muscle-quest

Depends on your definition of "productive and gratifying," I suppose. Why do you see those things as more "productive and gratifying" than what the internet has to offer? It's completely a matter of personal preference, which you seem to be projecting your own biases onto, and applying to everyone. (For example, I'd personally rather see France from Google Earth on my big screen. It's cheaper, and there are less French people to be bothered by. )

[Dreadnaught]

What's wrong with having people on ignore? There are several people here who never once posted anything worth reading. It's not that they say offensive things; it's that they're incapable of intelligent thought.

I didn't really want to get involved here but apparently I have to. Even if Loki beat me to the punch. The ignore function is there for a reason and it exercises a useful function. Did not we all BEG Kane and Tear to make use of it? There is absolutely nothing wrong with taking preventative action to reduce the likelihood of unproductive bitchiness between posters. It in no way keeps you from looking in at a blocked post and making a reply if you think the material might actually be worth it. But this is a discussion forum, not every post can or should be a major expounding of a critical idea and it is irrational to assume or passively demand that every post be both read and be worth the reading. Excessive filtering may be bad but it is beneficial to the forum as a whole if exercised in moderation. The moderators of course pose a semi-exception to that but you guys knew what you were signing up for.

Sure, Ignore serves an important function. I've had one person on ignore here for a few months and it's been useful. I should take them off soon though. But the sense I'm getting from Ness is she ignores a ton of people.

Ah, the old blame-the-victim argument.

Is anyone here really a victim, Khend? Don't you feel that's kind of an absurd position to take?

Enoch, you forget that Khend thinks me, Rand and Wraith shouldn't be allowed to post because we can also moderate posts. IE, he thinks I am some kind of police officers and everyone I disagree with is a victim.

[Ominous Gamer]

Theres no point in removing me from ignore dread, its not like I've let up on calling you out when you sprout some sorta bullshit, the ignore button just allows you move past having to make a bullshit response. It amusing to see you ignore me when I provide the facts you hate to argue against, but not ignore Ness when all you do is bitch about not getting the facts from her position. For some Freudian reason you like attacking Ness (as shown with the childish display in the D&D thread you have since derailed) over me

[GGT]

Site Discussion hasn't had this much activity since....well, since the forum got up and running, or the last upgrade?

Bravo to Ness for starting a thread to address the elephant in our room. This place has gotten more aggressive lately, and downright nasty. Many of our "fellow travelers" may never return. The teenaged-type of personal attacks (you're dumb, you're lying, you're ignorant, people like you are <insert derogatory comment>) have driven people away. We know that's true after Hazir's last thread. But it's obvious when others simply disappear without saying a word first. That kind of thing can be overlooked or diluted in larger forums, but in this small corner of The World that is toxic and destructive.

I've noticed the absence of some previously active posters....even if they mostly commented in General Chat. I don't know their reasons for leaving, but the way it's been going lately can't be the way to get them back, let alone attract new members. We should all remember something....

When Atari went kaput and this place was formed, the initial migrators had input into making the Rules, and we agreed we could "moderate" our own behaviors. That we'd do our best not to instigate fights just for the sake of fighting, make personal attacks, or use bait-and-troll tactics. That hasn't gone so well.

The Tear/Cain tirades were unfortunate, but Tear was a big contributor and had a way of engaging with everyone else on various topics, as a well-informed poster with a genuine desire to exchange information, ideas and opinions. He could disagree without being totally disagreeable with everyone. His ban seemed to set the tone going forward: the Wild West was in play...everyone was on their own, bullying and dramatic personal attacks were acceptable, only the hearty non-sensitive types would survive. That kind of Forum Darwinism only leaves the nastiest, most contentious manner of posting as dominant. Ew.

I think we might need a bit more Moderator intervention to keep this place active, attractive...and alive.

[Wraith]

Sure, Ignore serves an important function. I've had one person on ignore here for a few months and it's been useful. I should take them off soon though. But the sense I'm getting from Ness is she ignores a ton of people.

I'm going to have to disagree. Users should use the ignore function as liberally or as conservatively as they want. If it makes the forum experience better for them to cut out certain posters, by all means do it. I've encouraged it myself often enough when two posters just can't seem to get along and the amount of moderator intervention starts becoming too frequent. It probably improves life not just for the person using the function, but for all the people who don't really want to see yet another round of bickering.

[Khendraja'aro]

Enoch, you forget that Khend thinks me, Rand and Wraith shouldn't be allowed to post because we can also moderate posts. IE, he thinks I am some kind of police officers and everyone I disagree with is a victim.

Actually, Dread, my bone on this regard is just with you. This post only shows once again that you're not fit for that role.

[Loki]

I.E. You don't want people you disagree with having any power over you. Got it.

[Ziggy Stardust]

I thought the game and picture threads were the serious discussion threads. I enjoy those. Usually not so much jackarsery going on there.

[Aimless]

I.E. You don't want people you disagree with having any power over you. Got it.

Er, that's not what he said

[LittleFuzzy]

Er, that's not what he said

No, but what he just said is also at odds with what he said last time. He did object to the entire user-moderator idea and I don't think any of us has reason to think he's changed his mind about that, he's just ignoring his own general sentiments here because doing so enables an easier attack on his present focus.

[CitizenCain]

The Tear/Cain tirades were unfortunate, but Tear was a big contributor and had a way of engaging with everyone else on various topics, as a well-informed poster with a genuine desire to exchange information, ideas and opinions. He could disagree without being totally disagreeable with everyone. His ban seemed to set the tone going forward: the Wild West was in play...everyone was on their own, bullying and dramatic personal attacks were acceptable, only the hearty non-sensitive types would survive. That kind of Forum Darwinism only leaves the nastiest, most contentious manner of posting as dominant. Ew.

Might have a point if he wasn't the worst offender when it came to being a nasty, aggressive, bile-spewing jackass, and you weren't mistaken about why he was ultimately banned.

Not that I bothered to go back and read the ~year's worth of shit he posted during that latest absence of mine, but I rather suspect that his behavior didn't actually improve, and have concluded (based on the posting behavior preceding his ban), that he was in fact kicked out for being the jackass he was, who really just came here to relieve stress by abusing the other members. (And was ultimately the reason he was banned, if you go back and look - a number of people pointed it out in the lead-up and aftermath.)

So, you seem to be saying mutually exclusive things out of each side of your mouth again. One the one hand, we need to crack down on aggressive jackassery, on the other hand, cracking down on a particularly aggressive jackass shows that it's the Wild West and the moderators don't do shit.

Um, alright. Not I expect that you'll correct this glaring instance of cognitive dissonance, or that pointing it out will change anything... it never does... but there it is anyway.

[Crowheart]

Is non-brutal jack-assery allowed?

[CitizenCain]

Seems that way... lotta people sure do whine about it, though.

[Khendraja'aro]

No, but what he just said is also at odds with what he said last time. He did object to the entire user-moderator idea and I don't think any of us has reason to think he's changed his mind about that, he's just ignoring his own general sentiments here because doing so enables an easier attack on his present focus.

So, you can read my mind? Nice to hear that. Maybe you could point out exactly what is soooo at odds here?

I distinctly remember a thread where Dread disliked the questions aimed at him and which he promptly closed on a whim. I also remember other members not being very happy about his one-sided exercise of power.

I also don't remember attacking Wraith or Rand. Maybe you could, while you're at it, dig up the post where I demanded their removal as mods? Have fun.

[Loki]

You explicitly said that mods shouldn't post...

[Being]

It doesn't help that Nessus is being reticent about whom her fuckers are...

[coinich]

It doesn't help that Nessus is being reticent about whom her fuckers are...

Most people don't talk about their former lovers quite that openly...

[Lebanese Dragon]

I think the cause of most of these problems are two fold. First everyone trying to save face, and look smart and intelligent at all times (which can mean faking even when ignorant/or unsure on a topic).

The second part is ideologies. People are married at times to mind-narrowing idealogies that make discussion or even small-points hard to get across. I vote Democrat, I'm not a democrat. I see the problem with unions, lobbyists, whatever I see how it corrupts both Republicans, and Democrats, it angers me. I see how successful our system is, all the good in our society, all our failures. The problems are complex we can't be married to our own ways of thinking, honestly there is more than one successful, more than one morally correct, way of governing, of executing plans, of interacting. Simply because you're a shy person whose always concious of what other people think, doesn't mean that's the only moral, or worthwhile way of interacting with people. If you're the confident, outspoken, opinionated individual doesn't mean you're living your life wrong. There are pros in both approaches, and there are moments where each is ideal, and there are many moments where both work well.

What I'm trying to get at is don't be married to one way of thinking there are many routes that lead to the same answer, that keep sacred the same set of goals.

Don't be afraid of looking dumb. When I say that, ya it's okay to be annoyed when you're wrong, that annoyance is what helps you try to stay informed, and try to be correct with what you say, but if you make a mistake, it's only logical to embrace not try to layer it with words and phrases to hide your mistake. I feel a lot of times people are playing to make themselves look good and others dumb. Anything they don't understand in a post they read is a mistake on the writer's part (that shows the writer is dumb/wrong, and they are right), as opposed to trying to find common ground, point out what you and the writer have in common, and why you're coming to different conclusions.

In order to break habits, it takes a lot of self-reflection and admission if you've been shallow in some aspects of your life, and secondly it takes a concious day by day, post by post, effort to break habits. Repeated concious behavior is the only way to break long built habits.

[Knux897]

Don't be afraid of looking dumb. When I say that, ya it's okay to be annoyed when you're wrong, that annoyance is what helps you try to stay informed, and try to be correct with what you say, but if you make a mistake, it's only logical to embrace not try to layer it with words and phrases to hide your mistake. I feel a lot of times people are playing to make themselves look good and others dumb. Anything they don't understand in a post they read is a mistake on the writer's part (that shows the writer is dumb/wrong, and they are right), as opposed to trying to find common ground, point out what you and the writer have in common, and why you're coming to different conclusions.

This isn't exactly the environment for such reflection though. Colloquial outbursts result in criticism and sarcasm (though this sarcasm is one of the reasons I enjoy the patrons of this forum), which only forces the speaker to retreat further into their shell, not to learn anything. Constructive criticism would obviously be helpful, but it's simply not in the nature of most people here.

Perhaps I'm a bit too infrequent of a visitor here to fix our inner politics, but I believe the solution is to make the forum bigger and promote it. With more patrons, we have more opinions to deal with and to debate rather than focus animosity towards certain members. Let us take in those of an intelligent but mild nature and broaden our topics. I have no specific suggestions for such natures, but a community consensus on how to expand the forum if we choose to do so, can only be beneficial.

[Being]

This isn't exactly the environment for such reflection though. Colloquial outbursts result in criticism and sarcasm (though this sarcasm is one of the reasons I enjoy the patrons of this forum), which only forces the speaker to retreat further into their shell, not to learn anything. Constructive criticism would obviously be helpful, but it's simply not in the nature of most people here.

Perhaps I'm a bit too infrequent of a visitor here to fix our inner politics, but I believe the solution is to make the forum bigger and promote it. With more patrons, we have more opinions to deal with and to debate rather than focus animosity towards certain members. Let us take in those of an intelligent but mild nature and broaden our topics. I have no specific suggestions for such natures, but a community consensus on how to expand the forum if we choose to do so, can only be beneficial.

New members don't stand a chance here. They might if we permabanned Loki and Kane.

[LittleFuzzy]

They might if we permabanned Loki and Kane.

Not if they were conservatives. I'd take Loki being obnoxious over some of our posters' history or deliberate concerted thread-hijackings any day. Or the undiluted belligerence displayed by a certain European member.

[Illusions]

Or the undiluted belligerence displayed by a certain European member.

Does he post like this?

MysteryPoster: I applaud the European Union's stance that US companies must clearly label any and all advertisements as altered if they show a clear blue sky, because as clearly defined by the European Union's regulations, a sky must be cloudy and grey.

OtherPoster: Thats preposterous. I can't believe you can support that. Skies can clearly be something other than cloudy and grey. A company should be allowed to use a clear sky in its advertisements without having to act like the sky being clear is a lie.

MysteryPoster: I would expect that from a US poster. You just don't like the EU exerting its authority over US companies simply because the US government refuses to do so.

OtherPoster: Here is me live streaming a video of the clear blue sky outside my house. How can you deny this? How can you state that the European Union is in the right to regulate business advertisements like this?

MysteryPoster: Because you've been persistently annoying, and refuse to debate this matter reasonably, OtherPoster, I've put you on ignore.

[Loki]

No, I'm pretty sure he's referring to a European from a neighboring country.

[Wraith]

You guys know that MysteryPoster is going to be coming back sooner or later, right?

[Loki]

Is it August?

[Nessus]

Is it August?

It's not as easy as it was, or as difficult as it could be, for the samurai in autumn...