Chiff and Fipple Forums

Nanohedron wrote: There IS a matter of degree at play here.

No. You respond to bullying bluntly and forcefully, or not at all. Tunborough needed to learn that I won't be bullied. He knows that now, and the question won't come up again.

Nanohedron wrote: Tunborough's use of the words "ad hominem" might be cause for reflection. One might even thank him for the reminder.

I note that within this very thread you have attacked my character. Can you find an example in the last five years in which I've done the same?

PS have fun with the search function.

I think the term ad-hominem is relevant in the context of a debate but less so when a bantering exchange goes astray. 'Ribbing' is by its nature personal so appealing to ad-hominem when someone pokes too hard or responds badly after taking it harder than intended can be regarded as a red herring.

(first web-encountered defintitions of ad-hominem, banter, red herring and ribbing apply)

s1m0n wrote:When someone posts "I dislike X"...

You posted an opinion: I don't want to keep smilies.

I posted my opinion: there are two smilies in particular I want to keep.

Only then did you say you disliked smilies, and added a postscript that was crude and insulting.

Expressing an opinion is not bullying, even if you don't personally like the form used to express it. Name-calling is bullying.

If you don't like the decor, you don't have to come in. If you do come in, you can at least be civil while you're here.

Nanohedron wrote: There is a time and a place for everything. Of course smileys may be overused to the point of inanity, but we don't see a lot of that here, thank goodness.

s1m0n wrote:

Nanohedron wrote: There IS a matter of degree at play here.

No. You respond to bullying bluntly and forcefully, or not at all. Tunborough needed to learn that I won't be bullied. He knows that now, and the question won't come up again.

Ribbing is not bullying, s1m0n. Not even close. I personally know bullying all too well. I also know all too well, from personal experience, that one can see bullying where it is not. Fortunately, over time I was able to get past this. I invite you to take a step back for perspective's sake, and consider this.

s1m0n wrote:I note that within this very thread you have attacked my character.

There we go again. I pointed out out a series of behaviors that I consider problematic in the course of having a reasonable discussion, and only because I thought it was necessary; otherwise I wouldn't have bothered. For you it may have stung, but I would rather it not have been that way if I could have helped it. My goal was not to wound, but to make clear. I didn't even want to bring it up, but since I found your method to be very much in need of attention, I felt I was no longer left with any choice: not to address it would have been worse. But at the moment I fear you'll misunderstand why I say this. These things take two; neither you nor I are operating in separate bubbles, here. If you open the door, it is useless to blame someone for walking though. I'm sure your overall character is just fine otherwise, but consider this: You're the one bringing up character, here, not I. You might profit by asking yourself why this is. If I wanted to attack your character, I would have spoken directly to that, and then you would know what wounding really is. I don't equivocate in such matters. But it's up to you, isn't it, to believe me.

s1m0n wrote:Can you find an example in the last five years in which I've done the same?

Of course not. This is not a matter of tit-for-tat, so please don't divert the issue. I may have been very blunt in my observations, but in showing you my point of view, I felt, again, that I wasn't left with a lot of choice in the matter. You're the one who's calling this an "attack". Calling it so doesn't make it so.

From personal experience, again, I can see how you might arrive at this. But this is, if I may put it out there, an opportunity for growth. Only you can take that step. To further be blunt, I think you are letting mere pride get in the way, here.

s1m0n wrote:Well, you're the mod.

This has nothing to do with that. I'm speaking as one human being to another. The mod thing would apply if I did something like putting the kibosh on this thread, but you'll notice that it's still up and running. We're all being civil enough, considering, and I think this happens to be stuff worth talking about.

Nobody's against you here, s1m0n. But we don't want contention, either. We simply want camaraderie and good will, and the only reason I'm bothering with this is that I actually think you're capable of it.

Appropriately per our talk about being mobile-friendly, AaronFW, I'm posting this via my cellphone as my computer is down. Big pain in the ass. I'll do what I can this way, but there will necessarily be a limit to my patience for it.

Never mind; fixed. But it dives home for me the good in making C&F mobile-friendly, if we can do it.

Nanohedron wrote:Appropriately per our talk about being mobile-friendly, AaronFW, I'm posting this via my cellphone as my computer is down. Big pain in the ass. I'll do what I can this way, but there will necessarily be a limit to my patience for it.