Darwin’s contribution at the end here is key, actually. It's easy to be the observer and offer your advice, but if you're in the hot seat -- the view, (even for the ones with the "advice,") is quite different.Darwin wrote:I agreeJerry Freeman wrote:I agree with this, but with one clarification:dapple wrote:People who are driven by ideological positions that they cannot reasonably support often rely upon flaming and malice, which indicates that their positions are flawed.
Just a few C&F members seem so driven that they have surrendered their ability to listen to a need to repetitiously beat their ideological drum, and a little bit of that, like habanera sauce on a meal, can overwhelm a debate among a small group of people. For me, that takes the enjoyment and benefit out of debate.
This dynamic seems to include some people who actually CAN reasonably support their positions, but who are shooting themselves in the foot by driving away those who would otherwise be interested in what they have to say.--unless you're referring to me, in which case I am terribly insulted...
From the short time I've been on this board I've seen both good and bad, (or questionable,) behavior out of more than a few people, and the difference seems to have everything to do with perspective. For this reason it is often the case that the sage advice being offered can be tainted from past perspectives that might have been uncomfortable for the advisor.
The bottom line is that ultimately we are all responsible for our own behavior on this board and we can't expect the moderator to fix everything for us. I think everyone here knows in their heart of hearts when they themselves have crossed the line of civility, but it gets murky when we turn to judge others about whether or not they have. This is where the moderator faces his or her biggest challenge. It’s also why few of us are qualified for the task.
