Purpose of this Board

peeplj · Post by **peeplj** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:04 pm

Watching these threads grow and spin out of control has been like watching an accident happen.

It's my hope that the accident is over, the wounded can start to heal, and the passersby can move along to other things.

Best wishes to all,

--James

SteveShaw · Post by **SteveShaw** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:10 pm

jGilder wrote:No... it's all my fault. I can't accept that whenever I say anything or start a thread, that people are going to attack me personally instead of contributing to the discussion. If I could just accept the abuse as part of belonging to this board -- everything would be fine.

Stinks, Jack, and you have my sympathy if indeed this is happening. The very same thing happened to me a couple of years ago on that other board whose name I'm getting fed up of mentioning. Your support then would have been very welcome. I just butted out and as a result was never happier.

Steve

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:14 pm

Blackwood wrote:May I submit the root cause is this: Some people start threads that are sourced with, for example, a news item and bring forth a question or a opinion on the subject. The intent as I see it is to either raise awareness and/or have a discussion about it.

However, some people appear on the thread not actually debating the issue that was raised but rather by innuendo or direct attack on the person/opinion that was voiced WITHOUT ever addressing the substance, causing people to defend themselves as opposed to debate the issue

If one examines the evidence I would venture to guess that a vast majority of threads are deterioating because of that.

I ask: Why are people attacking without addressing the issue raised?

I think everyone here who has expressed dismay with the level of the Board discussion should think about this and try to understand the root cause, not scream about the symptom.

In my view thread jack or thread drift are not the root cause. What's going on right now is a flare-up, and not representative. I am sorry that jGilder is getting it from almost all sides right now. That can't be pleasant.

Blackwood · Post by **Blackwood** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:14 pm

Blackwood, I know we don't really know each other. I did participate in the ID thread. I have gotten along in general quite well with jGilder, I don't get into the political things though. My suggestion to him was intended to be friendly and was based on my personal opinion, which might be wrong, of what would be best for his mental health. I think you might be doing him a favor if you took a little break as well, at least from this topic. Just my opinion, not starting anything with anybody, not trying to silence anyone, believe me.

And it was a suggestion, not an order or request.

I got a little sensitive since so many people were suggesting Jack be quiet. Thanks for clarifying your intentions, my apologies.

Cynth · Post by **Cynth** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:18 pm

I think everyone, on all sides of whatever has happened, is feeling real sensitive right now. That's okay. I have made nice acquaintances who are going every which way on this and it is difficult for us all I know.

s1m0n · Post by **s1m0n** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:20 pm

Bloomfield wrote: In my view thread jack or thread drift are not the root cause. What's going on right now is a flare-up, and not representative. I am sorry that jGilder is getting it from almost all sides right now. That can't be pleasant.

Jack *is* getting flamed for his views, not his conduct or the content of his posts. He is entirely correct in this view.

Some people who don't agree with Jack's views have decided to engage in the board equivallent of screaming "SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP" at him.

It's like they learned their manners from Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh.

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:25 pm

s1m0n wrote:
Bloomfield wrote: In my view thread jack or thread drift are not the root cause. What's going on right now is a flare-up, and not representative. I am sorry that jGilder is getting it from almost all sides right now. That can't be pleasant.
Jack *is* getting flamed for his views, not his conduct or the content of his posts. He is entirely correct in this view....

Not by me, not by MurphyStout, not by Az, not by JerryFreeman, not by several others who've participated in the threads Dale locked today.

If someone else is trying to shut him up for his political views, I dissaprove, and commend you for sticking up for him.

That said, I don't think the presence of crypto Limbaughs should absolve him from listening to the criticisms that have no basis in his political views. Even if you're right in everything you say, it's not acceptable to burp at the table.

Blackwood · Post by **Blackwood** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:27 pm

In my view thread jack or thread drift are not the root cause. What's going on right now is a flare-up, and not representative. I am sorry that jGilder is getting it from almost all sides right now. That can't be pleasant. I would say if you don't listen to hints you will end up getting the message in terms that are increasingly blunt. I realize that jGilder won't see it that way, and that he prefers to pretend that he is being attacked personally or for his views, rather than being called on his behavior; and there is some attraction in the role of the martyr, of course.

Anyway we've had plenty perfectly constructive and interesting political threads, with thread drift and all, many even started by jGilder.

On a practical level trying to control thread jacking is like herding cats while being tied to a chair, only harder. The only way it can be done is by moderating the board (every post vetted by moderator first - yuk) or by appealing to vague principles of sensitive and appropriate behavior (which require that everyone listen a bit to hints dropped here or there). Whenever that comes up you start going off about rules and laws and how many posts is that 20, 50, or 100?!

Hi Bloomie,
Thanks for the little dig at the end, but i'm taking it as well intentioned humor.
I do disagree however. I don't think a thread changing subject is a problem . The so called flare-up you describe in the recent past appears to be exclusively caused by individuals not attempting to discuss the substance but the person.

he prefers to pretend that he is being attacked personally or for his views, rather than being called on his behavior

I think you are showing bias here as I have observed him very clearly being attacked personally, he is therefore not pretending. In addition posts attacking Jack appeared that were the result of him asking a question and were not related to behavior.

If you read my past comments on this subject you will find that I've consistently been against censorship or thread control or what have you (unless it's foul language etc.). However I do feel strongly that if people are unjustly attacked without any substantive basis for it other than that they don't like a person's politics then I will call them out for their lack of substance.

I'm a big boy and will defend myself and so is Jack, but I hope that there is not an implication that we should sit there and "take it"; I trust that that's not intended

jGilder · Post by **jGilder** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:29 pm

Cynth wrote:I have gotten along in general quite well with jGilder, I don't get into the political things though. My suggestion to him was intended to be friendly and was based on my personal opinion, which might be wrong, of what would be best for his mental health.

No worries, Cynth, accepting the abuse as a condition of membership to this board is very liberating... I feel so... so peaceful. Go ahaed, call me a troll... tell you hate my topics... go ahead... I feel like a yogi or something... nothing will hurt me now.

s1m0n · Post by **s1m0n** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:31 pm

Bloomfield wrote: Not by me, not by MurphyStout, not by Az, not by JerryFreeman, not by several others who've participated in the threads Dale locked today.

Nonetheless, the source of ALL the emnity is the content of his posts.

Even if you're right in everything you say, it's not acceptable to burp at the table.

If this comment means "It's rude to discuss politics in mixed company", then that, too, is a flame directed at the entirely acceptable content of Jack's posts. If it doesn't mean the above, what does it mean?

Blackwood · Post by **Blackwood** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:31 pm

is that Christian Yoga?

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:33 pm

Blackwood: you were fast with the "quote" button, there. I deleted the bulk of my post right after I posted it. Not because I disagree with myself (that does happen occasionally), but because I am trying to give it a rest already.

Blackwood · Post by **Blackwood** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:37 pm

Blackwood: you were fast with the "quote" button, there. I deleted the bulk of my post right after I posted it. Not because I disagree with myself (that does happen occasionally), but because I am trying to give it a rest already.

Fair enough, I would hate to see you argue with yourself

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:43 pm

s1m0n wrote:
Bloomfield wrote: Not by me, not by MurphyStout, not by Az, not by JerryFreeman, not by several others who've participated in the threads Dale locked today.
Nonetheless, the source of ALL the emnity is the content of his posts.

If you don't accept a distinction between what is said and how it's said, fine, but I have been trying to make that distinction.

Even if you're right in everything you say, it's not acceptable to burp at the table.
If this comment means "It's rude to discuss politics in mixed company", then that, too, is a flame directed at the entirely acceptable content of Jack's posts. If it doesn't mean the above, what does it mean?

I think the issue is not content, but behavior. It's rude not to listen to what others are saying and to twist their points into absurd proposition (I've written about this in another thread). That sort of thing is entirely unrelated to politics, and it would come up the same way if he only discussed music (see Talsagia, whose behavior is deprecated although most of his posts are "on topic" of sorts) or if it were just fluff (see Tyler Morris, whose being criticized). I have some right in saying this because I've had a couple of juicy spats with Gilder now, never even touching on a political opinion.

(this just to explain myself, I'm outa here.)

Will O'B · Post by **Will O'B** » Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:47 pm

Blackwood wrote:
You try to get some sleep too, Jack & Blackwood
you're not implying that Jack and I are a couple?

You saw through it, heh? As a matter of fact, Blackwood, yes, I was implying that you and Jack are a couple. A couple of decent chaps who, in a real pub, would probably join me in lifting a pint and sharing a few good laughs. There wouldn't be any rancor, because we know that there are still plenty of things to be agreed upon, and for the sake of our friendship we would look for those similarities rather than dwelling upon our petty differences.

So, in the spirit of friendship, I call upon all Chiffsters within the sound of my voice to raise your glass high and join me in a toast to that which brought us together on this board:

------------- TO THE MUSIC -----------------

Saol fada chugat !!!

Will O'Ban