Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 06:53 am
@Debra Law,
LOL
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 07:57 am
@Debra Law,
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u160/vickyluvsdanny/BigSmile.jpg
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 07:58 am
@Brandon9000,
life's rough eh
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 09:47 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

life's rough eh

So, you do think it's proper to start threads designed to ridicule a single member? Do you believe that we should have terms of service here at all?
djjd62
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 10:16 am
@Brandon9000,
yes i do, that's why i started this one

a place and a person for everybody's scorn and derision

0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 10:19 am
@Brandon9000,
How do you get the thread was designed to ridicule a member?

Foxfyre posts that she is putting me on ignore. I start a tongue in cheek thread about how I think she feels about me since she announced to everyone that she was putting me on ignore.

The title of this thread is a take off on lines from a Peter Weller play.

"I think Sylvia hates me because I was staring again. I swear, I don't know what to do about it. It's just she's so glamorous for her age. All she has to do is start talking to me and then all I can do is stare. And then somehow she gets the idea that I don't like her. Maybe I stare wrong. Maybe I should learn a new way of staring."

replace "stare" with "respond" to see how it applies.



We do have terms of service Brandon. This thread in no way violates them.
http://able2know.org/about/tos/


Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 11:13 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

How do you get the thread was designed to ridicule a member?

Foxfyre posts that she is putting me on ignore. I start a tongue in cheek thread about how I think she feels about me since she announced to everyone that she was putting me on ignore.

The title of this thread is a take off on lines from a Peter Weller play.

"I think Sylvia hates me because I was staring again. I swear, I don't know what to do about it. It's just she's so glamorous for her age. All she has to do is start talking to me and then all I can do is stare. And then somehow she gets the idea that I don't like her. Maybe I stare wrong. Maybe I should learn a new way of staring."

replace "stare" with "respond" to see how it applies.



We do have terms of service Brandon. This thread in no way violates them.
http://able2know.org/about/tos/

That's absolutely how it looks to me. Maybe you had a different intention, but that's how it's being used by several of the posters. Regardless of your intention here, a post designed to ridicule one specific member is inappropriate. Members should consider how it would feel if there were a block of friends who had it in for them and started posts specifically to ridicule them.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 11:25 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
Members should consider how it would feel if there were a block of friends who had it in for them and started posts specifically to ridicule them.


i'm pissed that the one i started to ridicule myself has done so poorly
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 11:30 am
posted this morning 8/2/09 by Mr Rex Red------
Quote:
"dys", a2k's sleaziest member
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 11:47 am
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:

posted this morning 8/2/09 by Mr Rex Red------
Quote:
"dys", a2k's sleaziest member


I thought that was me. Guess I'm doing something wrong.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  4  
Reply Sun 2 Aug, 2009 01:16 pm
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

ehBeth wrote:

life's rough eh

So, you do think it's proper to start threads designed to ridicule a single member? Do you believe that we should have terms of service here at all?


"Proper"? it's not a tea party here or in real life. Can't handle the rough and tumble? I don't much care.

Terms of Service? I think they should be as absolutely minimal as possible - with site members participating in threads they think are appropriate for them. Everyone's got a different tolerance for all types of things. I'm not a fan of swearing, but I know who to avoid in that regard. They wouldn't be part of my real-life circle, so they're not part of my on-line experience.
Brandon9000
 
  0  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 05:29 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

ehBeth wrote:

life's rough eh

So, you do think it's proper to start threads designed to ridicule a single member? Do you believe that we should have terms of service here at all?


"Proper"? it's not a tea party here or in real life. Can't handle the rough and tumble? I don't much care.

Terms of Service? I think they should be as absolutely minimal as possible - with site members participating in threads they think are appropriate for them. Everyone's got a different tolerance for all types of things. I'm not a fan of swearing, but I know who to avoid in that regard. They wouldn't be part of my real-life circle, so they're not part of my on-line experience.

It's a matter of placing a threshold. There shouldn't be a rule for everything, but there do have to be some rules. Members can't be overly sensitive, nor should the rules accommodate excess sensitivity, but there do have to be some rules, and every behavior shouldn't be tolerated no matter how improper. In my opinion, creating a mean spirited post solely to ridicule one member is something that we should have decency enough not to do, and if someone lacks this minimal decency, the admins should step in to delete the post.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 06:07 am
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
That's absolutely how it looks to me.

Quote:
Members can't be overly sensitive, nor should the rules accommodate excess sensitivity, but there do have to be some rules, and every behavior shouldn't be tolerated no matter how improper.


I think you are being overly sensitive Brandon.

If you really want to be that sensitive about it then this from you crosses the line.
Quote:
In my opinion, creating a mean spirited post solely to ridicule one member is something that we should have decency enough not to do,
Clearly you are attempting to ridicule me by saying my post was mean spirited. Maybe you should start censoring yourself Brandon.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:22 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Quote:
That's absolutely how it looks to me.

Quote:
Members can't be overly sensitive, nor should the rules accommodate excess sensitivity, but there do have to be some rules, and every behavior shouldn't be tolerated no matter how improper.


I think you are being overly sensitive Brandon.

If you really want to be that sensitive about it then this from you crosses the line.
Quote:
In my opinion, creating a mean spirited post solely to ridicule one member is something that we should have decency enough not to do,
Clearly you are attempting to ridicule me by saying my post was mean spirited. Maybe you should start censoring yourself Brandon.

No, pointing out that someone has been inappropriately mean does not constitute being inappropriately mean. Writing a thread designed to single out and ridicule a specific member, on the other hand, does, if that was your intention.
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:26 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
No, pointing out that someone has been inappropriately mean does not constitute being inappropriately mean. Writing a thread designed to single out and ridicule a specific member, on the other hand, does, if that was your intention.


how do you figure that it is up to you to determine either of those things for anyone else on this board?
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:28 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
No, pointing out that someone has been inappropriately mean does not constitute being inappropriately mean. Writing a thread designed to single out and ridicule a specific member, on the other hand, does, if that was your intention.


how do you figure that it is up to you to determine either of those things for anyone else on this board?

Like everyone else, I'm expressing an opinion.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:29 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

ehBeth wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
No, pointing out that someone has been inappropriately mean does not constitute being inappropriately mean. Writing a thread designed to single out and ridicule a specific member, on the other hand, does, if that was your intention.


how do you figure that it is up to you to determine either of those things for anyone else on this board?

Like everyone else, I'm expressing an opinion.


You could always ignore the thread; that seems to be the new A2K way.

Cycloptichorn
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:32 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon, take a look at Parados' post - where s/he uses the modifier "I think". That's a good way to let people know you're expressing an opinion.



Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:36 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

Brandon, take a look at Parados' post - where s/he uses the modifier "I think". That's a good way to let people know you're expressing an opinion.


Actually, Parados has said that it wasn't his intention to ridicule her, and, although it appears to be what he was doing, and it's certainly what some subsequent posters were doing, perhaps this is the case. As a general principle, though, starting a post to ridicule one member is inappropriate, and prefacing it with "I think" doesn't make it more appropriate.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  6  
Reply Mon 3 Aug, 2009 09:59 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
It's a matter of placing a threshold. There shouldn't be a rule for everything, but there do have to be some rules. Members can't be overly sensitive, nor should the rules accommodate excess sensitivity, but there do have to be some rules, and every behavior shouldn't be tolerated no matter how improper.

Brandon -- whatever your problem is, I suspect you're either telling it to the wrong people or expressing it in the wrong terms.

  • Is your problem that you don't like that Parados started a thread critical of Foxfyre? If so, you're free to ignore the thread. Or, if you want to take a stand, you could write, "I don't like it when people start threads to put down other members here". On the merits, I would actually feel the same way as you do. More importantly though, framing it in terms of preferences puts you on solid ground procedure-wise. You are not an authority on A2K's Terms of Service. Nor on questions of Right and Wrong. You are, however, an authority on what you like and dislike. Feel free to express it!

  • Is your problem that Parados's thread violates the Terms of Service? If so, I recommend that you hit the "Report" button at the top of the thread's initial post, explain to the moderators which term of service you think has been violated, and tell them what you want them to do about it.

  • Is your problem that A2K's Terms of Service are lacking a clause that should be in in there, and that this thread would violate? If so, I suggest that you go to the very bottom of this page, hit the "contact us" link, and petition The Powers That Be on A2K for redress of your grievances. I'm sure The Powers will be happy to consider your request.

But I doubt you will get anywhere with your self-confident talk about the absolute right and wrong of what people post here. Your demonstrated competence in the matter is no greater than ours. Hence, I would be surprised if people in this community accepted you as authority on absolute rights and wrongs.

I wish you luck in pursuing the changes you desire.
 

Related Topics

Oddities and Humor - Discussion by edgarblythe
Let's play "Caption the Photo" II - Discussion by gustavratzenhofer
JIM NABORS WAS GOY? - Question by farmerman
Funny Pictures ***Slow Loading*** - Discussion by JerryR
Caption The Cartoon - Discussion by panzade
Geek and Nerd Humor - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Caption The Cartoon Part Deux - Discussion by panzade
IS IT OK FOR ME TO CHEAT? - Question by Setanta
2008 Election: Political Humor - Discussion by Robert Gentel
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/24/2022 at 02:11:40