kennethamy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 09:02 am
@Pepijn Sweep,
Pepijn Sweep wrote:

Now it doesn't seem weird. There is just no way of knowing it without socializing first. I am to shy -believe it or not- to speak publicly. Love a Forum as long as people take me seriously. Has been some years I actually read books about Philosophy I must admit ... I do like philosophy and think a Forum should also stimulate to pick up a thread from the past.
Mr. Green Not Equal 2 Cents Not Equal Drunk


For people to take you seriously you have to earn their respect.
Robert Gentel
 
  5  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 09:18 am
@jespah,
Well it's not like we'd have accepted the Viagra ads for money either, the real issue isn't advertising or money but just not ceding control of a server (where users have entrusted data) to a hacker.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 09:28 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:

For people to take you seriously you have to earn their respect.

According to Dutch etiquette and my back-ground U take people seriously no matter who earns what. We always prided ourselfs being a open, egalitairian and tollerant society with many different types of people.
kennethamy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 09:37 am
@Pepijn Sweep,
Pepijn Sweep wrote:

kennethamy wrote:

For people to take you seriously you have to earn their respect.

According to Dutch etiquette and my back-ground U take people seriously no matter who earns what. We always prided ourselfs being a open, egalitairian and tollerant society with many different types of people.



Even in Holland, a person who earns the reputation of being a fool neither is taken seriously, nor deserves to be taken seriously. This is a truth the world over.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 09:48 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:
Even in Holland, a person who earns the reputation of being a fool neither is taken seriously, nor deserves to be taken seriously. This is a truth the world over.


Where there are cultural differences is the starting point in regard to when we respect others.

In some cultures, we start from a point of respecting people until they give us reason not to respect them.

In other cultures, we start from a "show me" place - not respecting people until they demonstrate an entitlement to that respect.


Also, I wonder if the reference to 'earning' respect might have confused things a bit. Was it your intent to suggest that you would respect more financially stable people more/sooner than you'd respect others? I don't think you did, but I can see how it might have been read that way.
kennethamy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:02 am
@ehBeth,
But in all cultures, fools are not respected. And rightly so, since they do not deserve to be respected. They are foolish. And let me add that if people on philosophy forums say many foolish things, then they do not deserve respect on those forums, and I don't respect them.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  4  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:07 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:

But in all cultures, fools are not respected. And rightly so, since they do not deserve to be respected. They are foolish.

In earlier, feudal cultures a Fool was well respected. He would be the only courtier being critical to the King. Covering his message in foolish formulations both Fool and King could live with it. Dangerous position though...
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:11 am
@kennethamy,
In america we like to keep our fools isolated to the House and the Senate. their comedic value being limited to interviews/performances on cable t.v.
GoshisDead
 
  6  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:14 am
neener neener neener I got spammmmmmmmmed
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:16 am
@dyslexia,
Would that to be true that we could contain the damage that these fools do to our environment and the general fabric of our culture.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:19 am
@dyslexia,
Where's Ur King locked up ?
0 Replies
 
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:24 am
@Robert Gentel,
Agreed -- it's a bit of both, I suppose. Not liking the advertiser plus not wanting be leeched off of. Advertising space on A2K (as you are well aware, but others may not be getting) is a place where $$ is made, money that is necessary to run the servers, which do not run for free.

I am sorry if I am pounding what is an obvious point to many but keeping a site such as this up and running is not a free proposition, nor is it an easy one. Love the free 'net and Open source all you like, and content wants to be free, etc. and I get that, but these are Robert's funds and time we are talking about here, neither of which are infinite.
Pepijn Sweep
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:24 am
@Ragman,
Hear hear !

Our Senators & Representatives yell once a Year: Hoor A, hoor A, hoor A ! Long live the queen ! This we do to our contitutional King.

Live on tv every 3rd Tuesday of September
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  4  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 10:29 am
@kennethamy,
give me the fools any day, the world is too full of folks who take themselves to seriously
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  8  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 11:09 am
@William,
Quote:
So it was all about advertising.


No, it isn't just about advertising. The Viagra ads were just the symptom that exposed the gaping wound in the security of the servers on which the PhilForum and Robert's other sites were hosted upon.

Those same vulnerabilities are exploited by hackers to spread malicious spyware, trojans and viruses to vulnerable computers. That open gateway from the PhilForum's VB software could expose all the other users in the many forums and business sites on that host server to those same contagions. Robert would be extremely negligent as a web host if he had thought it merely about advertising and did nothing to fix it. It is those types of negligent websites that make it on sites like McAfee's Site Advisor list to warn of sites with those infections.
0 Replies
 
sarek
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 12:21 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

To expound, I received a templated PM spam forwarded, I searched the database for that exact message (the whole message had to match exactly for the query) and it was sent to over 500 different people, philforum or not. I also checked my accounts from philforum and found Salima's spam there too.

After asking here on this thread for others to forward them to me I received the rest of the bigger picture and each time I got a spam PM forwarded to me I was able to query and delete them all en masse (which reports counts of affected rows, which is how I found out about the scale).

...

No, I do not read your private messages (I don't even read all mine).


Actually by comparing the messages in the database against messages you had received you did in effect read people's private messages. You did in fact read the private pm's of 500 different users.
My background is in law and I am pretty sure that what you did does constitute a breach of privacy regulations as they are commonly understood.

Not only that but you also performed a mass delete on PM's.

I can not retrieve a single one of my private messages now. I am assuming you will real soon give me back the messages that have been sent to me by other members in good confidence?

I know a little bit about proper forum modding. A mod worth his own salt will not let his personal interests or feelings prevail over the standards and guidelines set for the forum as a whole. A mod is required to maintain the proper personal and emotional distance to the subject.

Perhaps you were justified in banning aforementioned members, perhaps not.
Only correct interpretation of the forum guidelines will tell us that.
But whatever has transpired your actions should have been exclusively limited to such taken on the basis of knowledge that was obtained by legally sanctioned methods.
In my view the procedure mentioned above does not qualify as such. Hence, evidence obtained by this method does not count as evidence legally obtained.
G-Thomson
 
  2  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 12:55 pm
This is all crazy.
Cheery bye folks. See you on the other side of the internet.
0 Replies
 
josh0335
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 12:55 pm
Also, those private email exchanges shouldn't have been posted here on this thread. Whatever was said, however it was said, should have remained private between the parties exchanging the messages.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 01:24 pm
@jespah,
We don't have advertising now, that I notice anyway, and I think Robert mentioned that it is off for a while, during all the new development period. (Tell me if I'm wrong.) But, when we had it going, it wasn't obnoxious, at least to me. Since it helps pay for the site, I'll be glad to accept the advertising a2k does use, especially since I don't find the bits I have seen annoying, and even click on a few that interest me.
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jul, 2010 01:25 pm
@ossobuco,
I'm pretty sure it's off for the time being.
 

Related Topics

Philforum Focus Group - Discussion by jgweed
Top o' the Mornin' to Ya! - Question by Transcend
The new amalgamated philosophy forum. - Discussion by Soul Brother
Richard Grant - Question by Spock1111
Lily says goodbye - Question by Lily
 
  1. Forums
  2. » PhilForum check in
  3. » Page 26
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/19/2021 at 08:23:48