How do you feel about a membership fee for A2K?

Soooo Robert, some of us aren't very sly, can you please tell us what the April 1 gag was?

Best answer so far. Though I'd like to see racist comments edited in some way.

Sure, lets do that. Then after that we will edit the comments that question the assertions of the feminists. Then after that we will edit the comments of the global warming deniers.Then after that we will edit...

Delete a post might be acceptable, but what do you mean by "edit". I don't think I would be appreciative of anyone editing my posts to change my wording. In fact I know I wouldn't.

Delete a post because it's very existence is threatening or damaging?

(BTW - I know you are not endorsing deletions)

Instructions on how to manufacture a pipe bomb? OK, delete it.

Racist ranting about how blacks are somehow sub-human? What is the point of deleting it from a discussion forum, particularly when it can be effectively deleted, from their sight, by any member using the thumbs down feature? Are they afraid that these posts are like Medusa; that one gaze by the unwary reader and he or she will be instantly turned to stone... or to a racist?

It's not as if a post in this forum is a billboard in downtown L.A.

I've seen past arguments that failing to delete such a post is tantamount to endorsing the message. The logic of such an argument totally escapes me, and particularly in a forum that encourages discussion. By this logic though, every post not deleted is endorse by the owner of the site; even if they oppose each other. If one believes the failure to delete a racist post is tantamount to condoning it, then it would seem to follow, that continued participation in a forum that condones racism does so as well.

Posts that are, in my opinion, misinterpreted as racist attract a lot of condemnation. The truly racist ones are not left unscathed. No one coming into this forum for the first time could reasonably draw the conclusion that the members are a bunch of racists and racism is condoned by the owner, and if they did, so what? If Robert's not worried about it, why should anyone else be?

This is a case of people just wanting to be the judge of what is and is not offensive and that their judgment should result in the banishment of that which offends. Robert owns the site and if he wanted to accede to such demands it would be perfectly within his rights to do so, just as it is perfectly within his rights not to. No real harm in voicing these opinions on how the site should be run, but everyone should realize that's all they are. The option to stop using A2K is always available to each of us.

In my opinion, there is a need for policing the forum. I am just stating a need; that doesn't mean we can fulfill that need, without taxing the posters. Like a free public event, all types can show up.

I respect your opinion, but I don't agree with it beyond the need to police it for the sort of spamming that destroyed Abuzz. The hamster takes care of that nicely.

I went back and forth and back and forth recently on whether I'd want extremely racist posts banned; last I remember, I came out with a weak agreement with some for banning, while saying I was chary of it (the slippery slope thing). I'm back to not banning - answer back or use the tools a2k gives us to close them off.

Anyway, I'm fine with our moderators and the administration here - unusual place that I rather love and definitely appreciate. I learn a lot from many threads, including people I don't agree with, but a lot in general.
Meantime, my old a2k sweatshirt is now way too big and rather slack at the neck from so many washings, a little bit like a cowl collar. I wear it to the grocery store once in a while... give 'em a thrill, y'know. No one's ever asked me about it, sadly.

They don't asked me about my ucla sweatshirt or my quite loud red Bay Cities International Market tee shirt either. Usually I don't go around as a sign, but that's fun sometimes. Memories of A2k's PDiddie - man has quite the tee shirt collection.

I'm not sure if racist comments should or shouldn't be banned, because of the slippery slope argument. Maybe it should be banned. One thing I do know, is that when someone posts racist or any over the line/out of bound comments, other members should put them in check with their own post. Other members should shun those individuals with their own posts. That way all other members can join in, showing their disgust for those individuals. That may be the best solution for that problem. Members will just have to give off the sideline and say something.

I agree. A response to the post is the best way to deal with something you find offensive, and if you feel like its a waste of time to do so, scroll on or thumb down the post.

The posts that are frequently complained of as offensive tend to be the product of certain individuals. It's hard for me to imagine that if a person finds my posts to frequently be so offensive that they don't even want to lay eyes on them, that the person is going to find a lot of value in the my other posts. In such a case putting me on Ignore seems the perfect solution for that person.

I just don't understand why anyone would legitimately care about others seeing something they find offensive. It's not as if A2K is used in classrooms around the country.

Well, some of us have had the primary racist here on ignore ever since the ignore button was invented, now many years ago. I'm here every day and I don't need to see that **** over and over.

I've been accused fairly recently that I don't argue with someone I don't read. You'll understand when you are here longer - some people are a waste of your days, answering being a kind of brick walling of your head. Depending on your own circumstances, age, youth, health, temperament, humor, obsessions, you'll engage or not.

That's one thing about this place, there is quite a span of types of people here.

true for the US. there was a time it was used by EFL teachers in Japan, South Korea and China. I know this as I'm one of the people who gave the link to EFL teachers I knew, and corresponded with them outside of the site. I stopped giving out the link about 4, maybe 5, years ago. I now recommend slightly more moderated sites, generally single-themed, where there is comparatively little pissing on other members.

At one point, there was discussion of something along the lines of silos here, where members would have been able to set up their own groups. Facebook now fills that niche well.

I don't think I've ever ignored you, even when we find each other pissy. I do put some folks there as a rest for myself (oh, hi, Frank) but will bring them back after their time in the cloakroom, since I essentially like them and their existence.

So for me, I like ignore as maleable, which is what worries me about the possible changes to make it two way. I'm not against two-way ignoring, just would like my send-to-the-cloakroom ignoring from one side still to be possible.

On your last point - people do post here from all over the place. Sometimes we're helpful (the point of this site in the first place, the very strong point Robert meant in the first place) and sometimes we're brutal.

Possibly because posts also function as memes, and some memes are not good for the cohesiveness of society. Cyberspace can function outside the jurisdiction of the laws of states/municipalities. So, if there was a local/state law that prescribed a degree of civility between people, cyberspace can thumb its digital nose at that law. In my opinion, the highest common denominator of civility should prevail. With that in mind, I take a deep bow, and wish you a good day.

I think no longer recommending the site for EFL was an entirely appropriate. response base on your perception of some of the discussions.

If the students are adults, though, they may get a kick out of the pissing contests and benefit from exposure to the colloquial.

Well, I guess you have to have a stronger sense of community about A2K than I do. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of the forum or any individual posts other than my own. I hope this doesn't sound arrogant, and it certainly doesn't mean that I don't enjoy the forum or many of the people who post here or that I haven't seen many excellent posts over the years.

Helping people is a fine attribute of this site and when I post comments in this regard, I take them very seriously, and try very hard to provide something of value or nothing at all.

I was, quite out of the blue, rewarded today by a PM from a women who posted something about the loss of her dog 2 1/2 years ago. Sadly she has just lost another dog, but apparently it reminded her of what I had written over two years ago. She wanted to share the sad news of her good friend and thank me for the help my post provided during her past grief. It was the nicest thing anyone has written me (in any context) in quite a long time, and I was very grateful. It's not really very hard to help someone who is hurting, and well worth the effort.

fucks damn shits don't bother me. Arguing that a mixed race kid is a hybrid because Blacks are just a silly millimeter short of being human bothers me. Denying the Holocaust happened just because the poster just can't imagine the numbers, I have a problem with. When these crazy bigoted statements are made they aren't made to further any discussion but to stir up and inflict emotional pain. Thats freely made speech but it isn't free speech if its the internet version of fighting words. That bothers me. How about a jury system? One or two hamsters and one or two randomly chosen members?

You'd think if we know where that slippery slope was we could avoid it. Racism and three of four words is where I would stop: no "n" word, no "c" word.

WTF do your feelings have to do with anything? Do you also demand that restaurants you visit stop serving asparagus because seeing it on the menu brings up memories of that unfortunate meal you had when you were 7YO??

Jump over the words you dont like just as you jump over the asparagus dish when you read the menu, and dont dwell on the posts you dont like just like you dont order the asparagus. This is easy. And stop being a wuss, we have far too many victims running around already.

I despise the term "meme" and take issue with certain aspects of the concept, but I find the possibility that any post in this forum, and particularly those generally agreed upon to be offensive, might act as a functioning "meme" unlikely.

There may have been a handful of original ideas that were launched in or passed along from this forum, but in the main I see the regurgitation of already well established ideas and behaviors...present company excepted of course.

In any case, it is, I think, impossible to prevent the dispersal of truly toxic thought. Any attempt to simply wipe it off the face of the real or virtual world will prove unsuccessful and, in my opinion, set a bad precedent. As we see here with some frequency, one man's wisdom is another's toxic thinking. Better to confront and counter it with what we perceive to be truth and reason, and trust those who lay eyes upon it to recognize it for what it is.

If they do not, either they were inclined to such thinking anyway and would seek and find it elsewhere or it has been written by the silver penned Anti-Christ and we are all in a lot of trouble.

Good Evening to you.