When Shutting Up isn't Cowardice

This is one of the reasons we usually don't say anything about being married to one another. I spend all of my time defending this sort of nonsense instead of actual issues.

I can "decern the difference" and consider the board to be a place where I don't attempt to 'control' my husband. His 'acting' is of no concern to me. I know who my husband is; you aren't in a position to critique anything but his posts.

Do you expect my husband to tell me I'm a blithering idiot because of blatham's comment?

Thank you snood. I truly appreciate your heartfelt post.

I don't know why you're obsessing about Mr. Mountie's post--we haven't been commenting on it. If i were to comment, i'd point out that Mr. Mountie makes a point of being well-informed, and often points out to others situations in which they are not well-informed. For as annoying as that may be to some people, it does not constitute "ungentlemanly" behavior. This is, after all, a debate forum. The old saw of "netiquette" at debate forums is "attack the idea, not the person." For someone to say that he or she considers someone ill- or un-informed on a subject is an attack on their statement, and not their person. My experience of the Mountie is that he is very patient, and usually cordial. When his contempt for another member becomes obvious, it is nevetheless almost never (never in my experience) accompanied by personal invective.

Cyclo wrote "discern," which is the correct spelling. I am mystified to know why you wrote "decern," putting it in quotation marks. Are you attempting to make him look bad? You even quoted the post in which he properly spelled the word. This is just getting bizarre.

That was a typo on my part, and I've found there are times when the edit button doesn't appear for me to make necessary corrections. This is one of those times. This isn't any attempt on my part to make Cyclo look bad by spelling a word incorrectly.

You cn only edit your last post, and that only until no-one answered.

No, never!

But if you made a comment, and he thought that said comment was not fitting with your usual charcter/nature, wouldn't you want him to say so?

That's what I was saying earlier; you know your husband is a gentleman, noone is questioning your opinion of him nor asking you to change it; but everyone acts in a better or worse fashion from time to time. Especially on the internet, when the normal societal rules which force us to be nice and restrained when dealing with one another don't apply; we have a tendency to present the harshest versions of ourselves, and that leads to conflict and snap judgements that you wouldn't see in real life.

Your husband is a gentleman, we'll take that as a given; but it doesn't appear that his post re: Setanta was the most gentlemanly way that his opinions could have been presented.

One thing is true, that Joe brought up: we argue back and forth here for years, so many of us are used to the tete-a-tete between those with strongly held positions. We also for the most part realize that we aren't going to change each others' minds to the degree that some are searching for, and so you see quite acrimonious comments that aren't really as serious as they seem.

But someone new, who comes in and starts lobbing bombs is not likely to be well received, because it is difficult to determine who is a troll and who is not without some body of work to reference. Therefore at least some prudence in initial posting can go a long long way to further acceptance as a productive and valued member of the group... at which point you can really let loose to a greater degree than at first, and expect people to treat you more seriously.

Cheers

Cycloptichorn

No worries.




I STILL don't know who "MC" is, though!


(Damn...I used an emoticon!)

MC stands for Monte Cargo--who, if not actually Massagato, acts like a Massagato clone. Littlebitty says she is the wife of Monte Cargo.

I'm gonna spread the word all over Oz that you've used an emoticon. All good netizens will shun you now.

Blimey!


I have missed this entire chapter of A2k history.

Looks like Massagatto paranoia is becoming a problem.

Yep, and as long as we're voting on who is and who isn't Possum, I think LoneStarMadam (who was getting the finger point as well) also fails the Massagatto temperament test.

I just fell into into this thread, and read only the first 20 pages. Here's the lowdown as I see it: Thomas had the foresight to start this excellent thread, but by page 20, things began to change. I agree with Thomas, georgeob and joefromchicago on what they have opined.

As with many others, I let out a loud sigh of relief when I learned (from the first 20 pages) my name wasn't mentioned as a "troll."

Finally, I do not believe in censorship for any reason; it's about "free" speech. We will always have non-sensitive, racial bigot, trollers in our midst. We just need to "live" with them, and report them to the moderators if they "go over the line" on a one-on-one basis.

I've been "suspended" from A2K three times, but I've heard from many old friends a "welcome back." I try to contribute many positives to a2k as I can, but I can get involved on issues that gets me into trouble with the moderators. That's life.

Well you are a cranky old bastard Cicerone, but you have more than enough good and interesting features to make it worth the trouble.

I suspect that most of us here have had occasional l;apses into "troll-like behavior.

'Let him who is without sin cast the first stone....'

But you didn't read page 21, CI.

georgeob, You're not a cranky old bastard, but your disagreements can be "trouble" for old farts like me. Even I agree with you - sometimes.

And I cherish every one !

I like what nimh wrote here:

On the other hand, I have an argument on the other side too. I was rethinking about what Thomas wrote here:

Thomas wrote:
I'm asking you, pretty please with sugar on top, to stop feeding people when you think they're trolling. There is no point in discussing publically who's being obnoxious and who isn't. Just make your own judgment, and shun your opponents with silence whenever you judge them to be trolling.)

(emphasis mine)

There's a downside to this, at least when we're talking about being in a third-party role.

Lemme explain. In many cases (as in the case Thomas was describing here), trollness is in the eye of the beholder, for sure. But I'm sure we can also agree that there are also cases - too many cases, even - where there was much less of such ambiguity. I'm sure we can all remember cases where we saw how someone was insulted/yelled at/hurt in just a totally unwarranted way - by a card-carrying troll or just a foul-mooded regular. Just like us regulars are also very likely to have been the suffering object of the really stunning stuff, stuff that really gets to you, ourselves at least once as well.

OK, so - you're the third party in such a case. You see it happen, and you're aghast. What to do in that case? Taking Thomas's advice, you would "make your own opinion", express it in silence, and walk away - because "discussing publically who's being obnoxious and who isn't" is bad.

But there is some cowardice involved in that - or callousness, perhaps. Because if you've ever been the object of this kind of thing (and who hasnt been) - and you're not blessed with the kind of self-conviction/vanity that renders some people untouchable by such events - then you know it can feel pretty lonely being at the receiving end. Personally, in the odd case or two it happened to me, I can tell you I was damn glad with the fellow-poster or two speaking up on what was going on, right when I was being paralysed into this "am I crazy, or..?" feeling, right when I was feeling pretty much abandoned. Vice versa, it's not pleasant seeing bystanders just scuffle away from the scene without a word of support.

Sending a supportive PM is of course a much better alternative, but even that can still leave a feeling like you've been left alone out there, noone speaking up for you, while invisible behind the scenes everyone is happy to whisper in your ear that, really, they think you're right.

I myself in any case do tend to speak up when I feel someone is being attacked unfairly and rudely - especially (but not only) if they're relatively new, or talking from the minority political POV - and people did send grateful messages, saying the equivalent of God, I didnt know what was happening, I'm so glad you came in, I thought I was going crazy.

So I dunno. Mob/pack mentality is bad, yes. Everyone chipping in to join in a "boo bad guy!" match is also bad, I can see that too. But emotions do get involved when you're attacked, and it can be an immense relief if at least someone jumps in for you, or defends you against an unwarranted attack. Mob mentality and mutual escalation bad, but some support and solidarity is good - we're not robots, after all, we are humans, with feelings, and in any real-life community you'd have positive feedback, support, stepping up for friends etc, too, and thats a good thing. So not so clear-cut perhaps, after all.

On the same token, if we're out in public, and we see somebody attack a young girl/woman - even strangers, most people will take action to prevent any harm coming to the girl/woman. nimh makes a good point, and I agree. The only difficulty on the internet is trying to determine where real harm is being done.

Complicating matters, I've seen people say the equivalent of "Don't speak for me, I can speak for myself."

Fascinating ... 'course, discussions of precisely this nature have been fascinating folks on boards and forums for all the years I've been playing with 'em, and this is far from the first appearance of this discussion on this website.


Yup, there's a fascination there alright; more than just slowing down to stare at the wreck, more like stopping, getting out, and poking through the debris.

I get really sick of the totally infantile posts where misuse of words including "repuglicans" "demokrats" "hitlery" replace actual comments/critisisms of political philsophy. grow up or get out.

In re the Big Bird's remarks: the other two sites i frequent don't really have this problem--they see a troll, they call it a troll, they shamelessly ridicule the troll, then they ignore him. Problem solved, the troll leaves.