Personal attacks
I keep reading about them. I don't know how many times someone has accused someone else here of a personal attack in the last month.
Posters make a comment someone turns around and calls it a personal attack. Then the person attacked turns around and makes a comment and the first person cries foul and shouts personal attack!
Sorry if you think this is a "personal attack" but it's pretty childish if you ask me. We sound like children and not adults. If you think someone is making a personal attack instead of pointing it out in the thread stop participating and report it to a moderator.
Maybe the mods can reiterate what exactly will constitute as a personal attack on babble and if someone make a personal attack against someone else and it is reported then they have posting privileges taken away for a week or something. No slap on the wrist no gentle scolding. Start punishing posters for making personal attacks and the true attacks will stop.
It's like the boy who cried wolf. With everyone yelling personal attack personal attack when they are actually made they aren't taken as seriously or get ignored all together.
Hear, hear, sparky, you've shown yourself to be a trooper to the cause.
I have seen a number of digs which often erupt into larger conflicts that could easily be avoided by a little more consideration. I agree with SparkyOne's comment, and I think that the issue is more than just not accusing people of personal attacks; let's be -at the very least - mildly reasonable towards eachother (please!).
j.m. - I think it's more people need to learn to walk before they run on babble.
Smaller egos would make smaller targets.... as much as I like most of my fellow babblers, there are times I would like to take a few aside, put my arm around their shoulders and say "[insert name], really, it isn't all about you".
Maybe the mods can reiterate what exactly will constitute as a personal attack on babble and if someone make a personal attack against someone else and it is reported then they have posting privileges taken away for a week or something. No slap on the wrist no gentle scolding. Start punishing posters for making personal attacks and the true attacks will stop.
This also needs to be uniformly applied as well. No free passes for long-term members, no matter how popular you are.
Has the kinder, gentler Babble approach been unsuccessful?
Has the kinder, gentler Babble approach been unsuccessful?
Well yes and no IMHO. Yes in that it has and continues to generate good discussion, but I don't think too many people really change behaviour, at least in the long run. Clearly, my own feeling about what constitutes a personal attack differes from many others, or at least a personal attack which is worthy of taking note. Certainly every expression of disapproval, mild sarcasm or slight need not be even noticed much less responded to, but you wouldn't believe what shows up in the 'flag as offensive' queue. Part of the problem too, is that no one really believes they are the ones at fault, it's the other guy who would be fine if he/she would just change their posting style.
Yes, Oldgoat, I often forget to remove the beam from my own eye.
I use the flag offensive fairly often. I think one of the difficulties is some of us don't know where the lines of acceptability are in practice.
Is there any plan to review the situation given the "pledge" process some took part in contained a clause to review the situation after 3 months? If memory serves me correctly unionist facilitated that earlier discussion.
Hear, hear, sparky, you've shown yourself to be a trooper to the cause.
Yes and I'm not proud of it. At the time I thought when in Rome but that was wrong.
I have seen a number of digs which often erupt into larger conflicts that could easily be avoided by a little more consideration.
Exactly!
We have these great questions or subjects we discuss and sooner or later they all seem to end with the same people trading jabs with each other. The spotlight goes from the question at hand to a personal battle.
Smaller egos would make smaller targets.... as much as I like most of my fellow babblers, there are times I would like to take a few aside, put my arm around their shoulders and say "[insert name], really, it isn't all about you".
Yup! Someone made this comment to someone else in another thread and I thought holy shit they could very well be talking about me too. My ego has got in the way of my better judgment a few times. Like the personal attacks a lot of threads seem to degrade because some posters behave and act like it's all about them.
This also needs to be uniformly applied as well. No free passes for long-term members, no matter how popular you are.
I have mentioned this before when I was a newer poster here. I'm not sure if you can really fix this though. At work I can get away with stuff that would see a new employee probably fired. I don't really notice it but they sure do.
Yes, Oldgoat, I often forget to remove the beam from my own eye.
I use the flag offensive fairly often. I think one of the difficulties is some of us don't know where the lines of acceptability are in practice.
I reported about 4 posts last week which I felt were out of line or personal attacks. I didn't hear anything from the mods. I was hoping to at least get some feed back. No Jen this isn't a personal attack or Yes thank you for bringing this to our attention we will deal with it. Some kind of feedback would have been nice but I have been a mod elsewhere and I know stressful it can be and how much work is involved.
If members have a clear idea what a personal attack is and there is a zero tolerance policy ( for actual personal attacks and people crying wolf just to involve the mods) we would see less attacks and the mods wouldn't receive so many reports.
Just to be clear - we don't respond to the "flag as offensive" posts - there isn't a mechanism for it in our system, and we don't have time anyhow. The abuse flags are just about bringing it to our attention. Then we look at it, and if we feel it's serious enough, we say something in the thread, and if not, then we don't. And sometimes, even if it is something we might normally remark upon, we let it go if the moment has passed or the thread has moved on, so as not to drag the thread back into it again.
.
SparkyOne, I'm afraid the abuse moderation thingy is a one way communications hole. The way things are set up, to do otherwise would just be too cumbersome and time consuming. Also, organizationally, which mod would be respondible for answering? If someone goes to the trouble of emailing me or PMing me with a question or concern I usually try to answer though.
If someone goes to the trouble of emailing me or PMing me with a question or concern I usually try to answer though.
Are you serious??? If so, I'm going to PM you to find out what the meaning of life is!!
Who's life? This could actually be an easy one.
42
But is that in metric?
Adams
I noticed that a news item on the rabble links is entitled "Toronto 18 terrorist expresses regret to Canadians," instead of "Toronto 18 co-leader apologizes to Canadians, Muslims," which is how the original headline appears on the CBC website.
rabble.ca is a little quick to judge, isn't it?
Where's this again?
Holy crap, never mind, found it. Just so you know, that list is automatically generated by RSS. So we are not the ones who give those stories the titles that appear - those titles appear from the source of the story. I don't know the technical stuff behind it, but it's quite possible that this was the CBC's original title, and then they changed it on their site, but not on their RSS feed. That's the only reason I can think of for why it would do that on an automatically generated news feed.
I'll pass word along immediately and see if there's anything we can do about it.
Even weirder - it looks like it's been changed now in the feed title - so now the one that shows up is "co-leader," not "terrorist." I assume that we must have just caught them in the midst of an edit.
Yeah, that title change did seem like a rather un-rabble thing to do.
I see that "RSS" icon here and there. What is RSS?
Honestly? I have no idea what it stands for (blush). But what it means is that it's an automatic feed - so if you sign up for someone's RSS feed, or put it on your blog or web site, it will automatically print the titles and links of any updates that are made.
So a news site's RSS feed will give you the headlines and links to all their stories as they post them. We have several feeds from various news sites coming into that little box on the front of rabble.
Is it safe to say like a referee in sports there's a set of rules to follow? "equally"? If an individual pushes the limits they would either be "on watch" or "removed"? I think the "offensive button" is good for a guage that the moderators can have in their toolbox but by no means to be used as an automatic reaction to a post, I think these folks do a pretty good job, an eyebrow raised here and there is and always will be the nature of the beast on any quality forum from time to time.
With RSS feeds, apparently you need an RSS Reader. Live bookmarks explained for Mozilla Firefox users
And apparently you need an RSS reader. Firefox has lots of free RSS readers to choose from and are really easy to install as add-ons to the Firefox browser
And here's the wiki on what they are.
RSS (most commonly expanded as "Really Simple Syndication") is a family of web feed formats used to publish frequently updated works-such as blog entries, news headlines, audio, and video-in a standardized format.[2] An RSS document (which is called a "feed", "web feed",[3] or "channel") includes full or summarized text, plus metadata such as publishing dates and authorship. Web feeds benefit publishers by letting them syndicate content automatically. They benefit readers who want to subscribe to timely updates from favored websites or to aggregate feeds from many sites into one place. RSS feeds can be read using software called an "RSS reader", "feed reader", or "aggregator", which can be web-based, desktop-based, or mobile-device-based. A standardized XML file format allows the information to be published once and viewed by many different programs. The user subscribes to a feed by entering into the reader the feed's URI or by clicking an RSS icon in a web browser that initiates the subscription process. The RSS reader checks the user's subscribed feeds regularly for new work, downloads any updates that it finds, and provides a user interface to monitor and read the feeds.
RSS formats are specified using XML, a generic specification for the creation of data formats. Although RSS formats have evolved from as early as March 1999,[4] it was between 2005 and 2006 when RSS gained widespread use, and the ("
") icon was decided upon by several major Web browsers.[5]
I have RSS feeds for rabble. ca and the CCPA. When anything new is posted on either site (not babble debates here, I mean actual stories) then I get the headline and with a click I can go to the story. Very handy. I will be adding more RSS feeds as I find more that I like.
The only problem is that I haven't set it up for my Linux OS, only the Windows OS (as a Google Gadget) , and, as a result, I'm spending far too much time on the "wrong" Operating System on my dual boot laptop.
[shadow moderating hat]
Hey, this is a thread about personal attacks, not techo-babble. Either launch a personal attack or go elsewhere.
[/shadow moderating hat]
And that is precisely the reason why bagkitty should never be a moderator.
Finally some order here! are those moderators on another coffee break? geez!
Okay I'll get things back on track.
You're all worthless and weak! Now drop and give me twenty.
Aye sir. But that's not an attack by your standards Fidel, give me your best on Harpoon.
That was me launching a vicious attack on as many as possible.
Okay, Stephen Harper is a democrat. I'm sure he'd be totally and personally offended by that remark. I don't think I'd want to stick around long after saying it to his face.
I noticed that a news item on the rabble links is entitled "Toronto 18 terrorist expresses regret to Canadians," instead of "Toronto 18 co-leader apologizes to Canadians, Muslims," which is how the original headline appears on the CBC website.
rabble.ca is a little quick to judge, isn't it?
"The convicted mastermind behind a plot to cause death and destruction in downtown Toronto, says he is a changed man but one who deserves Canadians' contempt for his former extremism."
Well, the perp was convicted , he admits and expresses regret for his terrorism and he admits to extremism as motive.
I don't want to be quick to judge either but "a plot to cause death and destruction" due to religious extremism is terrorism n'est ce pas?
He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties
Numpty
a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others.
a) "No. That wisnae wit she meant, ya big numpty!"b) A good humoured admonition, a term of endearment
c) A reckless, absent minded or unwise person
b) i.e. "Silly billy", "You big dafty"
c) "That numpty's driving with no lights on!"
He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties
Say, what's with the personal attack?
I'm not politically correct, I'm just lazy. I read the headline on rabble, then followed the link to the CBC site and noticed the difference. I thought the article was about the guy whose trial began this week, but didn't actually read the article itself.
So there. Nyah nyah nyah.
Who's the smarty-pants now?
[I suppose I should apologise to the babble staff though]
Sorry.
Its a colourful, critical analysis of overweaned political correctness, not a personal attack on you.
Explanation accepted, no apology necessary. In this age of too little time and too much info to comprehend, everyone miscues.
I don't want to be quick to judge either but "a plot to cause death and destruction" due to religious extremism is terrorism n'est ce pas?
Did he engage in any acts of terrorism?
If someone plans a murder that never happens, would you still call the person a murderer?
Political correctness: Def: Any progressive idea that a particular writer disagrees with.
PC as a term is so passe because it is so meaningless.
whether pc as a term or a movement is passe, language never stopped being political. i don't know what or who canuquetoo is referring to with "PCs are numpties" statement exactly, but i sure hope he isn't referring to those who want to discuss the use of language and its political content, or he may find himself in the company of a "numpty" right here!
Political correctness: Def: Any progressive idea that a particular writer disagrees with.
PC as a term is so passe because it is so meaningless.
I was going to say the same thing about the word conspiracy. It's often not used by it's dictionary meaning but in a derisive way to counter valid criticism of the pro-corporate government line on things in general. Critics of corporate-government power sharing are deemed to be "anti-government" conspiracy theorists and not just concerned citizens asking questions about our bought and paid-for governments. We are slowly being trained to think of corporate rule through big money in politics as legitimate government.
Indeed Fidel like the idiots who claim Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" is a "conspiracy" theory. Might just as well say he suffers from political correctness.
I don't want to be quick to judge either but "a plot to cause death and destruction" due to religious extremism is terrorism n'est ce pas?
Did he engage in any acts of terrorism?
If someone plans a murder that never happens, would you still call the person a murderer?
If someone plans a murder that never happens and is convicted of planning that murder, I'd be fairly convinced that the person is capable of murder AND, if that someone issues a mea culpa to the effect that murder was plotted, they are a failed murderer, or failed terrorist as the case may be.
I'm out of time so, sorry, I won't be able to respond to your "when did you stop beating your wife" reasoning.
Political correctness: Def: Any progressive idea that a particular writer disagrees with.
PC as a term is so passe because it is so meaningless.
Passe' to whom? Meaningless to whom? Political correctness has nothing to do with progressive ideas and everything to do with liberal hypocracy.
The premise is based on a misunderstanding but feel free to be as defensive as you wish. The fact that 95% of the population is also passe' must be galling.
The non sequitur that disagreeing with political correctness run amok is akin to disagreeing with progressive ideals is particularly disingenuous.
whether pc as a term or a movement is passe, language never stopped being political. i don't know what or who canuquetoo is referring to with "PCs are numpties" statement exactly, but i sure hope he isn't referring to those who want to discuss the use of language and its political content, or he may find himself in the company of a "numpty" right here!
Not at all. The numpties I'm refering to are those who refuse common sense solutions and logic based thinking in order to pursue societal change at any price, especially when it is not themselves paying the price.
Political correctness: Def: Any progressive idea that a particular writer disagrees with.
PC as a term is so passe because it is so meaningless.
I was going to say the same thing about the word conspiracy. It's often not used by it's dictionary meaning but in a derisive way to counter valid criticism of the pro-corporate government line on things in general. Critics of corporate-government power sharing are deemed to be "anti-government" conspiracy theorists and not just concerned citizens asking questions about our bought and paid-for governments. We are slowly being trained to think of corporate rule through big money in politics as legitimate government.
Who is 'we'? Certainly not the passe' crowd I see at the polling booth. They are even more cynical than you, Fidel. It can't be the 45% of Canadians who don't bother to vote because they are much too busy tweetering about the latest idol reject while driving. Since they have the attention span of a gnat, they are probably not trainable, so who is left?
Indeed Fidel like the idiots who claim Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" is a "conspiracy" theory. Might just as well say he suffers from political correctness.
Or, might just as well say you are on a non-sequitur roll. Can you cobble a cogent argument together to support this rather sketchy assumption?
1. He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties.
2. It can't be the 45% of Canadians who don't bother to vote because they are much too busy tweetering about the latest idol reject while driving. Since they have the attention span of a gnat, they are probably not trainable, so who is left?
3. Political correctness has nothing to do with progressive ideas and everything to do with liberal hypocracy. The premise is based on a misunderstanding but feel free to be as defensive as you wish. The fact that 95% of the population is also passe' must be galling.
4. Can you cobble a cogent argument together to support this rather sketchy assumption?
Oh please! After those sweeping statements, made-up statistics and arrogant claims you accuse someone of making "sketchy assumptions"? There's no sense restraining oneself from confrontation, in spite of the board topic, if others are going to be this unreasonable.
Thanks for saving me the trouble j.m. That was a horrible read canuquetoo.
1. He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties.
2. It can't be the 45% of Canadians who don't bother to vote because they are much too busy tweetering about the latest idol reject while driving. Since they have the attention span of a gnat, they are probably not trainable, so who is left?
3. Political correctness has nothing to do with progressive ideas and everything to do with liberal hypocracy. The premise is based on a misunderstanding but feel free to be as defensive as you wish. The fact that 95% of the population is also passe' must be galling.
4. Can you cobble a cogent argument together to support this rather sketchy assumption?
Oh please! After those sweeping statements, made-up statistics and arrogant claims you accuse someone of making "sketchy assumptions"? There's no sense restraining oneself from confrontation, in spite of the board topic, if others are going to be this unreasonable.
Best I can do on short notice. I don't consider the exchange of ideas as 'confrontation'. I also don't take your post as a 'personal attack'. Anything I post is written with the expectation that it will be deconstructed and critiqued by some rather brilliant (and eccentric) minds as well as the usual shallow epithets from the hide-bound. I don't get all thin skinned and climb on my ego to squack about 'personal attacks' but learn and enjoy some quality time.
I don't necessarily have full confidence in my opinions, they may be uninformed and specious but thats how I learn. Devil's Advocate in instances to take responses into consideration to furthur an informed opinion. I can make the effort to support my 'sweeping statements, made up statistics and arrogant claims' but then, the frission of delight at putting the bumpkin in his place will have paled, interest in the subject lost and my efforts gone for naught -hence, the sweeping etc. Now, don't take this personally as furthur evidence of confrontation but I think simply dismissing my opinions rather than asking me to support them as I asked the brilliant and eccentric (or eccentric and brilliant, perhaps) poster above shows an unbecoming sense of superiority. Do you disagree?1. He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties.
2. It can't be the 45% of Canadians who don't bother to vote because they are much too busy tweetering about the latest idol reject while driving. Since they have the attention span of a gnat, they are probably not trainable, so who is left?
3. Political correctness has nothing to do with progressive ideas and everything to do with liberal hypocracy. The premise is based on a misunderstanding but feel free to be as defensive as you wish. The fact that 95% of the population is also passe' must be galling.
4. Can you cobble a cogent argument together to support this rather sketchy assumption?
Oh please! After those sweeping statements, made-up statistics and arrogant claims you accuse someone of making "sketchy assumptions"? There's no sense restraining oneself from confrontation, in spite of the board topic, if others are going to be this unreasonable.
Best I can do on short notice. I don't consider the exchange of ideas as 'confrontation'. I also don't take your post as a 'personal attack'. Anything I post is written with the expectation that it will be deconstructed and critiqued by some rather brilliant (and eccentric) minds as well as the usual shallow epithets from the hide-bound. I don't get all thin skinned and climb on my ego to squack about 'personal attacks' but learn and enjoy some quality time.
I don't necessarily have full confidence in my opinions, they may be uninformed and specious but thats how I learn. Devil's Advocate in instances to take responses into consideration to furthur an informed opinion. I can make the effort to support my 'sweeping statements, made up statistics and arrogant claims' but then, the frission of delight at putting the bumpkin in his place will have paled, interest in the subject lost and my efforts gone for naught -hence, the sweeping etc. Now, don't take this personally as furthur evidence of confrontation but I think simply dismissing my opinions rather than asking me to support them as I asked the brilliant and eccentric (or eccentric and brilliant, perhaps) poster above shows an unbecoming sense of superiority. Do you disagree?The very reason I was hesistant to post is due to this sort of tangential dispute, and the fact that it is confrontational on a board already preoccupied with attacks. I tried to word nicely, accusing you of being unreasonable; you have now accused me airing a sense of superiority. This is bothersome.
You make a statement that you post things that you know will be deconstructed by some brilliant mind. Really? Trying to engage people by playing "Devil's Advocate" with sweeping statements and questionable statistics, then accusing someone who dismisses your attempt as having "an unbecoming sense of superiority" is called trolling where I come from.
Let's go back a bit. I will briefly restate why I dismissed your opinions instead of engaging you in supporting them:
1. You sweepingly paint a group of people, poorly identify them as numpties, and push them to the margins with the noun "extremists".
2. You claim 45% of Canadians are driving around twittering about American Idol. Really? And they all have the attention span of a gnat? This is ridiculous.
3. You state only 5% of the population believes in political correctness (95% are "passe"). Really? Can you really prove that? Also, isn't this statistic (which appears made-up) self-serving to marginalize political correctness so that it appears extreme?
I really hope you don't answer me on this latter section because I don't want to debate whether 45% of the population has a gnat's attention span and drive around twittering about american idol, whether 95% of the population think PC is passe and whether the 5 % of people who don't are PC extremists and thus "total numpties".
You have shown very little respect towards other people in your postings and you have come across as hypocritical with logic and making claims. I don't want to further engage in a discussion with you.
And if this isn't enough reason, I have been following the double standard on the use of statistics: http://www.rabble.ca/babble/western-provinces/stelmach-challenging-equal...
For someone hestiant to make a positive contribution, you certainly have no hesitation in spending valuable time posting a windy about my shortcomings. I'm reminded of Abe Lincoln who stated: "He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know."
Sorry I don't meet your standards but feel free to continue not "furthur engaging in a discussion" with me by linking to other topics. Some would consider this a personal attack by stalking but I consider it a free flow of ideas.
There is a certain irony in being personally pilloried in a 'personal attacks' thread by someone who refuses to respond to the issue. Putting the bumpkin in his place takes priority, I suppose.
I take no umbrage at your umbrage but will ponder the ironies involved in an attempt to improve. I'll leave you with the words of Sri Chinmoy: "To criticise another individual may leave an indelible stain - on the critic".
I try to communicate in a style that will not be taken personally but doesn't end up talking around issues. Refering to overweaned political correctionistas as 'numpties' is not at all personal. I will renew this with vigour but I fear that to the overly sensitive and humourless, it will be a wasted effort.
Asking someone to produce where they are quoting a stat from while refusing or side stepping to do so themselves is common.
Its a colourful, critical analysis of overweaned political correctness...
But if I wasn't being politically correct, how can your comment on what I said be an analysis of political correctness?
Explanation accepted, no apology necessary.
Hang on. Who the hell are you? "The Mighty and Terrible canuquetoo, Lord of Time Space and Dimension"? I wasn't apologising to you, my arrogant friend, but to the rabble staff.
Its a colourful, critical analysis of overweaned political correctness...
But if I wasn't being politically correct, how can your comment on what I said be an analysis of political correctness?
I can't because your original remarks were based upon an erroneous assuption that you do not allow to stand so neither do my comments. I've mentioned once or twice that the whole issue is based on a misunderstanding that has been sorted out but the issue is ignored in favour of dwelling on my perceived shortcomings as a poster.
C'est la vie. G'day.
Explanation accepted, no apology necessary.
Hang on. Who the hell are you? "The Mighty and Terrible canuquetoo, Lord of Time Space and Dimension"? I wasn't apologising to you, my arrogant friend, but to the rabble staff.
Who am I? I thought I was respectful in addressing your mea culpa. I realised that you were not apologising to me and merely meant that its no big deal. Rather humble and deferential, I thought. I would never be arrogant enough to aspire to 'gracious', I can only dream.
Did he engage in any acts of terrorism?
If someone plans a murder that never happens, would you still call the person a murderer?
If someone plans a murder that never happens and is convicted of planning that murder, I'd be fairly convinced that the person is capable of murder AND, if that someone issues a mea culpa to the effect that murder was plotted, they are a failed murderer, or failed terrorist as the case may be.
I guess by the same logic, John McCain is a failed president.
I find it odd that you would call someone a murderer even if they've never taken a human life.
I'm out of time so, sorry, I won't be able to respond to your "when did you stop beating your wife" reasoning.
You're dreaming. There was no "when did you stop beating your wife" question.
I'm new to moderating, but my view on 'personal attacks' is that babblers should be able to handle a few written slings and arrows thrown at them. This is the nature of a discussion group that your ideas are going to be picked apart and dissected.
I've done a quick read of this thread, and it's possible I've missed something, but I don't see anything that warrants moderator intervention so far.
To me (and I'm only one moderator, and a newbie at that) personal attacks might include:
I'm not inclined to get too upset when it's ideas that are attacked rather than personalities
I'll judge posts that call other babbler names on a case by case basis. I think there is a line somewhere and while 'dork' doesn't really cross it, harsher terms probably do. I can live with being called delisiounal, flaky, stalinist, too politically correct, and an apologist to Yankee imperialism, and other terms like that, and I expect others to do the same. If you can't fight back with words and stronger arguments, babble likely isn't for you. Sticks and stones and all...
And yes, ask yourself if you really, really, really need to hit the 'flag as offensive' button.
Again, these are my views only, but they are based on the babble policy. Other moderators likely have their own opinions.
Lou's my new hero. :D
....
h?
It's the new elbbab.
I'm new to moderating, but my view on 'personal attacks' is that babblers should be able to handle a few written slings and arrows thrown at them. This is the nature of a discussion group that your ideas are going to be picked apart and dissected.
I've done a quick read of this thread, and it's possible I've missed something, but I don't see anything that warrants moderator intervention so far.
To me (and I'm only one moderator, and a newbie at that) personal attacks might include:
I'm not inclined to get too upset when it's ideas that are attacked rather than personalities
I'll judge posts that call other babbler names on a case by case basis. I think there is a line somewhere and while 'dork' doesn't really cross it, harsher terms probably do. I can live with being called delisiounal, flaky, stalinist, too politically correct, and an apologist to Yankee imperialism, and other terms like that, and I expect others to do the same. If you can't fight back with words and stronger arguments, babble likely isn't for you. Sticks and stones and all...
And yes, ask yourself if you really, really, really need to hit the 'flag as offensive' button.
Again, these are my views only, but they are based on the babble policy. Other moderators likely have their own opinions.
'Unbabble-like'?
What's next - have you now, or have you ever been a card-carrying American?
That sort of jingoistic, McCarthy-like baiting leaves me cold.
RP - you don't have to agree with those applauding US action, but is the name calling really necessary?
Name calling? Really?
Thread
Sorry Lou but I'm really offended.
Lou's my new hero. :D
Methinks thou dost give haste praise. Can't wait for the literary experts. Love you babble.
Sorry Lou but I'm really offended.
I find your ease in taking offence offensive.
RP,
I'm not sure what your point is.
In my earlier post I was trying to improve the tone. But I distinguish between a suggestion and action by myself as moderator. I never suggested your words were offensive, just that you were not making a convincing argument.
Lou's my new hero. :D
I was her hero once. Sic transit gloria mundi
Qscar Wilde: I wish I'd said that.
Whistler: You will, Oscar, you will.
What gets me is that those who have appeared to derail conversations and bait arguments in various ways in other recent threads also managed to not contribute to this thread or they derailed it.
From post 17 - 31 the topic went tangential without conflict but at from 32 onwards it erupted from on babbler's baiting. Here's post 69: why don't the moderators close this thread ?
And, really, did post 32 need to make mention to PCs as numpties to make the point? Why won't moderators acknowledge that this was an unnecessary remark that was also a sweeping attack and nip it in the bud? Lou's principle of tolerating a few slings may be a good heuristic in some instances to some people, but when those slings come out of nowhere why should they even be tolerated?
Good gravy.
Geez, the guy called me a "numpty." Big deal. I didn't even know what that meant until the intrepid remind did some valuable scholarly research on the subject.
Such name-calling is hardly any reason to go whining and tattling to the moderators.
Good gravy.
Geez, the guy called me a "numpty." Big deal. I didn't even know what that meant until the intrepid remind did some valuable scholarly research on the subject.
Such name-calling is hardly any reason to go whining and tattling to the moderators.
It was the first log on the fire. Do you have to be confrontational by referring to my recent point as "whining and tattling"? This thread has nothing to do with talking about personal attacks, but it is a great forum for taking shots at people. Why keep it open?
Why keep it open?
It's a great example of exacly what I was talking about.
This place would be so much more pleasent if a strict zero tolerance policy was in place for personal attacks and baiting.
I think zero tolerance (now there's a politically correct tactic for you) would make this place sterile and boring.
Good gravy.
Geez, the guy called me a "numpty." Big deal. I didn't even know what that meant until the intrepid remind did some valuable scholarly research on the subject.
Such name-calling is hardly any reason to go whining and tattling to the moderators.
For the record, I did no such thing. The quote is: "He's a kid and redeemable so I can forgive this clueless wannabe a lot easier than I can forgive the politically correct extremists for being total numpties"
To expand that thought, I have no problem forgiving a kid who does something stupid like thousands of other kids do if they redeem themselves. I have more concern for politically correct extremists, who go to any length,at any cost (as long as they don't have to pay it), to defend the indefensible. Its not personal. I didn't call you a numptie.So, given that you weren't referring to anyone posting on babble, how many numpties can dance on the head of a pin?
FIrst offence banning for a week second offence removal of one finger. It is really easy to find places on the internet to have any left view maligned by people who are not progressive. That is one of the points of this place. So when some right wing assholes posts anti-leftist tar brush smears it lowers the debate and makes it hard to discuss issues for a perspective that isn't the same as most MSM jingoistic sites. [given I did not make it specific, the first person to object to the term right wing asshole will self identify as one]
I think people come here to troll precisely because they don't want anything discussed from a left perspective otherwise they would not feel the need to tell us how misdirected "we" are in our ideas that are not part of the official corporate propaganda..
Politically correct extremists is a broad tar brush slur of the people who post on this site.
So in a similar vein why don't you take your hat and find the fucking door you condescending self righteous neo-con wanna be. Go read Fountainhead again for the umpteenth time and come back and grace us with more your insights.
What gets me is that those who have appeared to derail conversations and bait arguments in various ways in other recent threads also managed to not contribute to this thread or they derailed it.
From post 17 - 31 the topic went tangential without conflict but at from 32 onwards it erupted from on babbler's baiting. Here's post 69: why don't the moderators close this thread ?
And, really, did post 32 need to make mention to PCs as numpties to make the point? Why won't moderators acknowledge that this was an unnecessary remark that was also a sweeping attack and nip it in the bud? Lou's principle of tolerating a few slings may be a good heuristic in some instances to some people, but when those slings come out of nowhere why should they even be tolerated?
You go, grrl. The mods have spoken but you continue to belabour the point. L'audace', l'audace, toujours l'audace.
So, given that you weren't referring to anyone posting on babble, how many numpties can dance on the head of a pin?
I can think of one but forebearance will avoid another scathing lecture.
Politically correct extremists is a broad tar brush slur of the people who post on this site.
So in a similar vein why don't you take your hat and find the fucking door you condescending self righteous neo-con wanna be. Go read Fountainhead again for the umpteenth time and come back and grace us with more your insights.
Are you....talkin to me...? In a similar vein? Hardy. If you are reduced to obscenities, perhaps a nice walk will restore your equilibrium.
I can only restate that my criticism is directed at extremists, not the nuts and bolts of political correctness, which I agree with.
I also used the descriptor "overweened". It is a rather narrow tar brush slur of no-one on this site unless, of course, in the wise words of a poster above, they take offense because they self-identify as overweened extremists.
Politically correct extremists is a broad tar brush slur of the people who post on this site.
So in a similar vein why don't you take your hat and find the fucking door you condescending self righteous neo-con wanna be. Go read Fountainhead again for the umpteenth time and come back and grace us with more your insights.
Now that is more the kind of personal attack I have been waiting to read. Of course it can be put much more succinctly by calling someone an asshat, so the East German judge is only giving you a 4.5
C'mon, canuquetoo, you are a self-absorbed asshole. I am just sorry that I defended your "right" to post here some time ago.
You were just testing the waters for entry of your super-sized ego and I misjudged you. What can you possibly bring to this venue except acrimony?
I think zero tolerance (now there's a politically correct tactic for you) would make this place sterile and boring.
Actually, the fact that it was dreamed up by conservatives in the 1980s to deal with material, tangible public forums (urban spaces) doesn't make it some sort of leftist tactic. Still, I am apprehensive to the ZT approach as making spaces safe for debate is a really problematic idea.
Still, where is the commitment of users to some sort of ethic of consideration towards opponents/opposing views? It isn't constructive to mock, ridicule or dig at people, even if indirectly. I don't suppose that what I propose will resolve the issue but at least it would foster debate instead of acrimony and contempt.
What gets me is that those who have appeared to derail conversations and bait arguments in various ways in other recent threads also managed to not contribute to this thread or they derailed it.
From post 17 - 31 the topic went tangential without conflict but at from 32 onwards it erupted from on babbler's baiting. Here's post 69: why don't the moderators close this thread ?
And, really, did post 32 need to make mention to PCs as numpties to make the point? Why won't moderators acknowledge that this was an unnecessary remark that was also a sweeping attack and nip it in the bud? Lou's principle of tolerating a few slings may be a good heuristic in some instances to some people, but when those slings come out of nowhere why should they even be tolerated?
You go, grrl. The mods have spoken but you continue to belabour the point. L'audace', l'audace, toujours l'audace.
And you like baiting. Now I am just responding to get this damn thread to 100 posts.
I think it's cool, how babble is confining all the personal attacks in this one thread specifically named for that purpose.
Carry on...
J.M, I'll make a personal atacks part 2 thread for you.
Maybe babble should have one single unmoderatedenter at your own risk forum and let the sparks fly.
It has been suggested before SparkyOne... and for all our pretensions at being reasonable people, it seems it is time to suggest it again. Of course the problem lies in those who will not simply let something die, and dragging other threads into things... and having a "flame zone" will never stop that problem.
J.M, I'll make a personal atacks part 2 thread for you.
Maybe babble should have one single unmoderatedenter at your own risk forum and let the sparks fly.
Thanks for the flattering overture, SparkyOne.
The red zones and green zones for behaviour has already been done (another method for policing material public forums in the city). It would provide people with the legitimate response to offenders "take your flaming elsewhere", but it does little about attitudes - it just makes them less visible and more entrenched.
Nevertheless, it is a good palliative measure to "move on" with other issues.
I just said that because you talked about getting the thread to 100 posts to close it. Didn't mean a thread for you to insult people if that's what you thought! Sorry!
Know what's weird? I used to post on another forum that allows personal attacks and the amount of personal attacks jabs and baiting is far less than here. Two posters would argue, call each other a few names then that's the end of it. No massive derailed threads no following someone across the forum to stalk them in other arguments to get jabs in. Telling people NOT to make personal attacks almost seems to tempt them to see just how much they can get away with.
I think it's cool, how babble is confining all the personal attacks in this one thread specifically named for that purpose.
Carry on...
Yeah, it's one of those "form equals content" areas. Bravo for us!
Now, who here is Dionysus, and who is The Crucified?
Know what's weird? I used to post on another forum that allows personal attacks and the amount of personal attacks jabs and baiting is far less than here. Two posters would argue, call each other a few names then that's the end of it. No massive derailed threads no following someone across the forum to stalk them in other arguments to get jabs in. Telling people NOT to make personal attacks almost seems to tempt them to see just how much they can get away with.
I think it's because we tell people not to, then enable them by not doing anything about it, especially long-term members who are popular enough to get away with it. So long-term members eventually get acquainted with how far they can push the envelope, and how they can trash threads, and are able to push it further than newbies.
I think it's cool, how babble is confining all the personal attacks in this one thread specifically named for that purpose.
Carry on...
Yeah, it's one of those "form equals content" areas. Bravo for us!
Now, who here is Dionysus, and who is The Crucified?
There are no seething, brooding vendetta specialists in this thread. No way.
Seeing as this thread is becoming a semi-annual ritual , will babblers: do something about the issue (i.e., reflect on round 3 of 'kindler, gentler babble)? strike up a planning committee for the next reflection-and-bash-a-thon? create a canon of forum posts for new babblers to read so that they know the rules of war?
More seriously though, what are long-time babblers' reflections on these exchanges?
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/rabble-reactions/babble-finished
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/babble-banter/snark-killing-babble
C'mon, canuquetoo, you are a self-absorbed asshole. I am just sorry that I defended your "right" to post here some time ago.
I beg to differ. I'm not the least self-absorbed.
You were just testing the waters for entry of your super-sized ego and I misjudged you. What can you possibly bring to this venue except acrimony?
If defending one's opinions without resorting to labeling, name-calling and a delerious descent into obscenity, is your definition of a 'super-sized ego', George, I'll have to agree that you suffer from poor judgement.
Ideas and ideals that run counter to the common perception that to be a progressive, one must be a progressive steeped in the far left to be considered acceptable.
"Yes, he may be a progressive but he's not our kind, is he?" Do you see any parallels here, George?
C'mon, canuquetoo, you are a self-absorbed asshole. I am just sorry that I defended your "right" to post here some time ago.
I beg to differ. I'm not the least self-absorbed.
You were just testing the waters for entry of your super-sized ego and I misjudged you. What can you possibly bring to this venue except acrimony?
If defending one's opinions without resorting to labeling, name-calling and a delerious descent into obscenity, is your definition of a 'super-sized ego', George, I'll have to agree that you suffer from poor judgement.
Ideas and ideals that run counter to the common perception that to be a progressive, one must be a progressive steeped in the far left to be considered acceptable.
"Yes, he may be a progressive but he's not our kind, is he?" Do you see any parallels here, George?
You have not been "victimized" because of a political stance; you have been confronted about your attitude. If you believe what you just wrote after reflecting on what you were criticized over (multiple times on this board) then you are truly mistaken.
6, 5, 4, 3, 2, ...
Seeing as this thread is becoming a semi-annual ritual , will babblers: do something about the issue (i.e., reflect on round 3 of 'kindler, gentler babble)? strike up a planning committee for the next reflection-and-bash-a-thon? create a canon of forum posts for new babblers to read so that they know the rules of war?
More seriously though, what are long-time babblers' reflections on these exchanges?
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/rabble-reactions/babble-finished
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/babble-banter/snark-killing-babble
Meh. It comes, it goes.
Personally, I find a good snark amusing now and then. But only if it's witty.
Seeing as this thread is becoming a semi-annual ritual , will babblers: do something about the issue (i.e., reflect on round 3 of 'kindler, gentler babble)? strike up a planning committee for the next reflection-and-bash-a-thon? create a canon of forum posts for new babblers to read so that they know the rules of war?
More seriously though, what are long-time babblers' reflections on these exchanges?
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/rabble-reactions/babble-finished
http://www.rabble.ca/babble/babble-banter/snark-killing-babble
My reflection is that these meta-discussions are destructive - of zero value. Babblers should not attack each other. And they should not interpret strong expressions of opinion about issues as personal attacks. They should just carry on with the discussion. Of course, if you feel you have some brand-new things to say based on your experience here, by all means chime in.
Seems like a great note to end this for length.