Disrespect: where to draw the line here

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from steven11. Show steven11's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to Mile26's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to 2013soxchamps' comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to J-BAY's comment:

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

     

    How about everyone just wipe the slate clean and we'll all move forward?

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Couldn't agree more, as soon as steven11 can finish what he started.

     

    He clears my name, I'll clear his..... and we can all be done with this.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I think it is pretty clear that you will never be done with this.  Perhaps some outside help.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps folks who don't know the whole story shouldn't be giving advice.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Never stopped you before. 

     

    Bogie:  You never miss an opportunity for a joke, you crack me up.  Another great one liner by you.

    [/QUOTE]


    On the contrary, I've never gotten involved with whatever is going on with you two.

    I have my own reasons for kicking you around.

    [/QUOTE]


    you always got involved, if one posts the other one is right behind.  Kicking me around? Think what you want.  But this conversation is closed, I know you get upset when people don't answer you.  PM me if you want to continue it.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ThefourBs. Show ThefourBs's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to ThefourBs' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to Mile26's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to 2013soxchamps' comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to J-BAY's comment:

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

     

    How about everyone just wipe the slate clean and we'll all move forward?

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    Couldn't agree more, as soon as steven11 can finish what he started.

     

    He clears my name, I'll clear his..... and we can all be done with this.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    I think it is pretty clear that you will never be done with this.  Perhaps some outside help.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Perhaps folks who don't know the whole story shouldn't be giving advice.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Never stopped you before. 

     

    Bogie:  You never miss an opportunity for a joke, you crack me up.  Another great one liner by you.

    [/QUOTE]


    On the contrary, I've never gotten involved with whatever is going on with you two.

    I have my own reasons for kicking you around.

    [/QUOTE]


    you always got involved, if one posts the other one is right behind.  Kicking me around? Think what you want.  But this conversation is closed, I know you get upset when people don't answer you.  PM me if you want to continue it.

    [/QUOTE]


    Poor, misunderstood Stevie...

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    Its been a fun thread. I enjoyed the (for me) good natured give and take with Kimmi, an old nemesis from another board where out give and takes were not so much good natured as mean. But I swore off that stuff and despite my recent regression, I am going to try to return to being more overtly respectful. I would hope that Kimmi can finally let go of what happened in the past and bury the hatchet with me as I have buried it with her. I think she is a good poster here and know more about the statistical side of baseball than I do, and I respect her ability to support the team in the manner in which she sees fit no matter what their record is.

    Forgive me if I do not respond to any more of this sort of thing. It can't go on and on, for I have joined the support group for people who just go on and on. Appropriately, its called: 

     

     

    On And On Anon.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    A large part of all this BS would go away if BDC would simply institute a one screen name per email address policy, or by publishing a list of all monikers being used by the same poster for public consumption. It wouldn't eliminate multiple monikers totally, but it would cut it down drastically.


     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:


    In response to djcbuffum's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    In response to J-BAY's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    The probelm usually stems from talking baseball though, buff. If someone says something about a player, or manager, for example, and another disagrees, it goes from there. I think if everyone just remembers it's an opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs, just debate it, it's why were here.  Insulting posters for having one is not the way to go, IMO.



    That's my point. Just ignore the insults, snarkiness, trash talk and keep on talking about baseball. 





    [/QUOTE]
    How true. Ignore insults such as you are "boring", "have no sense of humor", "you are being too serious", " I was being tongue-in -cheek", "I was being sarcastic or it was satire", and " only trolling you". Put such posters onto ignore if they annoy you, otherwise if you respond in-kind you will be banned. Add them to your ignore list if you are a serious fan. If not then you should have a teflon finish.


    [/QUOTE]


    [object HTMLDivElement]


    Real genius you are pike, we're not worthy.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    Late to the game.....

    How about...I can make fun of Bill and it never gets blocked?  Does that work?? 

    Seriously though....stop working too hard, life is too short.  If something gets 'reported for abuse' then take a look at it.  If it goes against your opinion of the rule....then do what you see fit.  But forums are about discussing and they are about some ribbing and give and take, IT'S LIFE.

    BTW....most forums the moderators are not anonymous. I really think that if it had your REAL screename with the word 'Mod' under it, you'd be fine and it would help lift this bizarre veil of secrecy.  Sounds lame but I REALLY think it would make stuff a bit more 'real' around here....

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheExaminer. Show TheExaminer's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to Kingface12's comment:


    Late to the game.....


    How about...I can make fun of Bill and it never gets blocked?  Does that work?? 


    Seriously though....stop working too hard, life is too short.  If something gets 'reported for abuse' then take a look at it.  If it goes against your opinion of the rule....then do what you see fit.  But forums are about discussing and they are about some ribbing and give and take, IT'S LIFE.


    BTW....most forums the moderators are not anonymous. I really think that if it had your REAL screename with the word 'Mod' under it, you'd be fine and it would help lift this bizarre veil of secrecy.  Sounds lame but I REALLY think it would make stuff a bit more 'real' around here....





    [object HTMLDivElement]


    Everyone knows that Jbay runs the forum and bans posters at whim with his batphone. I am his loyal guard dog. Er, that's what pike told me anyway......

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to Teakus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I personally think banning should be an extremely rare occurrence , reserved for such egregious acts such as severe spamming, violations of the law, EXTREME and sustained verbal abuse, etc. The banning of posters because folks might disagree with their views is simply wrong and should be condemned. Requiring conformity in speech is about as despotic as it gets, and I for one stand with the many dissidents around the world who suffer daily because they dared to speak their minds. If the views expressed here are weak, lacking in corroboration or substance, etc. The Nation will resoundingly point this out. It's what makes a great board...err...great! I'm also not a fan of post removals, unless to move to an existing thread to help with clutter, unless it is an extreme violation of the TOS. I'm also a HUGE fan of allowing off topic posts, as long as they are identified as such, and they are otherwise acceptably presented. Some of our greatest threads ever were based on off topic posts. I view this site as a big old kitchen table where the Red Sox Nation family can come to discuss things. If an alien from outer space lands on the White House lawn next week, why shouldn't we be able to discuss it here among our family? Some here post ONLY on this forum, and for some this is their primary social outlet. We have a variety of disabled folks here and this site gives them great joy. I say let them occasionally tell us all that their beloved pet passed, or that they found an awesome new way to smoke brisket on the grill, or that the doctor told them they have cancer and they're scared. Again, the thread should be clearly identified as off topic such as: **OFF TOPIC** "My cat fluffy just died today...." Then folks who never want to read an off topic post won't be bothered, but those who choose to can offer support. Just something to consider, I think it's something that would help to drive traffic and improve satisfaction with the board.

    I really liked the tone of this thread and the respectful way input was solicited. Guests who come here have many options available to them, and it's nice to see a Mod making them 

     

    I agree with much of this.  OVER-censorship, especially when it is colored by unavoidable bias is a very dangerous thing, I.e. the IRS targeting speech already deemed constitutional by the Supreme court.  

    When the targeting goes your way, it's all good.  When change inevitably comes in any forum administration, and the targeting goes the other way, suddenly it doesn't seem quite so innocuous?

    Another example....  I was at a school where a certain group was obviously favored by the principal.  Others suffered obvious and undue scrutiny.  Strangely enough, when the principal changed, so did the tables.  As is often the case, the chosen ones were pretty harshly put in their places, and subsequently had to endure some some pretty unfair scrutiny.

    Generally speaking, what goes around comes around.

    Anyway..........

    Time to ratchet it back to a 4.  Don't let billy go off on political tangents, but conversely, don't buy into those don quixote types who tilt at every political windmill in his every comnent!

    PIKE????   Zero tolerance!!!!!!   He is just a 24/7 nuisance!!!!!!!!!   ZERO TOLLERANCE!!!!

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Kingface12. Show Kingface12's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just to be clear, my concern was never that the mods were being too lenient or too strict, but rather that they were being inconsistent and biased. The bias and unfairness seems to be directed at a small handful of posters, who can't so much as sneeze without getting a warning or having a post deleted, while others can be snarky, flame, antagonize, insult, or whatever without nary a warning.

    I am not in favor of more censorship. I am not in favor of deleting posts or banning posters, except for in extreme cases. I enjoy reading most of the back and forth between posters, and I'm sure the posters involved enjoy it as well.  I find most of the snarky comments rather funny. Many posters try to stir the pot or flame. Often times, that makes for some very good baseball conversation.  

    In short, I am not asking for stricter posting policies, just for consistency.   On a scale of 1-10, I would say 2.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The ONLY poster who answered the question presented and told it like it is. Most posters come here to stir the pot, flame, annoy, troll, deceive, bash the team and its players, be sarcastic, use satire, be tongue-in-cheek, be insincere, dishonest, play devil's advocate, be a contrarian, etc.  Most regulars do that and condone it. But why is pointing out the obvious such a cardinal sin in the eyes of the moderators. Do they have a vested interest in the forum status quo? Do they own BDC stock? Are they employed by BDC as webmasters, paid moderators, or is the forum on their servers?

    Why is pointing out why posters obviously come here such an unforgiveable transgression which results in deleted posts, threads, and bannings. If everything goes then why not allow criticism of the fact that everything goes? 

    [/QUOTE]


    Wrong.....my answer was better....

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    Like Kingface, I'm a bit late to this party, but I'd still like to put in my own $.02.

    I come here to talk Red Sox baseball and to have at least semi-civil interaction with other posters.  I try to be respectful of everyone else and their opinions and I expect the same from everyone else.  

    However, that doesn't mean that there aren't times when we all step over that line and I'm no different.  I've said a few things that I wouldn't want my kids to read and know it came from me - but that's ok with me.  It's a part of the give and take of the passionate people who post here.

    What I DO find objectionable is posters who intentionally repeatedly bait and stir the pot, and yes, IMO, Bill is the master baiter.  He even went so far as to ADMIT on Page 1 of this thread that he's intentionally and willfully baiting with his political slams and innuendos and I have no place for that.  A political discussion is something I have no objection to - but that's a discussion and I'm referring to the baiting.  I respect everyone's right to their own beliefs, but at the same time I don't want them pushed down my throat nor will I tolerate having my own political or religious beliefs insulted.  

    I'm not sure how I'd "rate" what I want for moderation but IMO the duties of the moderator are included in their title.  Their job is to "moderate".  To iron out the hills and valleys and bring the forum into "moderation".  IMHO the forums have become a better place since they took over and I'd urge them to not change a thing!

    Having the right to do something doesn't make it the right thing to do.

    And I have never posted here under any other names.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to Kingface12's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to RedSoxKimmi's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Just to be clear, my concern was never that the mods were being too lenient or too strict, but rather that they were being inconsistent and biased. The bias and unfairness seems to be directed at a small handful of posters, who can't so much as sneeze without getting a warning or having a post deleted, while others can be snarky, flame, antagonize, insult, or whatever without nary a warning.

    I am not in favor of more censorship. I am not in favor of deleting posts or banning posters, except for in extreme cases. I enjoy reading most of the back and forth between posters, and I'm sure the posters involved enjoy it as well.  I find most of the snarky comments rather funny. Many posters try to stir the pot or flame. Often times, that makes for some very good baseball conversation.  

    In short, I am not asking for stricter posting policies, just for consistency.   On a scale of 1-10, I would say 2.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The ONLY poster who answered the question presented and told it like it is. Most posters come here to stir the pot, flame, annoy, troll, deceive, bash the team and its players, be sarcastic, use satire, be tongue-in-cheek, be insincere, dishonest, play devil's advocate, be a contrarian, etc.  Most regulars do that and condone it. But why is pointing out the obvious such a cardinal sin in the eyes of the moderators. Do they have a vested interest in the forum status quo? Do they own BDC stock? Are they employed by BDC as webmasters, paid moderators, or is the forum on their servers?

    Why is pointing out why posters obviously come here such an unforgiveable transgression which results in deleted posts, threads, and bannings. If everything goes then why not allow criticism of the fact that everything goes? 

    [/QUOTE]


    Wrong.....my answer was better....

    [/QUOTE]

    No, my answer was fantastic; wait, sorry, I'm on the wrong thread.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    So basically this thread is a soap opera? 


    I missed the days of torching newbies, hazing as some might call it. It's a Forum, in all honesty, other than some poster who's name sounds like spike, does anyone really take this stuff personally and cry to their mommies? It's a freaking Forum, who cares. Also some of the best conversations I've had on this board had nothing to do with baseball, so sue me. Why can't we just start threads, answer threads, challenge opinions, jump on posters for terrible opinions, joke, be sarcastic, have fun, be angry, have a few long-running battles between posters, and let this 1984 over-policing of boards stop. You post someone's personal info or you threaten somebody with bodily harm, then you really cross the line. Other than that, it's a freaking board. That's all. When it's all said and done, the only winners are Boston Globe columnists who stole half their columns off of intelligent threads started here. That's a win-win for the Globe in my opinion.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    8

     

    other names i have posted under:  none

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So basically this thread is a soap opera? 

    I missed the days of torching newbies, hazing as some might call it. It's a Forum, in all honesty, other than some poster who's name sounds like spike, does anyone really take this stuff personally and cry to their mommies? It's a freaking Forum, who cares. Also some of the best conversations I've had this board had nothing to do with baseball, so sue me. Why can't we just start threads, answer threads, challenge opinions, jump on posters for terrible opinions, joke, be sarcastic, have fun, be angry, have a few long-running battles between posters, and let this 1984 over-policing of boards stop. You post someone's personal info or you threaten somebody with bodily harm, then you really cross the line. Other than that, it's a freaking board. That's all. When it's all said and done, the only winners are Boston Globe columnists who stole half their columns off of intelligent threads started here. That's a win-win for the Globe in my opinion.

    [/QUOTE]

    So there is nothing wrong in your opinion to call a troll a troll or to label someone as a contrarian, devil's advocate, insincere, dishonest, a flamer, pot stirrer, or instigator. I just want to make sure of that. If I make those accusations then I will IMO be 90 percent correct, do you agree? Call a spade a spade. Identify the chronic malcontent, perpetual wet blanket, the daily skeptic, or card carrying troll. You have no problem eith that? Then why does it bother the moderator who bans you being honest? Why not let everything go here instead of policing  those who identify trolls? It seems to me that we could give out prizes to the top ten rolls of the year. After all, a real fan on a gamethread can pretend on every post to hate everything Red Sox and when confronted about it say that it was only sarcasm or satire or that he meant the opposite, that he was really cheering on the player. Forget about thode who took him seriously and were flamed, they are the suckers. 

    How about Son of Sam Forum. Are they full of flamers and trolls and juveniles also. Or is that a BDC specialty?

    In any event, why should a poster who identifies the charade be banned. Isn't that like killing the messenger? Maybe the clowns want to fool the newbies. Maybe many of the oldtimers are gullible and keep falling for the daily charade. Maybe they believed that Softlaw was sincere for all of those years. If you fooled the elderly and took pride in it then shame on you. I never fell for it.  Never thought that Law was sincere neither. If everyone were aware of the charade then it wouldn't be any fun, would it? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard to tell, pike. I think often you take this stuff too personally. But I doubt I would have ever banned you if I had the keys to the City. I didn't really care for Softlaw either, especially his insane dislike of Wakefield. However, it's a Forum, and other than policing very detailed certain over-the-line comments, I think the over-policing is worse than the annoying posters who stroll in and out.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So basically this thread is a soap opera? 

    I missed the days of torching newbies, hazing as some might call it. It's a Forum, in all honesty, other than some poster who's name sounds like spike, does anyone really take this stuff personally and cry to their mommies? It's a freaking Forum, who cares. Also some of the best conversations I've had this board had nothing to do with baseball, so sue me. Why can't we just start threads, answer threads, challenge opinions, jump on posters for terrible opinions, joke, be sarcastic, have fun, be angry, have a few long-running battles between posters, and let this 1984 over-policing of boards stop. You post someone's personal info or you threaten somebody with bodily harm, then you really cross the line. Other than that, it's a freaking board. That's all. When it's all said and done, the only winners are Boston Globe columnists who stole half their columns off of intelligent threads started here. That's a win-win for the Globe in my opinion.

    [/QUOTE]

    So there is nothing wrong in your opinion to call a troll a troll or to label someone as a contrarian, devil's advocate, insincere, dishonest, a flamer, pot stirrer, or instigator. I just want to make sure of that. If I make those accusations then I will IMO be 90 percent correct, do you agree? Call a spade a spade. Identify the chronic malcontent, perpetual wet blanket, the daily skeptic, or card carrying troll. You have no problem eith that? Then why does it bother the moderator who bans you being honest? Why not let everything go here instead of policing  those who identify trolls? It seems to me that we could give out prizes to the top ten rolls of the year. After all, a real fan on a gamethread can pretend on every post to hate everything Red Sox and when confronted about it say that it was only sarcasm or satire or that he meant the opposite, that he was really cheering on the player. Forget about thode who took him seriously and were flamed, they are the suckers. 

    How about Son of Sam Forum. Are they full of flamers and trolls and juveniles also. Or is that a BDC specialty?

    In any event, why should a poster who identifies the charade be banned. Isn't that like killing the messenger? Maybe the clowns want to fool the newbies. Maybe many of the oldtimers are gullible and keep falling for the daily charade. Maybe they believed that Softlaw was sincere for all of those years. If you fooled the elderly and took pride in it then shame on you. I never fell for it.  Never thought that Law was sincere neither. If everyone were aware of the charade then it wouldn't be any fun, would it? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard to tell, pike. I think often you take this stuff too personally. But I doubt I would have ever banned you if I had the keys to the City. I didn't really care for Softlaw either, especially his insane dislike of Wakefield. However, it's a Forum, and other than policing very detailed certain over-the-line comments, I think the over-policing is worse than the annoying posters who stroll in and out.

    [/QUOTE]


    Come on now....  we're not really going to ignore the deliciously rich irony of Pike trying to "out" trolls?  Are we?

    This guy is the biggest  TROLL on this planet!

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from RigatoniT. Show RigatoniT's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    he did his best the past 3 days after being banned to disrupt the forum with ghost posting... only a certified troll would do that.... he is an amazing troll though - he actually fits into about 18 different categories of Troll.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BmoreCommie's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to dannycater's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    So basically this thread is a soap opera? 

    I missed the days of torching newbies, hazing as some might call it. It's a Forum, in all honesty, other than some poster who's name sounds like spike, does anyone really take this stuff personally and cry to their mommies? It's a freaking Forum, who cares. Also some of the best conversations I've had this board had nothing to do with baseball, so sue me. Why can't we just start threads, answer threads, challenge opinions, jump on posters for terrible opinions, joke, be sarcastic, have fun, be angry, have a few long-running battles between posters, and let this 1984 over-policing of boards stop. You post someone's personal info or you threaten somebody with bodily harm, then you really cross the line. Other than that, it's a freaking board. That's all. When it's all said and done, the only winners are Boston Globe columnists who stole half their columns off of intelligent threads started here. That's a win-win for the Globe in my opinion.

    [/QUOTE]

    So there is nothing wrong in your opinion to call a troll a troll or to label someone as a contrarian, devil's advocate, insincere, dishonest, a flamer, pot stirrer, or instigator. I just want to make sure of that. If I make those accusations then I will IMO be 90 percent correct, do you agree? Call a spade a spade. Identify the chronic malcontent, perpetual wet blanket, the daily skeptic, or card carrying troll. You have no problem eith that? Then why does it bother the moderator who bans you being honest? Why not let everything go here instead of policing  those who identify trolls? It seems to me that we could give out prizes to the top ten rolls of the year. After all, a real fan on a gamethread can pretend on every post to hate everything Red Sox and when confronted about it say that it was only sarcasm or satire or that he meant the opposite, that he was really cheering on the player. Forget about thode who took him seriously and were flamed, they are the suckers. 

    How about Son of Sam Forum. Are they full of flamers and trolls and juveniles also. Or is that a BDC specialty?

    In any event, why should a poster who identifies the charade be banned. Isn't that like killing the messenger? Maybe the clowns want to fool the newbies. Maybe many of the oldtimers are gullible and keep falling for the daily charade. Maybe they believed that Softlaw was sincere for all of those years. If you fooled the elderly and took pride in it then shame on you. I never fell for it.  Never thought that Law was sincere neither. If everyone were aware of the charade then it wouldn't be any fun, would it? 

    [/QUOTE]

    Hard to tell, pike. I think often you take this stuff too personally. But I doubt I would have ever banned you if I had the keys to the City. I didn't really care for Softlaw either, especially his insane dislike of Wakefield. However, it's a Forum, and other than policing very detailed certain over-the-line comments, I think the over-policing is worse than the annoying posters who stroll in and out.

    [/QUOTE]


    Come on now....  we're not really going to ignore the deliciously rich irony of Pike trying to "out" trolls?  Are we?

    This guy is the biggest  TROLL on this planet!

    [/QUOTE]

    I agree, but banning him isn't going to make him sane.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from RigatoniT. Show RigatoniT's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    I'd rather joust with him but if the Mods are going to delete my posts to or about him then that ruins it

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    I think you should have a high tolerance for personal insults ("you're ignorant", "you're boring") and zero tolerance for racist/sexist/homophobic abuse.

    Most people here claim they are big boys/girls and can take an insult so I think you should consider that.  But the abuse I mention above isn't specific and can cause collateral damage to innocent people.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    Personally, I would set the bar for deletion/banning pretty high - like serious harassment/stalking/slander/hate speech/spamming/etc. Most other stuff people should be able to handle on their own or ignore.


    I would rather post on a forum that resembles the wild west (as this one has more often than not since I first began posting here in 2005-06) than one that is too tightly moderated. Others may feel differently.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from RigatoniT. Show RigatoniT's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Personally, I would set the bar for deletion/banning pretty high - like serious harassment/stalking/slander/hate speech/spamming/etc. Most other stuff people should be able to handle on their own or ignore.

     

    I would rather post on a forum that resembles the wild west (as this one has more often than not since I first began posting here in 2005-06) than one that is too tightly moderated. Others may feel differently.

    [/QUOTE]

    bingo !!!!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from sycophant123. Show sycophant123's posts

    Re: Disrespect: where to draw the line here

    In response to RigatoniT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Personally, I would set the bar for deletion/banning pretty high - like serious harassment/stalking/slander/hate speech/spamming/etc. Most other stuff people should be able to handle on their own or ignore.

     

    I would rather post on a forum that resembles the wild west (as this one has more often than not since I first began posting here in 2005-06) than one that is too tightly moderated. Others may feel differently.

    [/QUOTE]

    bingo !!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    I am with that a hundred percent. 

     

     

Share