Srsly, dude? Rly? Only schoolkids use this phrase. So lame. And not the first time you've trotted it out. I think you've been copying from your neighbor. Pls try harder with the originality, mmkay? C- report to the detention master after school. This will not be recorded on your permanent record.

:p:

Now I'm confused. I thought we all wanted to be causing discourse.

All becomes clear....

Just to clarify, Cloud, my comment wasn't directed at you. Regardless of whether your moderation suggestions would work, I can at least appreciate that you're trying to find a solution.

THATS A BAD LINK, CUNTBALLS.

Now that's funny !

U R CUNTBALLS

poop mouth

:turd:

thanks for raising your hand, and all, but I thought we were going to try to be nice to each other?

<bites tongue ... err fingers>

Bite my ass

That wasn't mean or nice. It was a neutral assessment.

honest?

Honest injun, chief!

Oh, my. That's the funniest thing I've seen posted here yet!

This thread was intended to fix a problem. A portion of us still believe there's still a problem. You want to pick fights as diversion, in this thread,and continue to develop the problem on the politics threads at the same very time!

Come on! You are caught in the very act.

Reverting to the typical name calling and insults is not going to help. I am not requesting moderation.
Moderation of the threads is not the only solution.

Discord. For 500 dollars? Pat? :)

:D

Redux, you can try to twist it around as much as you like, but it's just more of the same shit you do in political debate, and it's the reason why people get frustrated with you.

It comes down to something like what clodfobble said. If you acted like you would if you were really interacting with a group of friends, you'd be fine. You clearly have no interest in doing that.

If you can't tell when I'm being funny, and just tugging on your chain (when i said that you should admit that you're an argumentative little bitch I was doing this) and when I'm seriously telling you about yourself (I'm doing this now) then you're bound have issues here.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to help you get this. You've been told before by other people, and I have the sense that you are resistant to introspection. You're much more likely to blame me for starting this and picking on you, and then to justify your responses by saying that you're just giving what you get. The point is that ....well, the point is this whole thread....

This thread is admittedly disruptive, as I said in the original post, but your claim that I'm the biggest disruption to the cellar in general is laughable. Either you get the fucking message here, or you don't. Griping at me, and how mean spirited I am and all that shit is just deflection and obfuscation, and it doesn't change the fact that you are a BIG part of the problem.

It seems to me at this point that you intend to continue blithely as you've been doing. I think that sucks.

Hey Cicero

I respectfully disagree.

I think the *ONLY* solution is moderation. Specifically, self-moderation. Nothing else will work, without dramatically changing the cellar. There have been a few calls for this, there have been a few examples of this. It does have some problems though. You only know it's been working after it stops working. It's hard. It's invisible. It is often unsatisfying. It is useless as a tool of persuasion. It works poorly when only some people in the room do it and others don't. It is anathema to an extremely popular kind of post: "You're (doing it) wrong!".

I will say for myself that I exercise self-moderation, but I sometimes fail. This isn't a reason to stop though. The "how" of self-moderation can take several forms. Ignoring known sources of inflammation works for me. Composing replies offline. Compassion and respect for others helps me be better at self-moderation. Selective deafness. Giving the benefit of the doubt.

It is hard though. And I can not think of any other ideas that come close to a solution.

Some like what I contribute and some dont....and thats fine with me.

You cant please all of the people, all of the time...particularly those with a pre-determined mindset.

As to the most mean-spirited, disruptive influence, here....I stand by what I said.

A little introspective on your own might do you some good as well. :thumb:

Fixed it for ya.

I like a good flame war as much as the next guy. But when it turns into name calling and bullshit I go play some where else. So POO POO on all y'all.

I like your idea to self-moderate. The threads don't need a mod. Temporary bans have worked in the past.

You're really saying he should act like you do with friends. I've no reason to believe Redux, and tw, and UG, don't act the same way in real life, as they do on the board.

Yet I've heard over and over what a great guy merc is in real life (real life as it pertains to extended relationships beyond the cellar, I guess...other sorts of contributions of which I do not know.) Can we assume he is NOT like he is on the boards?

I don't seem to have a problem IRL. Maybe it's seeing my face when I joke or get fired up, because IRL people seem to like me, actually want me around. *shrug*

Merc and Classic and Redux have all been very nice to me in PM's and other ways. Yet, they seem to have some male testosterone thing going when it comes down to one another. People are many faceted. I don't think we can make sweeping generalizations about what a person is like in real life based on a message board.

PS Bruce is a sweetie pie no matter what. ;)

I agree. For me, a cheeky grin goes along way.
umm on this side of the screen anyway.:blush:

Redux has been very kind to me in PMs, as well. I can only judge people by how they treat me, and I will refrain from my other opinions.

I am also very forgiving (my ex is my best friend, ffs.) It's the repeated behavior that shuts me down. "Fool me once, shame on you...fool me 34 times, shame on me." Even I have a point where I am just done.

This is how it works...
 

Reader thinks, "This doesn't surprise me, I'll be the video demonstrates something to this effect."

Reader thinks, "Ha, that's funny. I suppose it is possible that the original poster over-simplified the situation, but still this doesn't invalidate the original poster's point. Mainly, I like this post because it is funny."

Reader thinks, "Well, hell. Now this thread is ruined. I don't even care what the original point was. NOW all I see is somebody acting like a crybaby bitch with no sense of humor."

Bullshit, Flint. That is exactly the sort of snark that others are held accountable for. It didn't seem funny to Spexx because of the history of snark crap regarding such issues.

I get this. There are posters here that I am done with, because there's just no good to come from me interacting with them. I'm comfortable with that solution, and yet, I'd rather not keep adding more posters to the ignore roster.
I don't know what the solution is though.

Held accountable in what way Shaw?

Aww, go ahead!

The fun thing about Rule*34 is that most of those depicted seem to be having a good time, even in some of the really infantile "art" where it manages to convey any emotion at all. There are a triple scad of photo-pornsites that don't have that vibe. Mike18 is almost the only exception to that that I've ever seen -- Mike the gay Russian kid always seems to be having a good time in the pics where there is someone else to have a good time with. Too, there's the Australian paysite Abbywinters.com.

Maybe... Rule Six.

What do you mean Bullshit? I'm telling you what my reaction was when I read those posts.

When you say "others are held accountable" it shows where your thinking goes off track on this issue. It doesn't matter "who" you are. There are no special "cool kid" clubs. Either you are funny or you are not. This is just like in real life: there are intangible things which make something socially awkward, and knowing what these things are allows you to navigate your way through a social interaction.

We can't go around worrying about what people's reactions will be. What I was pointing out was that someone consciously decided to move the thread from being funny and lighthearted into their personal "my crybaby feelings are hurt" soapbox, and THAT is a party foul.

Though you have posted that way to others... and have been stared down by every reader of that thread for trying it, not just the three who lined up against you then.

Your... difficulties... with hoplophobia should be kept in mind, and the terrible consequences of empowering hoplophobia in the political sphere understood. Whatever Radar's sins, hoplophobia was not one of them. I've never suffered it either, and Merc and Classic are reliably immune to it also, as is Griff, I think.

Somebody pass me the popcorn and the shaker cheese.

Merc can be a little rough on the boards, but he's always been kind and supportive in PMs. He helped me move once, and he donated that kidney that one time. He's a good guy when you get to know him.

Classic sometime has a hard time not flinging the poo, but he's also been great with the PMs, and that time we went on vacation together is something I'll always cherish. Remember the para-sailing?

UG is a nut, the old lug. You can't take him seriously on the boards. He's really a good guy. He sharpens all my knives for me. You gotta love that.

Spexvett is on my team, so I love him, plus he set my parents up with all those free bifocals. He's a great guy. I'm not getting any younger, and he's assured me that he'll take care of my reading glasses when I need them.

But Redux. Man, Redux! He's on my team, but he sends me multiple abusive PMs every day and I caught him trying to sell my daughter to the gypsies.

I guess you read it as lighthearted and funny. I did not. Sure, have whatever reaction you want. I dont' think my sense of humor is that far removed from yours. Let me recap: Spexx makes a post about a political issue. lookout makes a 'joke' and calls him Kanye. And all spexx said was "well there's some respectful discussion." An observation, for which you felt it was ok to call him a crybaby.

Where is the name calling? I would say Kanye and crybaby fit that category.

The thing is, see, this thread is about the disrespect crap in the politics forum. There are those of us who have admitted to being a part of the problem, and are trying to do better. From the self-proclaimed not even close to being part of the problem, this comment was just business as usual.

Let's face it! We all be part of the problem! The problem is it's fucking POLITICS, people.

I wanted to post about the nightmare I'm going through with my teeth, but I didn't want to be called a martyr. Some words cut right through people, for whatever reason. Maybe you're immune? I wish I were. That sentence right there was martyrish. I'm just a big fucking crybaby martyr. I'm cool with that. Now, can we all admit our faults and try to do better? I doubt it. Too many are above fault.

And I don't give a hot hoot about the cool table or the club or lack of club. I've sat at the cool table my whole life, I don't need to make up any lost time. ;)

So you read one thing as funny, one as snarky, and I read them in the opposite order. That is to be expected--this is all subjective.

However, you state "others are held accountable" as the problem which absolutely indicates to me that a "cool kids club" is what you believe to be the source of the problem. How can that not be what you meant? What DID you mean when you said that?

This is really funny, glatt. :lol:

I mean, guy helps you move, that can't be taken lightly. :)

Tw cried victim, with no more success. This post of yours exhibits not merely a great, but also a Coulter-stereotypical, tendency to fuzz into relativism combined with crying victim that the Liberal or the Left have resorted to more and more, leaving the Conservative and the rest of the Right unimpressed. Is la Coulter right about the more leftward of the Democrats, then? Here was one more demonstration of the kind of thing she talks about -- she always did dislike wussification in politics.

I don't think it's fair to say to anyone who objects to inconsistency that the perception is (and what it implies) that that one is not part of the club and is therefore jealous or touchy on the subject.

The comment seemed to me (and no it doesn't matter WHO you are) to be The Great Snark 2010, based on what other things have transpired. I was willing to let it go until you brought in crybaby. I suppose if one of those who don't much like me decides to stab me in the eye, I should not say something like "that wasn't very nice" because it might seem as though I'm pointing out some kind of "club." Again, I dont' give a flying rat's rump about any club. If the subject of a kinder gentler cellar has arisen, then inconsistencies will surface, and people should be free to point that out. Otherwise, the way is being paved for those clubs you keep speaking of, and the stage is set for no kind of discussion at all.

@ jinx: sorry, just saw your post.

I think all of us should be free to call others out when they are not trying (and trying is good, ain't none of us perfect) to be part of the solution of more respectful discussion, without someone coming back and pointing at the "crybaby."

P.S. I don't ignore UG though. He really makes me giggle. ;)

I've been Cellardwelling since July of 2002, and despite the desire of some to dismiss me as a nutty toolbox, Lumberjim has never felt that urge in all that time... in the political sandbox or out.

UT has bitched at me -- actually bitched -- exactly once.

I suppose it's incumbent on me to point out to some folks who don't get it and don't want to, that there is a difference between being annoying and being crazy. I have values that many of my opponents never attained to, and hesitate to take up...:eyebrow:

ETA: as for whether Spexx is learning anything from this thread, read the bottom end of p. 25 and draw your own conclusions. I have.

What inconsistency Shaw? Who is held accountable for things others aren't, and how?

The comment seemed to me to be consistent with the tone and content of the original post.

Parse it however the ƒuck you want, Shaw, you, in YOUR OWN WORDS, stated that you thought the problem is of how "others are held accountable" and in saying "others" you abso-ƒucking-lutely have stated that you believe this is a problem of "groups" or "group identities" and NOT simply "inconsistencies" as you have back-peddled your position to. And HOW the ƒuck is anybody not "free" to do whatever the hell they want? Where is the Cellar police that only let certain people say certain things? Anybody at all is free to be a crybaby, I am free to call them on it, and you are free to disagree with me, and I am free to tell you to take a flying leap. There is absolute freedom and equality here. You are suggesting some kind of injustice that doesn't exist.

Shaw...ya know, if the tables had been turned on that interaction, do you suppose that Spex would have been called out for his snarky comment via this thread? I do. So I totally get your comment on inconstancies. Lookouts comment was snarky and not conducive to civil discussion. It only begged for more snarkiness.

This is why I think Bruce is smart.

I've no reason to believe that way either.

Personally -- in a couple of senses -- I figure both tw and Redux are single.

So, does this mean that we should join a Snark hunting club, that we should hunt Snark with a club; or, both?

Oh my word.

I suggest you take it up with those who are calling for change, and who keep getting mad at the politics threads. I don't care.

I don't even fucking care enough to use a fucking fucked up f. :lol:

Maybe that means somebody will finally do something constructive with that friggin' loose bowsprit, Sexobon.

Not just ". . .kept looking the opposite way/And appeared unaccountably shy."

Tangential to F, I wonder what fonts can deliver the long-S?

The rule should be, anyone can make a snark, but no one can respond directly to a snark. Each snark must stand on its own merits, and each man has the responsibility to decide for himself whether it was funny or unwarranted. Lobbyists must remain 100 feet back from the snarking station.

PUT THAT LAUNDRY AWAY. The rule should be no crybaby bullcrap.

I'm certainly not discounting your opinion here...I just don't see that at all! And I certainly don't see how the subsequent comment got the crybaby comment.

Eh, I'm the snarker and the snarkee, in turns.

But, I thought others have been unhappy with how things were going?

So, to snark or not to snark. That is the question.

I AM WOMAN. HEAR ME SNARK.

Snark-a-doodle dooooo!

(This is all meant to be humorous.)

http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php...918#post667918

Because, rather than keep it light and funny, somebody CHOSE to cry out "MOMMY, MOMMY, THE BULLY IS TEASING ME--SEE WHAT HE DID THERE?!" Sure sounds like a ƒucking crybaby to me. Was there some other way I could have read that?

I dont shut up I grow up
And when I see you I throw up.

:lol:

ALL he said was "well there's some respectful discussion" after the entire brouhaha about respectful discussion. :confused:

Ugh...you're maddening, my friend. I like you and your style a LOT...but you're maddening. ;)

I will madden your vagina.