|
Post by Morgana on Apr 6, 2017 11:10:01 GMT
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 11:59:49 GMT
Well, we will have to agree to disagree that it isn't childish. Fat man? So what. Toughen up. Danger to her? No poster believed she was actually being stalked by him. Take a step back, she is a crazy bag lady, and this is anonymous online posting. I see london birds point that some people take their online persona more seriously, and thats fine. But, if this was being done in real life to me personally, I wouldnt be whining about it there either, especially as nobody believes her (or her hypothetical equivalent at least). Ive called people out before for lying, but never demanded they be removed from the group of people. Others in that group might still enjoy the interaction, and im big enough and brave enough to deal with it. This is part of the reason liberals aren't getting anywhere anymore, IMO. Too sensitive about things that dont matter all that much. Again, just my opinion. No poster believes so what? If someone claims that I am after his or her life then I will question such a thing. If the person keeps lying about me then I will demand the admin to get into the matter and stop the person from defaming me. If a person has made it a routine to keep lying and enjoys disturbing the peace of the board then I will call for ban. Nothing Childish as far as I am concerned. That you enjoy her making a fool of herself is your reason not to see her banned. That does not make me a child. Well, people have talked about defamation (including you below) etc. It isnt defamation if nobody believes. You cant 'damage someones reputation' by saying something nobody believes. Go for it. Ive said people can address it if they want, and its fine by me. I don't see why you couldn't address it. Ive done it over the years plenty of times. Why? This is why I say people should grow up and be an adult. Especially when its anonymous online posting. Do you really want everybody from the soapbox/politics board etc coming crying to you as an admin every time someone lies about someone else? Well, thats pretty subjective on the disturbing the peace thing. Remember when a ton of people left the old board over trolls like discerningly tasty? Every comment I've heard about that board has been that it is boring. This is what you'll set up here if you want to ban everyone that is kind of a dick, and stubborn with their opinions, and have the power to do so yourself. Seriously, its playground BS where instead of running crying to mummy, you guys can just realise you have the ability to ban the people you don't like. I did the same when I got a job as a bouncer. Realised I had the ability to kick out people I didn't like, not let in lippy ****s etc. So i'm not giving you grief, I hope you just realise it isnt the way to go. Like I said, agree to disagree. Children go running to authority to fix their problems, adults deal with it themselves, or ignore it and move on. Sure, theres limits, but simple lying, and things like calling the board "gay" shouldn't be it. That is indeed my reason, and not related to why i'm saying this banning reeks of childishness. Its the inability to deal with name calling, and lies. PS Harden sucks
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 6, 2017 12:17:15 GMT
No poster believes so what? If someone claims that I am after his or her life then I will question such a thing. If the person keeps lying about me then I will demand the admin to get into the matter and stop the person from defaming me. If a person has made it a routine to keep lying and enjoys disturbing the peace of the board then I will call for ban. Nothing Childish as far as I am concerned. That you enjoy her making a fool of herself is your reason not to see her banned. That does not make me a child. Well, people have talked about defamation (including you below) etc. It isnt defamation if nobody believes. You cant 'damage someones reputation' by saying something nobody believes. Go for it. Ive said people can address it if they want, and its fine by me. I don't see why you couldn't address it. Ive done it over the years plenty of times. Why? This is why I say people should grow up and be an adult. Especially when its anonymous online posting. Do you really want everybody from the soapbox/politics board etc coming crying to you as an admin every time someone lies about someone else? Well, thats pretty subjective on the disturbing the peace thing. Remember when a ton of people left the old board over trolls like discerningly tasty? Every comment I've heard about that board has been that it is boring. This is what you'll set up here if you want to ban everyone that is kind of a dick, and stubborn with their opinions, and have the power to do so yourself. Seriously, its playground BS where instead of running crying to mummy, you guys can just realise you have the ability to ban the people you don't like. I did the same when I got a job as a bouncer. Realised I had the ability to kick out people I didn't like, not let in lippy ****s etc. So i'm not giving you grief, I hope you just realise it isnt the way to go. Like I said, agree to disagree. Children go running to authority to fix their problems, adults deal with it themselves, or ignore it and move on. Sure, theres limits, but simple lying, and things like calling the board "gay" shouldn't be it. That is indeed my reason, and not related to why i'm saying this banning reeks of childishness. Its the inability to deal with name calling, and lies. It's not inability to deal with lies. The same people continued talking with her on IMDB 1. In fact I and Cash were on her ignore lists (for years) because she couldn't deal with I and Cash but she could deal with you and prog. It's about system and it's about setting here. It is your bias (that you enjoy Ada) that makes you think others are childish for calling out her lies. Calling Ada a child doesn't make her a child. She was an adult who was creating all sorts of problems. That you have a particular view of looking at her does not make other views childish. Others called her for her lies, allegations of doxxing, her support to terrorists, general bigotry towards many communities and creating drama . She made this place not so conducive to chat for many posters and for that reason many people called for her exit. To believe that people who called for her exit are childish is naive and unthoughtful.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 12:45:34 GMT
It's not inability to deal with lies. The same people continued talking with her on IMDB 1. In fact I and Cash were on her ignore lists (for years) because she couldn't deal with I or Cash but she could deal with you or prog. It's about system and it's about setting here. It is your bias (that you enjoy Ada) that makes you think others are childish for calling out her lies. Calling Ada a child doesn't make her a child. She was an adult who was creating all sorts of problems. That you have a particular view of looking at her does not make other views childish. Others called he for her lies, allegations of doxxing, her support to terrorists, general bigotry towards many communities and creating drama . She made this place not so conducive to chat for many posters and for that reason many people called for her exit. To believe that people who call for exit are childish is naive and thoughtful. At NO point have I said its childish to call out her lies. Haven't done that either. What problems? I accept there would have been behind the scenes things in PM's, but if you chose to reply you her, that meant you are part of the problem you had. Its their childish views that make them childish, not that they are different to mine. I made a specific point about running to authority about speech you don't like. Its what children do. Of course I understand there is a line - Someone posting pointless profanity. Someone doxxing. Someone making threats. Im not sure what you mean here. Others called her out for that? So what? Thats what discussion often ends up being - challenging what someone has said about something. Why cant someone make an argument for 'terrorists'? Someone pro Israel will call anything violent done by a Palestinian 'terrorism', but there may be a valid case to make for what the Palestinian did. Thats discussion. Thats debate. She was just bad at it. Guess what, on a RELIGION board, you are going to get bigotry. How could you not? Know the last time I had issues with someone "creating drama" that I didn't just ignore? High school. Id be willing to be that only a tiny fraction (maybe none) of those calling for her exit had used the function designed to minimise the impact of posters like her in this exact situation. Block/ignore. A good argument might have been that even blocking her, posts replying to her broke down the thread too much, but I haven't seen a single person make that claim. Im sorry, I don't see any argument for why me calling these people (people that refused to block her, but wanted her gone anyway) childish is naive in any way. Calling it unthoughtful is clearly wrong, I've obviously thought about it, and presented number of points.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 6, 2017 12:59:49 GMT
It's not inability to deal with lies. The same people continued talking with her on IMDB 1. In fact I and Cash were on her ignore lists (for years) because she couldn't deal with I or Cash but she could deal with you or prog. It's about system and it's about setting here. It is your bias (that you enjoy Ada) that makes you think others are childish for calling out her lies. Calling Ada a child doesn't make her a child. She was an adult who was creating all sorts of problems. That you have a particular view of looking at her does not make other views childish. Others called he for her lies, allegations of doxxing, her support to terrorists, general bigotry towards many communities and creating drama . She made this place not so conducive to chat for many posters and for that reason many people called for her exit. To believe that people who call for exit are childish is naive and thoughtful. At NO point have I said its childish to call out her lies. What I meant was use those those vile lies for demanding her ban. (You called that childish). Let alone behind the scenes problem. Why should I not be disgusted by a generally nasty person and choose to remain silent about her via ignore method. if there is a limit to being nasty, Ada lovelace crosses that limit. if a person like Ada meets me and talks to me in the manner she does here then I wouldn't choose to remain silent about it. Lying is one thing but using her lies to create propaganda is another thing. She was not just a liar but a propagandist as well. If cash chooses to call for her ban for her bigotries against many communities, her hate speech, her her inability to learn from her past suspensions and her persona of creating a negative environment it does not make him childish. She was a bigot and people called on her bigotry to be eliminated from here.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 13:19:26 GMT
At NO point have I said its childish to call out her lies. What I meant was use those those vile lies for demanding her ban. (You called that childish). Let alone behind the scenes problem. Why should I not be disgusted by a generally nasty person and choose to remain silent about her via ignore method. if there is a limit to being nasty, Ada lovelace crosses that limit. if a person like Ada meets me and talks to me in the manner she does here then I wouldn't choose to remain silent about it. Lying is one thing but using her lies to create propaganda is another thing. She was not just a liar but a propagandist as well. If cash chooses to call for her ban for her bigotries against many communities, her hate speech, her her inability to learn from her past suspensions and her persona of creating a negative environment it does not make him childish. She was bigot and people called on her bigotry to be eliminated from here. Well, i'm going go right ahead and still think its childish, and even a bit cowardly to ban someone like that, instead of just being happy utterly destroying their arguments for everyone else to see, or just ignoring them. Im a firm liberal, but its one of the recent aspects of liberalism I don't identify with, this "snowflake" behaviour. Its just like the recent trend of protesting right wing speakers at colleges in America, and getting them banned from speaking (that, and defending islam as a set of ideas, though that is a different story). They are just ideas. Don't go to the lecture theatre if you don't want to hear it. Others do want to hear it. Others might even have the guts to get up and challenge it, in front of a partisan crowd. Getting these speakers banned, because they have significantly different ideas, was cowardly and childish of these students. If you want to call that naive and unthoughtful, you might want to have a rationale behind saying that. At the end of the day you got to choose to engage with her or not. Some people weren't big enough and brave enough to handle it, it would seem.
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Apr 6, 2017 13:25:12 GMT
I can see Puvo's point.
None of us took anything she said seriously at all.
Then again, if I have some Cancer that sometimes tickles my funny bone I'm still going to have it cut out.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 6, 2017 13:32:45 GMT
What I meant was use those those vile lies for demanding her ban. (You called that childish). Let alone behind the scenes problem. Why should I not be disgusted by a generally nasty person and choose to remain silent about her via ignore method. if there is a limit to being nasty, Ada lovelace crosses that limit. if a person like Ada meets me and talks to me in the manner she does here then I wouldn't choose to remain silent about it. Lying is one thing but using her lies to create propaganda is another thing. She was not just a liar but a propagandist as well. If cash chooses to call for her ban for her bigotries against many communities, her hate speech, her her inability to learn from her past suspensions and her persona of creating a negative environment it does not make him childish. She was bigot and people called on her bigotry to be eliminated from here. Well, i'm going go right ahead and still think its childish, and even a bit cowardly to ban someone like that, instead of just being happy utterly destroying their arguments for everyone else to see, or just ignoring them. Im a firm liberal, but its one of the recent aspects of liberalism I don't identify with, this "snowflake" behaviour. Its just like the recent trend of protesting right wing speakers at colleges in America, and getting them banned from speaking (that, and defending islam as a set of ideas, though that is a different story). They are just ideas. Don't go to the lecture theatre if you don't want to hear it. Others do want to hear it. Others might even have the guts to get up and challenge it, in front of a partisan crowd. Getting these speakers banned, because they significantly different ideas, was cowardly and childish of these students. If you want to call that naive and unthoughtful, you might want to have a rationale behind saying that. At the end of the day you got to choose to engage with her or not. Some people weren't big enough and brave enough to handle it, it would seem. You can go ahead and call out anything you want and any number of time. That won't make it true. If a person creates problems, spreads bigotry, lies endlessly, is a perceived of as hateful (and actually is) and refuses to change her behaviour after getting suspended then some people will call for her elimination. Such people would rather like a board with members who comply with civility and don't create drama and envrinmonent where you see hateful views directed on many communities. If you can't see rationale behind calling for the ban of a person with qualities I listed before then I can't do anything about it. Not everyone here enjoys Ada's stupidity like you did. There are people call for end to an environment of bigotry, lies, hate and scorn. Which doesn't make them childish.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 13:43:12 GMT
Well, i'm going go right ahead and still think its childish, and even a bit cowardly to ban someone like that, instead of just being happy utterly destroying their arguments for everyone else to see, or just ignoring them. Im a firm liberal, but its one of the recent aspects of liberalism I don't identify with, this "snowflake" behaviour. Its just like the recent trend of protesting right wing speakers at colleges in America, and getting them banned from speaking (that, and defending islam as a set of ideas, though that is a different story). They are just ideas. Don't go to the lecture theatre if you don't want to hear it. Others do want to hear it. Others might even have the guts to get up and challenge it, in front of a partisan crowd. Getting these speakers banned, because they significantly different ideas, was cowardly and childish of these students. If you want to call that naive and unthoughtful, you might want to have a rationale behind saying that. At the end of the day you got to choose to engage with her or not. Some people weren't big enough and brave enough to handle it, it would seem. You can go ahead and call out anything you want and any number of time. That won't make it true. If a person creates problems, spreads bigotry, lies endlessly, is a perceived of as hateful (and actually is) and refuses to change her behaviour after getting suspended then some people will call for her elimination. Such people would rather like a board with members who comply with civility and don't create drama and envrinmonent where you see hateful views directed on many communities. If you can't see rationale behind calling for the ban of a person with qualities I listed before then I can't do anything about it. Not everyone here enjoys Ada's stupidity like you did. There are people call for end to an environment of bigotry, lies, hate and scorn. Which doesn't make them childish. Yeah, but it is true. Again, you seem to forget there is a function which means posters don't have to see what she posts. Invented for this exact situation. Its REALLY easy to use. Not using it, and running crying to admins about it, is weak/childish/cowardly. It's running to the teacher about the bully picking on your mate, rather than stepping in and standing up to him. Adults deal with their problems, children whine about them to authority figures. We really should agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 6, 2017 13:47:59 GMT
You can go ahead and call out anything you want and any number of time. That won't make it true. If a person creates problems, spreads bigotry, lies endlessly, is a perceived of as hateful (and actually is) and refuses to change her behaviour after getting suspended then some people will call for her elimination. Such people would rather like a board with members who comply with civility and don't create drama and envrinmonent where you see hateful views directed on many communities. If you can't see rationale behind calling for the ban of a person with qualities I listed before then I can't do anything about it. Not everyone here enjoys Ada's stupidity like you did. There are people call for end to an environment of bigotry, lies, hate and scorn. Which doesn't make them childish. Yeah, but it is true. Again, you seem to forget there is a function which means posters don't have to see what she posts. Invented for this exact situation. Its REALLY easy to use. Not using it, and running crying to admins about it, is weak/childish/cowardly. It's running to the teacher about the bully picking on your mate, rather than stepping in and standing up to him. Adults deal with their problems, children whine about them to authority figures. We really should agree to disagree. Which is why societies managed by adults have no need for authority figures. Oh, wait a minute...
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Apr 6, 2017 13:53:17 GMT
You can go ahead and call out anything you want and any number of time. That won't make it true. If a person creates problems, spreads bigotry, lies endlessly, is a perceived of as hateful (and actually is) and refuses to change her behaviour after getting suspended then some people will call for her elimination. Such people would rather like a board with members who comply with civility and don't create drama and envrinmonent where you see hateful views directed on many communities. If you can't see rationale behind calling for the ban of a person with qualities I listed before then I can't do anything about it. Not everyone here enjoys Ada's stupidity like you did. There are people call for end to an environment of bigotry, lies, hate and scorn. Which doesn't make them childish. Yeah, but it is true. Again, you seem to forget there is a function which means posters don't have to see what she posts. Invented for this exact situation. Its REALLY easy to use. Not using it, and running crying to admins about it, is weak/childish/cowardly. It's running to the teacher about the bully picking on your mate, rather than stepping in and standing up to him. Adults deal with their problems, children whine about them to authority figures. We really should agree to disagree. If you insist on agreeing to disagree post after post, this will be my last post. I am assuming you never went to Admins about anyone. Good on you. Cash was brave enough to do so on the board with valid reasons. Good on him. If I see a person like Ada talking the way she does, the last thing I will do is shut my eyes and chose to ignore.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 13:55:24 GMT
Yeah, but it is true. Again, you seem to forget there is a function which means posters don't have to see what she posts. Invented for this exact situation. Its REALLY easy to use. Not using it, and running crying to admins about it, is weak/childish/cowardly. It's running to the teacher about the bully picking on your mate, rather than stepping in and standing up to him. Adults deal with their problems, children whine about them to authority figures. We really should agree to disagree. Which is why societies managed by adults have no need for authority figures. Oh, wait a minute... Yeah. Adults can act like children in certain situations. That behaviour would be referred to as childish behaviour. Its what I've been talking about.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 6, 2017 13:58:41 GMT
Which is why societies managed by adults have no need for authority figures. Oh, wait a minute... Yeah. Adults can act like children in certain situations. That behaviour would be referred to as childish behaviour. Its what I've been talking about. Yes, we should do away with all law enforcement since societies are managed by adults and anyone who reports someone to the cops is obviously being childish anyway. I'm perfectly okay with just shooting the bastards if they get out of line but the system of "call the cops unless it's a situation where the only viable action is to shoot the bastards" seems to work well enough most of the time provided the cops aren't criminals themselves.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 14:04:12 GMT
Yeah, but it is true. Again, you seem to forget there is a function which means posters don't have to see what she posts. Invented for this exact situation. Its REALLY easy to use. Not using it, and running crying to admins about it, is weak/childish/cowardly. It's running to the teacher about the bully picking on your mate, rather than stepping in and standing up to him. Adults deal with their problems, children whine about them to authority figures. We really should agree to disagree. If you insist on agreeing to disagree post after post, this will be my last post. I am assuming you never went to Admins about anyone. Good on you. Cash was brave enough to do so on the board with valid reasons. Good on him. If I see a person like Ada talking the way she does, the last thing I will do is shut my eyes and chose to ignore. Oh, I've absolutely reported people before (ada and erjen). On the old IMDB in particular. I did it with Ada, because over there it ended with her quota being raised, and I enjoyed such a horrible person being frustrated. Some would call that childish behaviour on my part, and I wouldn't disagree with them. I don't know, maybe you are looking at the term as a pure insult? I don't think im perfect, but if i'm being a vindictive little child, or a little cry baby bitch, i'm going to prefer someone calls me on it. Sometimes the truth hurts to a degree. If you don't want to ignore behaviour like that, good for you. You have a few choices. You can be like those "liberal snowflakes", who are currently giving the rest of us liberals a bad name by wanting to silence speech they dont like, or you can destroy their arguments. But saying calling for a ban is "brave"? Now you are stretching the definition of that word.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 14:08:46 GMT
Yeah. Adults can act like children in certain situations. That behaviour would be referred to as childish behaviour. Its what I've been talking about. Yes, we should do away with all law enforcement since societies are managed by adults and anyone who reports someone to the cops is obviously being childish anyway. I'm perfectly okay with just shooting the bastards if they get out of line but the system of "call the cops unless it's a situation where the only viable action is to shoot the bastards" seems to work well enough most of the time provided the cops aren't criminals themselves. Your analogy falls flat because I've repeatedly referred to continuing enforcing the terms of service along the lines of doxxing, pointless profanity, spam etc (analogous to the law here), but not crying about lies and nastiness (which isnt, and shouldn't be, against the law).
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 6, 2017 14:13:21 GMT
Yes, we should do away with all law enforcement since societies are managed by adults and anyone who reports someone to the cops is obviously being childish anyway. I'm perfectly okay with just shooting the bastards if they get out of line but the system of "call the cops unless it's a situation where the only viable action is to shoot the bastards" seems to work well enough most of the time provided the cops aren't criminals themselves. Your analogy falls flat because I've repeatedly referred to continuing enforcing the terms of service along the lines of doxxing, pointless profanity, spam etc (analogous to the law here), but not crying about lies and nastiness (which isnt, and shouldn't be, against the law). You do realize that the administrator can make additional rules as he sees fit, right? You're being an ass, an extremely ignorant one at the moment.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 14:17:19 GMT
Your analogy falls flat because I've repeatedly referred to continuing enforcing the terms of service along the lines of doxxing, pointless profanity, spam etc (analogous to the law here), but not crying about lies and nastiness (which isnt, and shouldn't be, against the law). You do realize that the administrator can make additional rules as he sees fit, right? You're being an ass, an extremely ignorant one at the moment. Of course I do. You do realise I can offer my opinion on them, right? Ignorant of what? No need for petty insults.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Apr 6, 2017 14:18:56 GMT
Like I said, agree to disagree. Children go running to authority to fix their problems, adults deal with it themselves, or ignore it and move on. Sure, theres limits, but simple lying, and things like calling the board "gay" shouldn't be it. Agree to disagree is fine, and I disagree. In complex societies, people implement law enforcement bodies, like the police and judges. And the mature way to deal with transgressions of law is to report it to the authorities. When your car is stolen or your appartment broken into: Do you call the cops, or do you try to find the thief/burglar all by yourself? When you play organized team sports and a member of the opposing team commits a foul: Do you let the referee handle the situation, or do you punch your opponent and keep on playing while ignoring the referee? These are rhetorical questions. Playing by the rules is not childish; ignoring the rules is sociopathic.
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Apr 6, 2017 14:20:25 GMT
You do realize that the administrator can make additional rules as he sees fit, right? You're being an ass, an extremely ignorant one at the moment. Of course I do. You do realise I can offer my opinion on them, right? Ignorant of what? No need for petty insults. You've accused me of being childish at least a half dozen times by now and you want to complain about petty insults? Are you kidding me? Did Ada loan you her lack of self-awareness on her way out of here?
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Apr 6, 2017 14:24:26 GMT
Like I said, agree to disagree. Children go running to authority to fix their problems, adults deal with it themselves, or ignore it and move on. Sure, theres limits, but simple lying, and things like calling the board "gay" shouldn't be it. Agree to disagree is fine, and I disagree. In complex societies, people implement law enforcement bodies, like the police and judges. And the mature way to deal with transgressions of law is to report it to the authorities. When your car is stolen or your appartment broken into: Do you call the cops, or do you try to find the thief/burglar all by yourself? When you play organized team sports and a member of the opposing team commits a foul: Do you let the referee handle the situation, or do you punch your opponent and keep on playing while ignoring the referee? These are rhetorical questions. Playing by the rules is not childish; ignoring the rules is sociopathic. Im sorry, you have not understood my argument.
|
|