Fuel for forum governance thought

[NHPats2011]

It is still here... more people means more chaff...

No, more trolls means more chaff.

And sorry Curm, you can't tell me that you didn't know that a couple of the people you invited here weren't trolling the IS board, and so were likely to come here and do the exact same thing.

No one - FOR THE ONE HUNDRED BILLIONTH TIME - has ever said that it was a bad thing to invite new people here, or EVER suggested it was or should be exclusive.

No one.

Ever.

Inviting new people and inviting known trolls are not mutually exclusive concepts.

So your repeated attempts to try and turn what I have said, into suggestions that I have never - not one single solitary time - EVER - made, is beginning to border on ridiculous.

And at this point, your defensiveness (in insisting on twisting my words), is beginning to make me wonder if you really just invited them so you could flex some moderator muscle against the ones you knew would continue to challenge your dual role.

You do realise that NHPats was right about your own posting don't you?

...and yes what I said is accurate and true.

We had this same bs peeing contest with Raver and occasionally ST, and now there are more...on both sides... more chaff.

The history is here, this is just another regurgitation of the same bs you try to pass off before about how it was a forum wonderland and all we pristine and pink clouds and lemonade.

What it was was a VERY small contingent of conservatives and a large contingent of liberals, not that the pool as a whole was very large but... and once Raver got pissed and left it freaking died for all intents and purposes.

Thank you DR.

[sundaymorning]

I have to ask - how to you sell the "the board is no different now than before I invited a couple of known trolls" idea with s straight face when you have to think about implementing rules that have never had reason to exist until you invited them?

Eh, nevermind...

The irony is that you don't consider yourself a "troll"...

Too funny!

From what i understand, a troll is someone who is uninterested in adding to the actual topic being discussed and merely wants to get his nut off by provoking other posters with sarcasm. Apparently, one of the salient identifiers of trolls is that they are never actually interested in the topic at hand, only in using it to perpetuate their own vendettas.......like complaining about all the new trolls!!!

[MyOwnMind70]

I have to ask - how to you sell the "the board is no different now than before I invited a couple of known trolls" idea with s straight face when you have to think about implementing rules that have never had reason to exist until you invited them?

Eh, nevermind...

The irony is that you don't consider yourself a "troll"...

Too funny!

From what i understand, a troll is someone who is uninterested in adding to the actual topic being discussed and merely wants to get his nut off by provoking other posters with sarcasm. Apparently, one of the salient identifiers of trolls is that they are never actually interested in the topic at hand, only in using it to perpetuate their own vendettas.......like complaining about all the new trolls!!!

Is it just me or does it look like someone is a little upset that others are cutting in on her action?

[Curmudgeon]

We had this same bs peeing contest with Raver and occasionally ST...

Oh my fucking jeebus...

NO ONE HAS EVER SUGGESTED OTHERWISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your stubborn refusal to respond to what I've actually said - repeatedly - tells me that you only invited people so you could be the boss and ban them if you didn't like what they had to say.

You're right Curm, the new people aren't the problem - you are.

Point is you have no point due to the history... by your own admission it isn't new, there's just more of it which as I have stated and stated and stated is to be expected since we have more people on both sides of the aisle.

So be sure to throw those capital letters and exclamation marks where you can see them. That is exactly what you are trying to maintain.

[Curmudgeon]

ok, lets do it this way.

I didn't really want to get to this but fine, who is it you think I wanted here dd?

[Village Idiot (R)]

Crum

This thread has made the issue clear for me.

I think you should ban all current members.

You should then invite the few people you like to have around back as members.

Chat with them all you want and feel comfy.

For me can you please ban me, close my account, wave your censorious wand over me or whatever and make it no longer possible for me to post here.

It's been a blast and a waste of time. Shame on me.

[dd]

It's not a matter of who you wanted here. You knew some of those you extended the open invitation to, to be trolls.

You knew that, and you invited them here anyway. Did you really think they were not going to troll here?

The funny part is that you ask for input at the outset, and can't take it when it's honestly given. You have to pretend that I've said things I've never once said, just because you can't accept honest criticism.

But hey - I've tried to talk to you about this on the board, I've tried to talk to you in pm, and I've tried to talk to you about it in person. I've gone out of my way to explain it to you, and I'm done trying. It's clear that you want to be stubborn and childish and most of all - in control.

So, more power to you.

Now, tell me to admit I'm wrong or I'll be banned for two weeks.

[MyOwnMind70]

Maybe this should be settled the old fashioned way.

[Curmudgeon]

Crum

This thread has made the issue clear for me.

I think you should ban all current members.

You should then invite the few people you like to have around back as members.

Chat with them all you want and feel comfy.

For me can you please ban me, close my account, wave your censorious wand over me or whatever and make it no longer possible for me to post here.

It's been a blast and a waste of time. Shame on me.

You are as confused as others, it isn't who I like that's important or whether or not they agree with me.

Now the point to this thread was how much of a dick do you want me to be?

To enforce this on what many say they want, civil discourse w/o the "trolling" ...and that is a nebulous commodity itself.... you need to actually realize what it is you are asking, and I think few of you do.

I am willing to do this if it is a consensus though, but be careful what you ask for is my caveat here.

As to what is important to me is honesty. I understand that can mean multiple views on the same subject, but when proven wrong are you the type of person who can say "yup, I got that wrong."? I am, I have and as I have stated, I give what I expect and I expect that even here on an anonymous forum.

Far as I'm concerned if you are unwilling to admit on occasion you are wrong, you need to find another forum you are a waste of anyones time and effort in a discussion. I do not care how much you bring to the table. Most threads/debates/discussions/arguments won't come to that head, as most of these discussions are about perspective on a matter, but it does happen occasionally...

[CaptainCorruption]

I am willing to do this if it is a consensus though, but be careful what you ask for is my caveat here.

Gosh - consensus sounds impossible. My feel, however, is that a majority would not prefer any acceleration or increase of any enforcement.

[Curmudgeon]

I am willing to do this if it is a consensus though, but be careful what you ask for is my caveat here.

Gosh - consensus sounds impossible. My feel, however, is that a majority would not prefer any acceleration or increase of any enforcement.

ok, wrong word, major majority then, 2/3rds or like ratio.

...and I'll reiterate I think few realize just what they are actually asking for in this.

[MyOwnMind70]

I am willing to do this if it is a consensus though, but be careful what you ask for is my caveat here.

Gosh - consensus sounds impossible. My feel, however, is that a majority would not prefer any acceleration or increase of any enforcement.

Wouldn't expect that my say would count for much, but I second that motion of non-preference to acceleration or increase of any enforcement.

This place is pretty chill in my estimation. Especially compared to some of the other places I've seen. No need for arbitrary rules for grown ups(at least there shouldn't be a need). As I think KJK pointed out earlier, there's always the ignore feature if you just can't take someone anymore.

And if that doesn't work, there's always the option of buggering off!

[Porterhouse]

<snip>
For me can you please ban me, close my account, wave your censorious wand over me or whatever and make it no longer possible for me to post here.

It's been a blast and a waste of time. Shame on me.

Pardon my interjection here but have you given any consideration to simply deleting your account? 100% effective in preventing future posts.

[coltsfan1955]

Why change anything?

[MyOwnMind70]

Why change anything?

Excellent question!