posted
I'm sorry, it's just that the title of the main gay marriage thread drives me nuts. I don't know if Lalo meant it specifically to be hurtful to Mormons like myself and Card, who see the use of God's name as an epithet as one of the ultimate forms of blasphemy, but it works that way, and I wouldn't put it past him When he uses it here and there in a post, I can read once and ignore. But reading it every single time the list of threads comes up is really freaking annoying. I'm wondering if he'd be willing to change it?
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not specifically, though that might be a good comparison to use in the "Proposal and Rant" thread Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reading this thread title just made me instantly think of the old Batman/Robin; and want to say "Holy *expression of your choice*, Batman!" like Robin always did.
posted
Well, Dog knows me pretty well. And probably knows how tempted I was to delete the entire thread in the first place. (Why I continue to be patient with such people sitting in my own virtual living room I don't know.) But I try very hard to be hands off and let hatrack govern itself where possible. But, the name of the thread is really getting to me too. So, Lalo -- I haven't given you warnings on other things I would like to -- but on this one -- change the title today or I will.
Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I think an argument could be made that I am, in fact, quite rude. I've been told so many many times here, at least.
I was just a little surprised, because all 12 of those pages remain pretty civil and on-topic throughout. It's not like it's been overtaken by trolls we don't know, or newbies talking trash.... it's almost entirely regular posters, expressing their honest opinions.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm, so that brings up an interesting question.... are we under an obligation of sorts to not openly disagree with or express disapproval of the man who pays for this forum? Obviously, blatant attacks and unreasonably rude behavior shouldn't be tolerated. But if the host publishes something that really hurts or angers a lot of the people here, what should happen?
I keep trying to imagine it in the "living room" scenario, but somehow that just doesn't seem quite right. Hasn't Hatrack become more than a room in someone's private home? Doesn't it seem much more.... open than that?
quote:I keep trying to imagine it in the "living room" scenario, but somehow that just doesn't seem quite right. Hasn't Hatrack become more than a room in someone's private home? Doesn't it seem much more.... open than that?
Except that the Cards own the living room, pay for its upkeep and provide us with nice leathery couches to sit upon. Not to sound rude Ayelar, but despite your opinions and words, and presence, does your contribution to the forum approach the realm of ownership?
Neither does mine.
Frankly, I'm surprised Kristine doesn't boot more people out on her virtual sidewalk.
Posts: 1800 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lovely. I think I just caused a glitch in the sofware. I logged out because I wanted to look at the TOS, because of our discussion. I think it does specify profanity as "bad" Now the little thing up in the corner says "You are not logged in. Login or Register"
But when I hit "Register" to look at the TOS, it says "you are already logged in"
And now as I'm trying to post, it still recognizes me as BannaOj even though I'm ostensibly "not logged in"
posted
So, is it a rule then, no blaspheming in thread titles? Or only in the titles of those threads which remain on the front page for a long time?
Posts: 3056 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Were I in a real living room, and the host had said something that angered me as much as OSC's column apparently angered Eddie, I probably would react in an analogous physical way. Nor would I leave without being asked. But I would not be surprised if I was asked to leave, and it would be well within the rights of the host to ask me to do so. (The analogy breaks down somewhat because spoken words cannot be edited, of course.)
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it breaks down all that much. You can restate yourself in actual conversation. If he edits, it won't change the fact that we all read it the way he originally posted it.
posted
Civil discourse has always been what hatrack is about -- I've never tossed or edited anyone for disagreeing with the ideas of the host. If you think so, you haven't been paying attention.
Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I *think* (can't find the TOS) that there is a general "no profanity" rule.
The moderators are normally fairly lenient on editing from what I've seen. But I think the profanity linked with our host bothers a lot of people, myself included. I understand the title's, sentiment, becuase I was left with a powerful disagreement at the end of the piece too. However, there are more polite ways to say it, that are equally as strong.
I guess my overriding sentiment was dissapointment. Yes I disagree with what OSC said, but even when I disagree, normally he says it so much better than that. To me he wasn't meeting his normal standard of writing, regardless of which side of the issue he fell on.
AJ (I walked away from my computer before posting, and didn't see the post from our esteemed moderator)
quote: You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.
(Hatrack registration agreement)*
Were I a moderator, I would have been strongly tempted to change it to "Good Going, OSC." That's probably one of the reasons I'm not a moderator.
*Note: The registration agreement has been changed at least once, and, as the old agreement is not available, it's difficult to verify whether some members might have registered under an agreement with different terms.
posted
His last post was at 1 am, so I don't know if he's been around to see this. Also, you migh want to indicate to Lalo that this thread is about him.
Ayelar, doesn't it bother you that he used caps in his thread title? I'm not trying to be snarky, I just wondered. But then, I guess this thread title is annoying for the same reason.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is, indeed, jarring for me, pooka, like any all-caps word. However, since in this instance I happen to agree with the sentiment of the title, and in fact think Lalo was really understating how he felt, it doesn't bother me as much as caps-locking for no apparent reason.
If someone's trying unsuccessfully to fix their tire on the side of the road on a miserable cold night, I won't be that shocked to hear them utter the "F-word". Not surprised at all. But yelling it in the middle of a family picnic in the park.... I'd find it a lot more unsettling.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scott R, I love Maggie, et al. I would rather be in the room when my kids are watching that than any other show.
I even happen to own a copy of the Maggie Board Game.
The other thing I think of when I hear or see that phrase is a commercial where a couple of grandparents are watching the kids so mom and dad can go out. Grandpa goes to change a dirty diaper, opens it up and says, "Great Googly Moogly".
Posts: 995 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've seen a couple of really offensive bumper stickers in my day, and wondered what I would do if that person lived on my street. What are our rights in terms of bumper stickers?
I think I remember there being a law in D.C. that if you said something profane or vulgar, and someone hit you, you could not sue them for assault. I guess it's best I never find out if that is the law in UT.
But the second word in that thread is also very offensive to Orthodox Jews. If (edit: any orthodox Jew) started a thread to this effect, would you be as offended? (Any who are offended, though I guess I'm sort of replying to Ayelar).
posted
Pooka, it's very kind of you to be worried on my behalf, but I suspect I am LESS offended (although it does bother me) by disrespectful uses of the word God than many Christians -- simply because I don't consider that to be one of His names. (There are many Jews who would disagree with me on this, which is why they would write it G-d.)
[Edit: ok, edit and make me look nuts, see if I care ]
posted
On the fluffy side again, any time I see "Googly Moogly" I think of Weird Al's song "Genius in France" off of Poodlehat. I love that song!!
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whenever I see/hear "Great Googly Moogly," I think of the comic strip Liberty Meadows. Frank Cho is possibly the most talented artist of any comic strip creator I've ever seen. He's also pretty funny.
And no, my opinion of his art has nothing to do with the way he draws women. Nothing at all. Really.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
rivka Sorry about the edit, I really tried to do it like instantaneously. I just didn't want to speak for you. I mean, obviously if it bothered you personally, you would already have said something. Which is why I generalized Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, there are many things that bother me that I don't think I need to make an issue of. And I really do appreciate your concern on behalf of others. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
pooka, I wouldn't say I'm offended by use of all-caps, though I'm mightily annoyed when I think people are using them specifically to bug me.
It's like someone with Tourette-like symptoms in public. It's not offensive (to me, anyhow), but it sure is jarring.
Posts: 2220 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I could also say that I find the use of animated smileys jarring, or the color scheme of this site jarring. It doesn't mean I'll start a thread demanding that we ban or change them, it just means they're not what I would have chosen.
posted
Yet the Cards OWN this place. If this were just an ordinary unofficial fan site, we could do whatever we want and protest when stuff got deleted or changed. (Even those sites have moderators.)
It's not that we can't express our opinions for or against anything OSC says, but it IS that the Cards have a right to do whatever they want on this website. (And I love it when I realize that I'm just restating what a bunch of people have said. Thanks a lot Pat! )
And Ayelar, I agree with you on the 'purposefully' annoying capslock. That makes it worse, though it's not for me to say that anyone has done that.
posted
UofU: Frank Cho is immediately what came to mind as well.
Even though I rank him a little bit below Bill Watterson & Berke Breathed - both of whom inspired his styles VERY much.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about "Good GOAT, OSC..."? I was trying to find a "Good GOAT, OCD" web page for a dobie, but I couldn't find anything worth the effort.
Posts: 2292 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
When he uses it here and there in a post, I can read once and ignore. But reading it every single time the list of threads comes up is really freaking annoying. I'm wondering if he'd be willing to change it?
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
to the Cards![[Wink]](wink.gif)
]![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
And I really do appreciate your concern on behalf of others. ![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
