I'm not particularly happy with the influx and...is enabling the word I'm looking for here?...of juvenile and insipid posters, but I think this trend of people in a certain clique of doing a sort of show off mocking of them is a bad thing. It's childish, especially the "laugh at people behind their backs with my clique" aspect of it.
Maybe it's just me that isn't happy with it. I'm willing to bet most other people haven't even seen it. But you know you're doing it. And I, at least, am saying that I don't appreciate it and don't think that it's good for the forum.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
First of all, if I offend anyone with my light-hearted silliness, I do apologise. I come to Hatrack to get away from some seriously heavy things in my real life, and I enjoy the silly fluff.
Second of all, I really don't want to offend anyone, so please, if you do find me obnoxious, email me off the forum, so that I can have the opportunity to apologise sincerely and personally, and to reform my obnoxious behavior.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
If you find ME obnoxious, email me off the forum so I can be confident that my spam filter will prevent me from ever being aware of your discontent. Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
You see, Tom, this is why everyone likes me better. Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Do they? My spam filter kept me blissfully unaware. *grin*
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Good old Mr. Squicky, courageously telling the truth to people whether they like it or not! And in such a comfortable position, too, routinely insulting people in a blunt and very non-playful fashion rather than insulting them in a playful (but still sometimes hurtful) fashion.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
How dare you!!!
Oh alright... I'm being silly.... Oh its a vicious cycle!!!
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I feel sad whenever I see mean-spiritedness here. I keep thinking we can be better people individually, and a better as a group than that.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Where have people gotten the idea that it's okay to mock, attack, or insult people on a regular basis on this forum, whether playfully or not? Certainly not from anything OSC has said. Perhaps the newer members saw older members doing it and thought it was okay, but the older members should certainly know better. It's pretty shameful that it has gotten to the point it has - even if not as bad as some forums out there.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
May I just say, I absolutely love the word insipid.
That said, hear hear Mr Squicky. And Tresopax as well. Nicely said.
By the way, is it hear hear or here here?
Posted by Stray (Member # 4056) on :
It's hear, hear.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
I love insipid as well. Especially when someone carefully selects it because it so *perfectly* fits the situation they're describing. That's the best.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
As a sign of the Apocalypse, I agree with Squicky.
It's like watching an ungraceful Gotterdammerung.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
I gotta say I was waiting for that, and wondering if there would be a thunderclap or something to alert me when it happened.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The Gotterdammerung?
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
You coming in and agreeing with Squicky. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hmm...to me, the clap of lightning when someone appears is associated with villians. Is that how you meant it?
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
I took her meaning to be as a divine warning that the Apocalypse was nigh. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, that makes sense, Karl. I'll go with that.
[ March 03, 2006, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Tante is like a mother and Tom is like a father kinda, like I like you both equally though now I'm miffed that my 1000 or so fan mail letters didn't make it to Tom. Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Karl is wise. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That makes much more sense.
I'm clearly getting sensitive about this topic. I think I need to be careful not to see negative things that are not intended, especially when everything I know about the person denies that it would be. Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob the Lawyer: I love insipid as well. Especially when someone carefully selects it because it so *perfectly* fits the situation they're describing. That's the best.
For whatever odd reason I totally loved it when my best friend used the word to describe her bemusement over her children adoring the "Clifford" videos. I guess it tickled my funny bone because she is ultra vigilant about what her children are exposed to, very conservative in her views, and I would have thought that she would be delighted for her children to be entertained by something so devoid of any negative influences. So when she rolled her eyes in disgust at her children glued to "that INSIPID cartoon" it made me laugh.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Of course I should probably shut up since I'm probably one of the offending "insipid" posters, LOL!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
If you are open to suggestions, Uprooted, I thought the post was fine. It's a good story.
I think the part that may be offputting is the LOL. Leaving off the LOL and ending with a period makes the post sound wry and slightly self-deprecating. Posted by David G (Member # 8872) on :
This, I know, is an incredibly stupid question, but I'll ask anyway: What does "LOL" mean?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It means "laugh out loud."
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
o_O
There are people left in the world who still don't know?
(lol = comp speak for laugh out loud, it's rather massively over used)
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
There are people left in the world who still don't know?
Lucky people. Very lucky people.
Posted by JemmyGrove (Member # 6707) on :
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
There are people left in the world who still don't know?
Lucky people. Very lucky people.
Hier hier. Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I've always thought of LOL as "laughing out loud," not "laugh out loud." A fine point, I know, but it's the difference between describing what I'm doing and ordering you to do the same.
Then there's ROFL and ROFLOL and ROFLMAO, ad nauseum. Lots of times I have to google the Internet acronyms I read here on Hatrack to find out what they mean: YMMV and IIRC are a couple I've learned here. I never use them, though.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Where have people gotten the idea that it's okay to mock, attack, or insult people on a regular basis on this forum, whether playfully or not?
I would be willing to bet that at least part of it comes from the long-held tolerance of mocking, attacking, and insulting people who aren't participants in the forum. It's a small jump from there to simply doing it to everyone.
That being said, I'm not entirely sure that "What the crap are you talking about?" and the near constant assigning of motives to others aren't worse than any mocking going on.
[ March 03, 2006, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: Dagonee ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
The motives don't matter.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I'm not talking about the motives for mocking. I'm talking about the near contant assignment of motives in general that happens on this board.
Doing it about mocking - which I didn't even say had been done - would be just as bad as doing it about anything else.
Posted by Narnia (Member # 1071) on :
[completely off topic]My sister decided to change ROFL to ROLF just because she accidentally types it like that all the time. So now she'll email me back with "ROLF ROLF" and it reminds me of the muppets for some reason. [/completely off topic]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hm...I think I haven't noticed that. Does that mean I'm completely unaware, or that I am part of the problem? Both are possible.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
The motives thing definitely happens. I know I frequently get accused of saying something because I'm out to avoid looking wrong, or for the sake of argument, or to advance some political attack, or to score points, when in reality I normally just say things because I think they are true. I've seen the same treatment given to other posters, whether it is assumed their hidden motive is to get someone else to do their homework, or to make themselves popular on the forum, or to insult some person or group. I've even seen OSC himself directly state that someone's hidden motive was a campaign to tear him down.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It looks like there are lots of things which tear down the forum.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
(What does YMMV mean?)
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:when in reality I normally just say things because I think they are true.
Tres, if that's the case, what are we to make of all the times when, if pressed on an argument, you immediately withdraw to "it's just a hypothetical; I don't necessarily believe this?"
As far as I'm concerned, it's perfectly okay to assume someone's motive -- provided you're willing to, when wrong, admit that you were wrong about it. Because let's face it: it takes a remarkably unimaginative person to NOT speculate on someone else's motive. It'll happen whether you choose to do it or not; it'll happen in the time between your eyes read the letters and the letters make it to your brain.
Whether you let this speculation affect your own behavior, and whether you let this assumption blind you to the facts before you, are things you can control.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Your mileage may vary.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
I think part of the motive problem is the limitation of language in general, and the medium of text in particilar. Since we lack determinants like inflection that we are used to using to judge meaning, it's often easy to misunderstand others. I know I've done that once or twice.
Edit - I realize this could be a sort of cover-all excuse, but I think it'd be hard to understate the problems of communication via language. Telepathy would be so much easier.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
>.<
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
(What does >.< mean?)
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote: it's perfectly okay to assume someone's motive -- provided you're willing to, when wrong, admit that you were wrong about it. Because let's face it: it takes a remarkably unimaginative person to NOT speculate on someone else's motive. It'll happen whether you choose to do it or not; it'll happen in the time between your eyes read the letters and the letters make it to your brain.
Whether you let this speculation affect your own behavior, and whether you let this assumption blind you to the facts before you, are things you can control.
I think there's a difference between assuming motive (Hmmm...Tom must post on Hatrack because he likes the community) and assigning motive ("Look, everybody, Tom posts on Hatrack to destroy our community!").
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
constipation or brain-splodey, I'm guessing.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Yeah, like you're saying "Huh?"
Is that really what YMMV means? I never know when to trust Scott. Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
quote:[completely off topic]My sister decided to change ROFL to ROLF just because she accidentally types it like that all the time. So now she'll email me back with "ROLF ROLF" and it reminds me of the muppets for some reason. [/completely off topic]
Which reminds me...have I just missed her posts and she's still here, or has sarcasticmuppet left Hatrack? I don't remember seeing any of her posts lately.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Yeah, that's what it means.
I've always taken >.< and >_< to be wincing emoticons, one with the mouth puckered and one with it pressed into a thin line.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Is that really what YMMV means? I never know when to trust Scott.
You're right. It stands for, "Your monkey might vomit."
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Thanks. Google just didn't know what to do with >.<
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: Yeah, like you're saying "Huh?"
Is that really what YMMV means? I never know when to trust Scott.
::nods::
Scott is a jackanapes. It is known.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
quote:
quote:when in reality I normally just say things because I think they are true.
Tres, if that's the case, what are we to make of all the times when, if pressed on an argument, you immediately withdraw to "it's just a hypothetical; I don't necessarily believe this?"
Tom, because I like to defend things I don't necessarily ultimately believe in, but think have valid and/or true points to be made that should be respected. There is a difference between saying a particular viewpoint is right and saying certain things about a particular viewpoint are right.
For instance, I don't believe in Islam. That does not mean I can't give an argument supporting some aspect of Islam that I do think is right. And it doesn't mean I can't support Muslims when they do something I think is right or within their rights. If I do so, you should not assume I also believe in Islam as a whole.
If I withdraw and state "I don't necessarily believe this", what it means is that I have concluded you are assigning a certain belief as the motive behind my argument, and I wish to correct that - to suggest that the motive is not to defend at all costs my personal belief. ("Oh, you're just saying that because you are Muslim!") The real motive behind my arguments is normally the fact that I think the argument follows and is valid, and thus should be true if you accept the premises. In short, because I think the arguments are true (even if I also think the viewpoints they might be used to support are not so true!)
[ March 03, 2006, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Xaposert ]
Posted by Lord Of All Fools (Member # 3841) on :
quote:Scott is a jackanapes. It is known.
Not just "a" jackanapes. *THE* jackanapes.
As my alt-screename indicates.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
*blinks* sarcasticmuppet is Narnia's sister? Because I totally never caught that before. Is she also abrynne?
Posted by David G (Member # 8872) on :
What is "IIRC"?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
"If I Recall Correctly."
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lord Of All Fools:
quote:Scott is a jackanapes. It is known.
Not just "a" jackanapes. *THE* jackanapes.
As my alt-screename indicates.
Where's the sakeriver "shock" emoticon when you need it?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
^ Use this one.
Incidentally, why are you shocked?
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Must be from the sparks flying from his computer.
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve: *blinks* sarcasticmuppet is Narnia's sister? Because I totally never caught that before. Is she also abrynne?
No. Abrynne and sarcasticmuppet are two different people, and sarcasticmuppet is not Narnia's sister. The post was referring to the fact that "ROLF ROLF" made Narnia think of muppets, which reminded someone of SM.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
See, I see >.< and think "attractive woman's midriff."
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Shocked that you're not just any old jackanapes, but the jackanapes. Teh jackanapes, even.
Posted by David G (Member # 8872) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: See, I see >.< and think "attractive woman's midriff."
LOL!
(Was that a proper use of the term "LOL"?)
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: See, I see >.< and think "attractive woman's midriff."
That IS funny. But people still like me better. Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Is that really what YMMV means? I never know when to trust Scott.
You're right. It stands for, "Your monkey might vomit."
That's so sad. What's wrong with it?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
The women you find attractiv, Tom, have lats that most bodybuilders would envy. Posted by David G (Member # 8872) on :
This is not directly relevant, but as long as we are explaining abbreviated terms commonly used on the forum, what is "BTW"?
Posted by Mirrored Shades (Member # 8957) on :
Opening myself up for mocking and insulting -- what does IIRC mean? I've been wondering for ages.
Posted by Mirrored Shades (Member # 8957) on :
btw: by the way.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
BTW = by the way IIRC = If I remember/recall correctly
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by JonnyNotSoBravo:
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve: *blinks* sarcasticmuppet is Narnia's sister? Because I totally never caught that before. Is she also abrynne?
No. Abrynne and sarcasticmuppet are two different people, and sarcasticmuppet is not Narnia's sister. The post was referring to the fact that "ROLF ROLF" made Narnia think of muppets, which reminded someone of SM.
*wipes forehead* Life makes sense again. Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)