Am I correct in assuming that when people were mean and the discussion was icky, Aros deleted the thread? Or was that a moderator's hand?
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
I... wow.
Really? Holy crap.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
If it weren't for the near dozen pages of other people's words, I would hope it was a nice juicy tantrum. Little else would serve to illustrate my point so well.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
That was not necessary Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Yeah I don't think this is particularly funny. That's seriously lame.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
There were some really serious and important words there about getting "chivalrous" people to understanding the problematic sexist issues involved in their code of how to treat women. It was broadening into larger issues as a result. And now its gone. If it really was deleted in a tantrum it shows an unwillingness to critically appraise well intentioned sexism that you were raised with, which is the problem with chivalry in a nutshell.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
If it was deleted because people were talking about boobs though, that's even worse.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
It was deleted because it was my thread and I had the prerogative to do it. If people are lewd and tasteless in a thread I start, if the conversation devolves from one about polite manners into one of a much more adult nature (well beyond a mere discussion of boobs), I have every right to delete it.
Just like Rakeesh has every right to whine and throw about personal attacks on my purported character. At least it's apparent that a moderator may have been necessary.
You can call it a tantrum if you like. I spent less thought on it than I would picking out a shirt to wear in the morning.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'd like to think that true knights would be brave enough to face young children sharting on women's breasts without running away.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I spent less thought on it than I would picking out a shirt to wear in the morning.
Considering the amount of discussion and thought that many people put into the thread, this sentiment is even more insulting than the actual act of deletion.
You should have thought about your actions.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Hey Aros, serious question: how does chivalry relate to the level of respect and consideration you just showed to people who spent considerable time and effort on their posts in that thread?
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
I spent fifteen minutes on my last post. You had no right!
That said, idk if anyone responded to me. If you did, I never read it.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
I just hope they know their posts went to a happy place. I'll be hosting a memorial service this afternoon. There will be tears.
Do you want an honest answer or a facetious remark? Don't matter to me. It was my thread. I couldn't delete offensive posts, and the moderator wasn't about to step in. My purpose in starting the thread had been completed. And I wasn't about to put up with the trash it had become.
Should this evolve into a discussion of how much ownership and responsibility we have over threads that we start? Because the software just gave me this big delete button. . . .
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: I spent fifteen minutes on my last post. You had no right!
If I had no right, why did the software allow me to do it?
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Dan . . . it was hyperbole.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I just hope they know their posts went to a happy place. I'll be hosting a memorial service this afternoon. There will be tears.
Do you want an honest answer or a facetious remark? Don't matter to me. It was my thread. I couldn't delete offensive posts, and the moderator wasn't about to step in. My purpose in starting the thread had been completed. And I wasn't about to put up with the trash it had become.
Should this evolve into a discussion of how much ownership and responsibility we have over threads that we start? Because the software just gave me this big delete button. . . .
Just because you are able to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
You decided that you'd rather sabotage other peoples' ability to discuss something you didn't want to discuss. That's pretty messed up.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
It was always going to end this way.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
People don't often spend much time thinking about the tantrums they throw beforehand. And spend more afterwards justifying them.
Anyway, I do credit you with the minimal integrity necessary to at least admit the actual reason early: you had the ability to do so, and you wanted to, so therefore you did. You also get to hide the fact that the one actually mentioning nasty bodily functions the most was you.
Anyway, you're an excellent representative of your sort, Aros. Have a position, insist others must hold it to be in good form, and then when things go against you throw a fit that ends up alienating even more people. Keep on shrinking that share, buddy!
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
As Rakeesh will tell you in painstaking detail, I'd complained about the toilet humor, semi-pornography, and child endangerment subtopics multiple times before I contemplated deletion. In return, I received ridicule. I'm fine with that. But it was MY thread. MY discussion.
I apologize to people that had participated with good intentions that their words were lost. But others DID read them (for the most part). It's not like the communications never happened.
And for those that can't keep their heads and minds to at least a semblance of public civility (both in posts and personal messages), I couldn't care less. If I were hosting you in a real-life public forum and you got out of hand, I'd send you packing just as well.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
No Aros, it was not. As soon as other people began talking to each other, be became many people's discussion. You were one participant. Yes, the software lets you delete a thread that you create, but that doesn't make it *your* thread any more than JanitorBlade's ability to delete any thread makes them all his. You eliminated by fiat a discussion that was valued by many people because you no longer approved of it. It was petty.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Oh, and incidentally, you're lying when you say you spent almost no thought on it. Not hyperbole, lying-you first were whining about how distasteful the thread had become well before you deleted it, making (untrue, as it turned out) mentions that it needed a NSFW tag, or was getting close to it. Please don't expect anyone to believe the thought of deleting the thread didn't occur to you then.
As for needing moderation, you mentioned yourself the moderator wasn't about to step in, so you've lied once more. What you thought it needed, and were in a position to give, was a good stiff dose of autocracy. How appropriate for the censor.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
You forgot to compare me to Hitler. Isn't that right?
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Hahaha. Or Darth Vader.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I'm fine with that. But it was MY thread. MY discussion.
And your response to it really does tell us more about your position than you ever intended to express, or perhaps more than you are self-aware of.
Anyway ladies, remember — it's such a shame that we're moving away from a chivalrous world where men purposefully deny you the ability to know how much they are tipping your server, because you're a girl. Remember: being treated differently because of your genitals is something you should be happy about, and lord's sakes let's not discuss the adult issues of sex and sexuality, that's just uncivilized and will result in deletion of an important discussion about outmoded sexist mores!
quote:The expected reply: That's totally not fair, that's not what happened and I'm not saying we shouldn't discuss t...
WOW THEN DON'T FLIPPANTLY DELETE THE ENTIRE CONVERSATION NEXT TIME
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Oh, and as for the ability conferring the right...well. Were we to meet, I may very well have it within my power to steal your wallet. Or you mine, Aros. Therefore I've a right to your wallet.
Maybe now we can dispense with such a profoundly stupid argument, though I've got to admit it's beginning to be funny in itself at how suited that argument is to a censor's mind: might makes right.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Oh, and another nugget of unintended humor on your part, Aros: I received ridicule, but I was fine with it...as evidenced by my deleting the entire discussion. Hee.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I'm going to pull the entire conversation out of cache from my computer when I get it back from the house it's at right now. If anyone can contribute to that before then I would be pretty happy with that. My goal is to have the entire thread reposted here for posterity with highlights on the best individual posts, and I am not sure when my record is going to end because of the last time I viewed the thread.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
Just thought that Obi-Wan quote was fitting, aros. You had the right to do it. I just thought it was terrible.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: I'm going to pull the entire conversation out of cache from my computer when I get it back from the house it's at right now. If anyone can contribute to that before then I would be pretty happy with that. My goal is to have the entire thread reposted here for posterity with highlights on the best individual posts, and I am not sure when my record is going to end because of the last time I viewed the thread.
I think you should creatively misquote some people and modify portions of it. That would be good for a lark.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Oh, and another nugget of unintended humor on your part, Aros: I received ridicule, but I was fine with it...as evidenced by my deleting the entire discussion. Hee.
S'what I get for feeding the trolls, I guess. I'd rather not bother.
Look. I start a post about the '69 Raiders. Say you come along and hijack it to talk about Starcraft or some other such nonsense, to the degree where my original post gets lost in the noise. I'll delete that one too. And if I still care, I'll repost about the Raiders. If I don't? Who cares.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Why would you? Threads do not exist to serve you, and we do not post at your behest.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
When does Heart of the Swarm come out?
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Nobody said that you did exist to serve me. Maybe it goes back to the question . . . who owns our posts? Maybe I shouldn't have access to the delete button. I'd probably agree with that.
If I post regarding a personal medical condition, asking for advice, would you come up into it insulting me and talking about child objectification? Wouldn't it be completely reasonable for me to delete it?
Posted by NobleHunter (Member # 12043) on :
No. If it contains content from other people it's completely unreasonable for you to delete it.
If you don't like where a thread's gone just stop reading it.
Heart of the Swarm is March 12, I think?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
You're still lying. I expect you think that because you exercised the right that your might (in a discussion board, anyway) gave you you might have some credibility.
The thread was still quite topical. We were discussing whether society should tell us which parts of our bodies we're allowed to expose publicly and if so, to what extent. That stemmed directly from the conversation about changing social thought on gender roles. The extent the thread even included such naughty topics as toilet humor was minimal and the conversation on that score was dying out anyway when you started whining and then threw a tantrum, and you had spent more time complaining about it than anyone did talking about it.
Now go on, Aros. I'm not even sure why you bother to defend yourself in a thread you created-you've already shown yourself so lacking in guts as to be unable to see unpleasant *words* without stamping them out. The bravery and moral strength of the censor. A feeble thing indeed.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
I need to get a new computer monitor for it. My current one glitches when I play it.
Send me a friend request?
Posted by stilesbn (Member # 11809) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Anyway ladies, remember — it's such a shame that we're moving away from a chivalrous world where men purposefully deny you the ability to know how much they are tipping your server, because you're a girl.
That's an interesting example to pull out of the whole thread since it's really no one's business how much you tip unless she's your wife and therefore has a shared financial interest and responsibility. Unless of course you keep separate accounts and manage your financials separately, then it's not even your wife's business.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:If I post regarding a personal medical condition, asking for advice, would you come up into it insulting me and talking about child objectification? Wouldn't it be completely reasonable for me to delete it?
Why do you expect anyone to believe this self-serving spin you put on events? You're the one who made it impossible for people to read and make up their own minds about what happened. Why should you be considered trustworthy, censor?
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Nobody said that you did exist to serve me. Maybe it goes back to the question . . . who owns our posts? Maybe I shouldn't have access to the delete button. I'd probably agree with that.
If you'd agree with it, then you should choose to act morally and act as though you don't have that option.
This is like bludgeoning someone to death and then saying "Maybe I shouldn't have the ability to bludgeon this guy to death. I'd probably agree with that."
You still chose to do it. All you're saying here is that you recognize that you made an immoral choice. Have you decided you'll stop making that immoral choice in the future?
quote:Originally posted by Aros: If I post regarding a personal medical condition, asking for advice, would you come up into it insulting me and talking about child objectification? Wouldn't it be completely reasonable for me to delete it?
Generally, when someone posts something of a sensitive nature, that may be deleted, they indicate such from the outset.
You posted something you knew was controversial, to have a critical discussion of that topic. You don't get to dictate what path that discussion takes, and you shouldn't punish people for discussing it in a way you disagree with.
Even if you can.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
As I said in the deleted thread, the backbone of courtesy is respect for other people. As I also said there, Aros, you seem to lack this respect (at the time I said it seemed somewhat lacking, but you've proved this doubt correct), which is a big reason why people doubt the sincerity of your holding the positive aspects of "traditional" manners, as opposed to the negative ones.
Also, courtesy and politeness are about the extra you do (or don't do). If you're going to defend yourself with "Well, I was able to do this, so it's okay." you should probably give up the pretense that you care much about them.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Aros, it was a tactical mistake.
You claim that the post you started to discuss the serious issue of Chivalry dieing has been hijacked with perversion so you deleted it.
This thread, which was not started by you so you can not delete it, hints at something different. You lost the argument, so in a petulant huff, deleted it.
Any proof that the thread was hijacked is deleted. Any proof that the thread had gone into NSFW areas inappropriate to this forum--has been deleted.
We have your word that the thread was terrible so you deleted it, and the words of others, those who's thoughts and efforts you deleted, saying you were wrong.
There is nothing now that you can say or that you can do that can change the opinions of any new person who reads this thread. You are a poor loser who "Took his ball and went home."
That may not be the truth, but you deleted any evidence to the contrary.
I've started many threads, and have seen them hijacked to ends I did not like. What is the mature response?
Ignore it.
Let the thread fade away, drift to the next page, not respond.
And if others keep it alive, ignore it.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
My only real thought in deleting this was essentially that people behave online as if there are no consequences. Some people poured a lot of thought into a debate over chivalry. Others countered and had a reasonable discussion. Regardless of anything that happened, we still had that discussion. It already happened.
Then one or more trolls came in and crashed the discussion, believing there was no consequence to their action. Some of them put a lot of time into it too.
Well, the system allowed me to nuke the thread. I still had a good debate over chivalry with some reasonable people. That didn't disappear. There were two consequences to my action: - People can't go back and read the actual discussion - The trolls might have learned that there are consequences to their behavior
To anyone who wasn't a troll, I apologize profusely if you're offended or upset. But I thought the loss was worth the gain. Still do. I just mourn the proliferation of trolls on this site. And some of them actually behaved themselves in the past. Someone must have just pushed their troll buttons.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
No one was trolling. We discussed chivalry until we were tired of it, and people decided to talk about something else. At some point the thread pivots into a tangent or it dies. You can disagree with it. I wouldn't have blamed you, but no one was doing anything harmful. Maybe a warning should have been made based off of one link, in case someone gets really unlucky over something that was actually pretty tame. That doesn't mean there was anything wrong with any thing else.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
You are using a very loose definition for "troll". JanitorBlade actively moderates actual trolls. People saying stuff you consider to be off-topic or off-color does not constitute trolling. Context matters. If we only had some...
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Not that anyone was really trolling the thread, or that what you really had a problem with actually had to do with people trolling, but it's just flat-out dense of you to say "I thought the loss was worth the gain" so comfortingly to everyone who contributed to that thread.
If you were worried about the "trolls" and wanted them to learn that there was a consequence to their actions, then you should not have responded to it by letting their actions prove that you were a whiny tantrumbaby who was going to delete the entire thread, void every aspect of the conversation equally, then come back later and say "I spent less thought on it than I would picking out a shirt to wear in the morning."
Well, y'all just come back when you figure out that this was a calculated decision to teach people a lesson that you weighed the consequence of, or if you re-remember that it was actually just something you did without really thinking about it.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
This isn't an 18+ board, is it Matt? Where's the line? If you create a thread, are you not able to draw that line?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Oh, goodie. We haven't had a tar-and-feather-all-thread-deleters thread in positively AGES!
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
We haven't had someone selfish enough to delete a thread like that in ages either.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Bye bye gun discussion.
I for one will -never- post in a thread created by Aros ever again.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
My work here is done. Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Wow, Aros, did you also delete your gun thread?
So... "I probably shouldn't have the power to do this" wasn't what you actually thought, huh?
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: My work here is done.
Give me one good reason I should ever trust my words to your feeble care?
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_:
quote:Originally posted by Aros: My work here is done.
Give me one good reason I should ever trust my words to your feeble care?
Duh, you shouldn't. Anything can be deleted at any time. The point is to have a discussion. Not to keep every word for posterity. If someone breaks the penis off the statue of David, or urinates on the Mona Lisa, I say throw them out with the trash.
Probably why I'm not the moderator.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Wait, you said "penis," so for propriety's sake I think this thread should be deleted.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Heck, you can't even get a thread deleted for links to nudity and offhanded ramblings about child promiscuity. Oh wait. . . .
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Thread drift is just a part of life.
You have just as much right to destroy our discussions as Thomas Jefferson has to hop into a time machine and nuke this continent down to a pool of molten glass.
But you know that. This was never about the discussions, this was your grand exit gesture, flipping everyone here off as you back through the door.
Because you knew if you did that that your reputation here was shot. You knew that the citizens of this particular community would not forgive you for the wanton destruction of our voices. That you are still here, posting with nasty little quips isn't a reflection that you believe you are right, just that you want to enjoy pissing on your grave until your bladder is all the way empty.
And I know that by talking to you at all I'm feeding the troll. So...I'm done now.
Posted by umberhulk (Member # 11788) on :
He has the right to delete the thread. He's just an asshole for it.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Don't get yourself in trouble on his account umber...he so isn't worth it.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Thread jacking is a part of life. So there. I'll do whatever I want. Nanny-nanny-poo-poo.
You have just as much right to destroy our discussions as Thomas Jefferson has to hop into a time machine and nuke this continent down to a pool of molten glass.
But you know that. This was never about the discussions, this was your grand exit gesture, flipping everyone here off as you back through the door.
You're right. I was flipping a few people off. And I have the right to do it. I asked a few people nicely to keep it family friendly and I was derided for it.
Some people get insulting. Some people spend incessant amounts of time boiling down a cutting remark. I'd rather just hit the delete button.
Thomas Jefferson wouldn't nuke people. Nor would I. But if you peed all over the Declaration of Independence, and if the software gave him a delete button to push, he might just do it -- if only to teach you whelps a little respect.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
If it was deleted because people were talking about boobs though, that's even worse.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
Actually linking to them. And talking about objectifying children. And being $*#-hats.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
Yeah, looks like its "worse" then.
I was reading that discussion. I saw what it actually was. I saw how different it was from how you are characterizing it here, and honestly the only thing i can tell you now is that the lesson you think you are teaching everyone here ... Isn't happening. You don't understand your own lesson.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: This isn't an 18+ board, is it Matt? Where's the line? If you create a thread, are you not able to draw that line?
No, you are not able to draw the line. That's what the moderator is for. If you think a post crosses the line, whistle it, and the person who's responsibility it is to make that decision will make it.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: Do you want an honest answer or a facetious remark? Don't matter to me. It was my thread. I couldn't delete offensive posts, and the moderator wasn't about to step in. My purpose in starting the thread had been completed. And I wasn't about to put up with the trash it had become.
I wanted an honest answer, which is why I asked an honest question.
Your "don't matter to me" answer confirms my impression from the original thread. Your notion of chivalry is about your aesthetic preferences, not about consideration or respect for others.
Posted by JanitorBlade (Member # 12343) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I just hope they know their posts went to a happy place. I'll be hosting a memorial service this afternoon. There will be tears.
Do you want an honest answer or a facetious remark? Don't matter to me. It was my thread. I couldn't delete offensive posts, and the moderator wasn't about to step in. My purpose in starting the thread had been completed. And I wasn't about to put up with the trash it had become.
Should this evolve into a discussion of how much ownership and responsibility we have over threads that we start? Because the software just gave me this big delete button. . . .
You did not even mention that there were problems in that thread. There's always a change I'll see it myself, but if there was a real problem that you felt necessitated intervention, you should have said so.
Simply jumping to the delete option is disrespectful to everyone who posted in good faith. I'm not saying I'll stop you from deleting your posts, right now it's not against any rule to do so, but don't lay this on me or say that I was unwilling to step in, I didn't even know I might need to.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Aros:
quote:So. . . .
In another article about dating, it has been (rather forcefully) pointed out that many traditional concepts of chivalry or Southern manners are outdated -- offensive even.
Is it truly sexist or misogynistic to: - Open a car door - Open a door to a residence or other building - Walk on the road-side of the sidewalk - Offer a lady a jacket - Help a lady with her jacket - Help a lady with her chair - Stand when a lady approaches a dinner table - Pay for the first date
What about more traditional daily chores? - Taking out the garbage - Doing "dirty" work (major digging, snow shoveling, changing oil, etc)
I didn't think that I'd be the only one arguing in favor of traditional manners. Most of the internet seems to agree with me. But posters on this site seem to think, rather than these being good manners, they are quite the opposite -- offensive. I agree that some old fashioned etiquette is outdated (ordering for your date).
I understand issues of equality . . . but is this just an issue of Hatrack hyperbole? Or would ladies truly be offended if a gentleman genuinely felt these to be matters of proper manners? Are we throwing out basic table manners while we're at it?
I'm certainly not arguing that chivalry should only apply when courting a girl. I open doors for everyone, regardless of sex. I stand when anyone joins my table. But where do we draw the line between carrying a heavy, nasty bag of garbage versus pulling out a chair. Is it sexist that many of us were taught that it was always better to err on the side of manners?
Conversely, I am CERTAINLY not advocating adopting these behaviors if it offends a lady. Only as a default. One wouldn't want to fight a lady, for example, if she feels awkward having a gentleman pay or open a car door.
If you saw an old man and an old woman sauntering to a car . . . he takes her hand, opens her door, helps her in. I can't help thinking this sweet. I can't imagine thinking ill of him, because she's a pretty little flower that can't enter a car herself. That really isn't the intention.
theamazeeaz:
quote:Um, I pointed out in a previous post that the word misogyny, which only you had ever used, is inappropriate.
Many of these things are patronizing.
Aros:
quote:No, the word "chauvinism" was used. I changed switched to misogyny, but the implication is the same.
Patronizing would infer an inherent belief that women are inferior (as would the other two terms). So, following traditional, etiquette makes this inference?
So, proper etiquette is now: - Don't offer to help carry anything - Don't open doors - Shrug off any discomfort that your date might be feeling - Make your date pay dutch
rivka:
quote:I would not be offended if anyone, male or female offered to do most of those things. UNLESS the implication was they were doing so because I was a delicate flower, or were themselves offended if I declined their offer of assistance.
Dan_Frank:
quote:
quote:So, proper etiquette is now: - Don't offer to help carry anything - Don't open doors - Shrug off any discomfort that your date might be feeling - Make your date pay dutch
This is Hatrack Hyperbole.
Most of the people arguing with you explicitly discussed how they open doors for everyone, are happy to pay for friends, etc.
I'm all for being courteous to people. I just don't think that the presence of a vagina is what merits that courteousness.
Aros:
quote:Hmm. . . .
Some of these I wouldn't naturally do for any woman . . . only one I was courting.
And I'd offer to carry things / take out the garbage for anyone if I was a guest or if they were (significantly) smaller than me.
But I would argue highly in favor that these are proper courtship behaviors, unless the lady makes it clear that they make her uncomfortable.
Dan_Frank:
quote:Ah. I don't know much about courtship behaviors. I was speaking about general civility towards other people, and whether or not that should be contingent upon genitals.
If it's specific to courtship, though... what's the appropriate behavior for a gay couple? Should gay men alternate on trash-taking-out and fight to be the first one to the door to open it? Should lesbians just live in filth and never open any doors?
Aros:
quote:Well, the other article was specific to courtship. That's why I was flabbergasted by some of the opinions.
And yes, in regard to gay couples, that's precisely what should happen. But lesbians will need to find a way to get food in and out, otherwise they'll starve.
Boris:
quote:
quote:Many of these things are patronizing.
How? Do you believe that people are opening doors for women because said door openers think that women can't open doors by themselves? Your use of declarative voice seems to suggest that you think that those acts are *objectively* patronizing in all situations. I don't think that is either a rational or objectively demonstrable view to hold.
I mean, to prove an action is patronizing, you must prove intent. If someone opens a door for a woman, the only way you can prove they are being patronizing is if they say, "Hey, sweety, you look pretty weak. I bet you need a big strong man to open this door for you." Which no one ever does. Because that would be blatantly sexist and a complete douchebag move.
Personally, I open doors for most people, but I do so because I can't stand walking behind people. I have opened doors for women on dates in the past, but I do so because I feel it's kind to do so. I open the door to the car for my mom because my dad fusses at me if I don't. My personal opinion on why to do kind things like opening doors and whatnot is that I should do them because I'm a person who is willing to expend my own energy to keep other people from having to. Not because I don't think they are capable of doing so.
On a related note, if I see a woman with lots of kids struggling to do something, I always try to offer to help them out with what they're doing, be it taking out trash, opening a door, or grabbing something off the shelf in the store (being 6'3" I get asked to do that a lot).
Parkour:
quote:Help people or treat people certain ways because it is nice or because that is how they want to be treated and you are willing to reciprocate.
Don't treat women with expected favors or courteous gestures because they are women.
Also remember that courteous gestures aren't actually courteous if it is in any way required that the person receiving this gesture is going to get sideways glances or any sort of refusal or rebuff from you if they do not accept this gesture. It is not courteous to refuse a woman when she desires to pay half the check.
kmbboots:
quote:What happens to that if you take gender out of the equation?
stilesbn:
quote:Are you in favor of tearing all barriers between sexes down then? So men behave exactly the same way towards women as the do men. Including all the less than desirable ones including the actions that happen in high school. Say fights, butt slapping, any other manner of survival of the fittest or pecking order? Sexual harassment would be impossible at that point since everyone would be acting the same way towards both genders. There is actually precedent there too.
Aros:
quote:
quote:[Help people or treat people certain ways because it is nice or because that is how they want to be treated and you are willing to reciprocate.
Don't treat women with expected favors or courteous gestures because they are women.
Also remember that courteous gestures aren't actually courteous if it is in any way required that the person receiving this gesture is going to get sideways glances or any sort of refusal or rebuff from you if they do not accept this gesture. It is not courteous to refuse a woman when she desires to pay half the check.
Rebuff? Did anyone presume to say that they would "force" courtesies? Wouldn't that kind of kill the point?
And I'd say that sex most certainly has something to do with it. Offering to carry my mother's groceries sends a much different sociological message than offering to carry my father's. In one, it implies politeness. In the other, weakness. These are age old gender roles / cues.
Men and women ARE different. As a man, I'd like to think that women can "have their cake and eat it too", accepting both equality and gallantry. Maybe some would like to bail on gender roles altogether. I guess I can understand that, as I'm a man who's a compulsive cleaner, I iron all my clothes, and I'm an avid cook. But that doesn't mean I don't believe in romantic, old fashioned manners.
kmbboots:
quote:Stilesbn, maybe you could cut out the obnoxious behaviour toward men while you are at it?
Tom Davidson:
quote:
quote:these are age old gender roles / cues.
Think about that for a moment. If you carry your mother's groceries, it is because you are polite; if you carry your father's, it is because you believe he is too weak to carry his own.
Now imagine for a moment you have grown up observing these age-old gender cues. Would it not be perfectly natural to conclude that the unvoiced implication is that not only do you believe your mother is too weak to carry her own groceries, but that society does not expect her to be strong enough to do so? That the default assumption is that she is in need of that assistance?
I see nothing wrong with women deciding that they do not care to accept these default assumptions. Let them be insulted by your offers to carry their groceries; are they not at least as strong as your father?
Rakeesh:
quote:I'm just wondering when exactly it was expected that men would be doing the dirty work domestically.
Dan_Frank:
quote:A lot of this stuff, while rooted in "women are delicate weak flowers," has also morphed into "men are gross menial animals."
The thing you're quoting is perhaps more an example of the latter?
Stilesbn has unintentionally hit on this too... when people hear "don't treat people courteously based on their genitals," the assumption is "treat women like crap, the same way society expects you to treat men."
That's why you so often get "You're saying you should never open a door for anyone or help anyone in any way ever? How monstrous!" replies.
It doesn't even occur to people that you're saying "Treat men and women with civility and courtesy, help them when it's appropriate, and don't condescend or patronize them."
Because treating a man that way indicates you think he's weak, because men should be treated like crap.
And treating a woman that way indicates you think she's manly, because women should be treated like glass.
They're both bullshit. Interrelated, but also different in key ways.
good goddamn i need to automate something to save every page i load on this site
uhh well that's good for now
i'm also going to cut ahead temporarily to the Welp He Called It award awarded to this post for Dan Frank
quote:Aros, is that post your way of signalling that you're uncomfortable with receiving criticism around this issue, and not interested in continuing a discussion?
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Everyone *did* post in good faith. In fact quite early on Aros himself began posting in bad faith, posing over the top examples and putting them into other people's mouths.
Spin what lies you like, Aros, the thread wasn't debauched or filthy or anything else like that. What it was was a bunch of people calmly and more or less politely discussing a complicated set of social topics and routinely rebutting your outdated, sexist notions but most of all not caring a whole lot if polite frank discussion offended your oh so very tended sensibilities.
No one was taking your implied claim as Taste Police Chief seriously. Ego couldn't handle it. Censorship followed.
The important thing to remember is that you've taught no lessons, except that you won't allow your ideas to stand on their own. You've taught no lessons, except that you shouldn't be trusted to be an adult. And you've scared off no 'trolls', because if anything if the situation were what you said it was, you've made things easier by showing yourself so fearful.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Man, and he called it WAY early too. Props, Dan!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
So, chivalry.
Man, I know I've been persuaded by example more than the other thing.
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: - The trolls might have learned that there are consequences to their behavior
Yea, we've learned how much power we have over your threads in the future.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Heh, yeah. Huge thread deleting tantrums that wipe out multiple threads just for the hell of it don't at all assert the kind of control and defense against trolls that he claims they do. To the extent that it's so obvious I cannot help but wonder if he is just lying again.
I mean, if 'trolls' were really so hostile and persistent with respect to him, well what do trolls want? They generally want a great big reaction that makes the person they're trolling look bad. Which is exactly what happened. If he was being so unfairly persecuted, not a single troll would be driven off by the deletions.
On the subject of the original thread, though, I hope that when you're teaching your daughter to expect and delight in 'chivalrous' (sexist) gestures from the world, you neglect to teach her the other behavior you professed in the thread: to throw a great big weepy hissy-fit if the chivalrous gestures aren't forthcoming.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I occasionally think that clear, rigid social rules exist solely so that people can feel ok about being assholes in contexts not obviously covered by those rules.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: I occasionally think that clear, rigid social rules exist solely so that people can feel ok about being assholes in contexts not obviously covered by those rules.
This.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Heh, yeah. Huge thread deleting tantrums that wipe out multiple threads just for the hell of it don't at all assert the kind of control and defense against trolls that he claims they do. To the extent that it's so obvious I cannot help but wonder if he is just lying again.
I think you're right. Your behavior has gotten worse. Oh well. The more you know. . . .
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Thanks for copping to being a transparent liar, Aros. It wasn't necessary because, you know, transparent, but it's the thought that counts.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
That's, like, more than 5 times you've repeated your assertion that Aros is a lying liar who lies a lot, in this thread. Are you trying to hit a quota?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
It's the Hatrack Teen Boy Squad!
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
You're right. I'm sorry I'm being so mean to Aros. Hmmm. I don't know if I'm sorry enough to kill the thread in a fit of picque, but maybe I'm getting there.
Anyway, Aros has repeatedly made untrue claims about what was going on in the threads he deleted. When he does so, I'll point out he's lying. And let the words stay up there for people to decide whether I'm being unreasonable or not. If I 'teach a lesson', well, people will be able to see it.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Rakeesh, You're not doing this to protect the forum or for any productive purpose.
You're jumping on Aros because you like jumping on people and being morally superior to them. He's given you an excuse. This behavior is selfish and juvenile.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
(Because I'm wearing my "judging people's transparent motives" clothes today) Aros, I'm not sure if you thought people would not respond with pretty much universal condemnation of your actions or what, but it seems pretty clear that things didn't go as you planned. I get the feeling that you have found yourself in a hole that you don't think you can get out of and have thrown up obviously false justifications and adopted a "Hey, I'm a troll" persona to somehow deal with this. I don't think that this is actually a good reflection of how you are.
You don't need to do these things. If you man up and admit that maybe your actions were not, in hindsight, what you should have done, you can actually restore a good bit of people's opinion of you. The Aros handle isn't burnt.
We all mess up, especially on things that we are emotionally invested in. If you handle your screw ups like an adult, admit them and apologize for them (especially if you learn from them moving on), I think you'll find that people respect you much more than if you try to deny that you ever messed up or try to dodge and minimize your error.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Replacing thread deleting with locking might be better; along with board software to have off topic posting moved to its own OT thread.
But I would rather have custom avatars installed first.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Mr Squicky,
Well I certainly won't deny that I do get satisfaction out of jumping on *some* people over *some* matters. Even if I wanted to do so, it would be foolish because it's pretty obvious. You're quite mistaken that it's a general liking, though. For example, I disagree with say BlackBlade on a number of large and important issues (mostly involving the intersection of religion and society). Unfortunately for my example he's now a moderator also, so it's a bit fraught, but even in other settings on issues I consider very important but where I disagree with him, I don't jump on him.
I don't feel I do with anyone who doesn't attempt to seize the moral high ground-not just the high ground of 'here's why I'm right, and why it's morally important to be right' but the moral high ground of 'you're a bad person, and I'm in a position to say so'.
Anyway, I didn't say I was doing it to 'protect the forum'-I tend to regard such claims not as a proclamation of concern for the community's welfare, but rather an attempt to speak for everyone. I was doing it because he was lying, repeatedly, and since unfortunately I can't show the thread I'll simply say so.
To conclude, I do agree with you on a substantial bit of what you said. But I'll also take a page from Samprimary's book and note how difficult it can be to charge someone with enjoying moral superiority and then dress them down for personal character flaws.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: (Because I'm wearing my "judging people's transparent motives" clothes today) Aros, I'm not sure if you thought people would not respond with pretty much universal condemnation of your actions or what, but it seems pretty clear that things didn't go as you planned. I get the feeling that you have found yourself in a hole that you don't think you can get out of and have thrown up obviously false justifications and adopted a "Hey, I'm a troll" persona to somehow deal with this. I don't think that this is actually a good reflection of how you are.
You don't need to do these things. If you man up and admit that maybe your actions were not, in hindsight, what you should have done, you can actually restore a good bit of people's opinion of you. The Aros handle isn't burnt.
We all mess up, especially on things that we are emotionally invested in. If you handle your screw ups like an adult, admit them and apologize for them (especially if you learn from them moving on), I think you'll find that people respect you much more than if you try to deny that you ever messed up or try to dodge and minimize your error.
I tried to apologize. The whole incident was casual, without a whole heck of a lot of thought. Like if we were playing a board game, I threw up my arms and dumped the board. Screw it.
My reasoning basically being this . . . if trolls are going to screw up my thread, not actually read what was said, derail it into porn, name calling,and talk about child objectification, I'll just dump it and walk away. I don't want my name -- nor a worthwhile conversation -- associated with a lot of what went on in that thread.
Call me a censor. I don't care. I still feel I had the right not to have a decent, legitimate conversation wrecked in that way. If I start a thread and I have one or more juveniles wreck it, and new people will come in and judge myself or the community by it, I'll dang well delete it.
The link was part of my problem. I had no objection to the sidebar conversations, except for some of the child-related stuff that went on. I won't stand for that crap. And ridicule, cat calling, on top of the rest? Whatever.
Again, I truly apologize to people that were invested in that thread. And the other ones I deleted. But I don't have to put up with that crap. Frack, I've posted quite a few big threads, under a few names, since the beginning. I'd never seen so much disrespect and smarmy behavior.
I might leave. Haven't decided. But I probably won't post a thread under this handle for awhile. Next time, I should probably just contact the mod.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Rakeesh... You're jumping on Aros because you like jumping on people and being morally superior to them.
Well to be fair he IS a little morally superior to Aros...but on the other hand, most are. Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
the critical flaw in the Teen Boy Squad judgment of rakeesh is that it is possible (and it is in fact observably true here) to be both enjoying moral superiority accompanied with jumping on someone for offensive acts, and simultaneously — with no real conflict of interest or incorrect self-appraisal — be doing it with constructive intent re: a community, board, social group.
Rakeesh is straight-up getting up in Aros' grill and sure as hell is enjoying some moral superiority. He is also acting intentionally and constructively against both Aros' act and the subsequent, post-hot, captious and bogus rationalizations and sanctimonious claims that he's "teaching us a lesson" and will continue to do so using alts.
Anyway the Teen Boy Squad gives its thanks to the Domesticated Doormat Olds Squad for allowing it many chances in hatrack history to shine against their sclerotic, mincing, pliable nonaction and I am sure we all love and are having lots of fun with this sort of useless labeling? How many squads can we make!
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
I for one, am a member of a pack, not a squad.
I'll leave it to next poster to decide what kind of pack.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I... thought Aros was Katherina? No?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
STONE PACK
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: STONE PACK
Rocket punch! Yes, yes, oh yes.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aros: I tried to apologize. The whole incident was casual, without a whole heck of a lot of thought. Like if we were playing a board game, I threw up my arms and dumped the board. Screw it.
I find this mind boggling. I can't imagine anyone dumping a board game in the middle of a game. My kids have been trained since they were 2 that to dump a game is disrespectful to the other players and if they do it no one will want to play with them.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Official recruitment into the Stone Pack has officially begun, officially.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: I... thought Aros was Katherina? No?
Katherina had an alt, and it got pretty obvious pretty shortly in. So it left too.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I don't think it's morally wrong to delete a thread without warning.
Whew! Glad I got that off my chest.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
*Makes mental note never to post in a thread started by Scott R.*
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I'd probably never do it, but I'm not concerned with others who do.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
So I don't have a lot to offer to this discussion as A: I rarely post anymore and B: Did not post in that thread. And I will say that in the brief bit of lurking I've done over the past year or so, I've always enjoyed the presence of Aros. And I'll echo Scott's sentiment that on principle I can't find it in me to be offended that someone deleted a thread.
That being said, I wish the thread people are referring to was still around. My reasoning is more pragmatic than principled: I really really would have liked to have read it. Not for the nitpicking or snarking that such threads inevitably contain, but because I am working on some lectures at the moment that deal with precisely this issue and I would have loved to have read other peoples thoughts and opinions. Even the outlandish or crazy ones, but I also have an inordinate amount of respect for the minds and opinions of some people on this board.
So I guess my two cents boils down to urging potential thread deleters to think to yourself (general you, not specifically Aros or anyone), "Is there someone who might get some use out of this now or in the future?" And then maybe give a days warning or so, so that it can be saved for people like me. I get that if a thread is offensive or too far gone or personally insulting that it might still be the "right" thing for a person to do to delete it (debatable, but again, I can't find it in me to have a strong opinion on the subject. The benefits of lurking I suppose). I just really wish I could read that thread instead of people complaining about it's deletion. Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr Strangelove: So I guess my two cents boils down to urging potential thread deleters to think to yourself (general you, not specifically Aros or anyone), "Is there someone who might get some use out of this now or in the future?" And then maybe give a days warning or so, so that it can be saved for people like me. I get that if a thread is offensive or too far gone or personally insulting that it might still be the "right" thing for a person to do to delete it (debatable, but again, I can't find it in me to have a strong opinion on the subject. The benefits of lurking I suppose). I just really wish I could read that thread instead of people complaining about it's deletion.
That's a good idea. I already stated that I think I should have contacted the mod before deleting. But I think giving a warning might have been better. If only to allow myself a little time to cool down and to allow others to know that I was serious.
My only concern would be people reposting parts of the thread, especially out of context. Well, at least it wouldn't be my name slapped all over the thread.
Thanks for coming out of lurker-dom to post. Gave me something to think about.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Before deleting which threads, exactly? As for taking some time to cool down, perhaps taking time to decide which self-serving version of motive was the real motive. So far it's been flipping the board in frustration, unconsidered reaction, a form of forum vigilantism to teach trolls a lesson, or a pointed commentary on the evils of frank discussion about public decency laws.
It can't be all of these things at the same time.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Rakeesh: You're making it extremely difficult for Aros to choose to do the right thing in the future.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I sometimes believe six impossible things before breakfast.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I would credit you with the capacity to do so, as well as the good will not to be a schmuck about it.
-------
BlackBlade,
Yes, well so far I've seen nothing to indicate he would actually be inclined to do so with respect to this issue. He's still being deceptive about what actually went on in the threads in question, he hasn't actually apologized (apologies aren't 'it's too bad this happened, but here's why I was right to do so'), and he still hasn't made up his mind as to what the real intent was.
If he wants to drop it, he has to actually drop it, not continually justify it while taking swipes.
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: As for taking some time to cool down, perhaps taking time to decide which self-serving version of motive was the real motive. So far it's been flipping the board in frustration, unconsidered reaction, a form of forum vigilantism to teach trolls a lesson, or a pointed commentary on the evils of frank discussion about public decency laws.
It can't be all of these things at the same time.
Why can't it?
And again, for the fourteenth million time, I had no problem with the "frank discussion about public decency laws". I had problems with the comments on child molestation, the direct statement that my daughter would be sexually abused because I opened doors for her (due to unrealistic expectations about sex relations), and the link to topless women. Do I need to be more explicit? I've been self-censoring up until now for decency. How indecent do we need to get? As indecent as the last thread?
I want to call you an idiot right now. But I'm not going to. I wish I could tell you to meet me, after school, at the monkey bars. But that wouldn't solve anything either.
Of course I took it personal.
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I would credit you with the capacity to do so, as well as the good will not to be a schmuck about it.
-------
BlackBlade,
He's still being deceptive about what actually went on in the threads in question, he hasn't actually apologized (apologies aren't 'it's too bad this happened, but here's why I was right to do so'), and he still hasn't made up his mind as to what the real intent was.
I haven't been deceptive. I've given many descriptions of contributing factors to why I deleted the thread. No, I haven't been graphic before. But I guess you'll be the monkey on my back.
And if you'll actually read this thread (as I'm pretty sure you hadn't read all of the deleted thread), and maybe the OTHER thread on this topic, you'll see that I actually used the words "I apologize" several times. I thought I was being sincere. And I tried to communicate some of the reasons I was frustrated.
Whatever, man. . . .
[ February 15, 2013, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: Aros ]
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:And again, for the fourteenth million time, I had no problem with the "frank discussion about public decency laws". I had problems with the comments on child molestation, the direct statement that my daughter would be sexually abused because I opened doors for her (due to unrealistic expectations about sex relations), and the link to topless women. Do I need to be more explicit? I've been self-censoring up until now for decency. How indecent do we need to get? As indecent as the last thread?
Yeah, the link wasn't to topless women, but even if it was the appropriate non-tantrum thing to do would've been to slap a NSFW label on it or report it to moderation. Certainly not delete it and then go on to delete others. As for child molestation, no one can even decide if you're accurate or not. And as for your daughter being sexually abused, that part of the discussion where your daughter was even *mentioned* was early in the thread, and it didn't happen as you describe it anyway.
As for why it can't be all of those things at once, it's because several of them are exclusive motivations. You cannot have both put no thought into it and have been intended a broader, meta rejection of trolls.
And as for apologies, well I didn't know all that was necessary for them to be sincere and honest was the words 'i apologize'. Now that I do know, though-I apologize for offending your sensibilities, though I was well within my rights to do so and you shouldn't have had such sensibilities anyway.
[ February 15, 2013, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Rakeesh ]
Posted by Aros (Member # 4873) on :
I'm done with this thread. I might have thrown a tantrum in another thread, but someone else is throwing one here. And it's old.
If anyone else has any questions, you can IM me.
Best,
Aros
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I'd probably never do it, but I'm not concerned with others who do.
Out of curiosity: How would you feel about a mod deleting someone else's post without warning?
Aros: Just for the record, I don't have any particular ill will towards you and will happily argue with you again in the future. I think it was a stupid thing to do, and I hope next time you handle it differently, but... Oh well. Everyone makes mistakes. What matters is whether or not you learn from them. Try to do so, yeah?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I'd probably never do it, but I'm not concerned with others who do.
Out of curiosity: How would you feel about a mod deleting someone else's post without warning?
Depends on the reason for the deletion. If it's because the post violated the TOS, I've got no problem.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I'd probably never do it, but I'm not concerned with others who do.
Out of curiosity: How would you feel about a mod deleting someone else's post without warning?
Depends on the reason for the deletion. If it's because the post violated the TOS, I've got no problem.
What if it's just because they felt it was bad, but there were no complaints about it from other posters and it was not a violation of the TOS?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Bad how?
If the moderator feels it violates the TOS-- and I do not think the mods need to consult the community-- then he has the right to delete the post. He also has the obligation to explain why the post was removed.
It is possible that the mod may be wrong--even morally wrong-- depending on circumstances.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
Okay.
I was thinking of a circumstance where the mod explicitly realizes that the post is not a violation of any rule and he has no basis in the rules of the community/TOS/etc. to delete the post.
But he doesn't like it anyway. So he deletes it.
Good? Bad? Doesn't matter?
I'm trying (and failing?) to draw a parallel. Because Aros didn't just delete his post, right? He deleted a few hundred other posts made by other people. But maybe the standard for him is different than it would be for a mod anyway.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
It is. A mod is trusted due to his judgement, and his/her job is to help regulate the traffic on the forum.
Aros isn't a mod, so he doesn't get the same leeway.
I don't like thread deletion, but it isn't the worst thing in the world. That being said, I've done it, although the rare occasion I did was much more clear cut, and I don't think anyone disagreed with the choice, at least not strongly. I also gave notice it was about to be deleted, IIRC> It was years ago....
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Yes, the parallel fails. For one, a member of this community and the mod have different responsibilities and powers. Secondly, the mod has a job, not personal ownership, where Aros is arguing that it was HIS thread. C: one post being removed does not shut down ten pages of discussion by at least a dozen different people, about several different topics. 5, Aros deleted unrelated threads just to be a jerk.
The parallel that makes sense from my point of view would be the mod deleting every single thread because one of them was not to his liking, and he had the power to do it. And since he had the power, it must be his "right".
What Aros did is crap. But when we remove the ability of thread starters to delete whole threads out of irk then it will have all been worth it. Until then, it's just a big crap sandwich, come get your bite while it is still hot and fresh!
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
my previous statement i think just .. holds
just put it to a community vote
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Seconded!
Posted by ZachC (Member # 12709) on :
I haven't been on the forum in a while, so when I checked in about an hour ago, I started reading throughout this entire thread.
I have to admit, it seems pretty uncharacteristic for you guys to become so heated towards another poster. At times the discourse resembled a pack of wolves circling their prey.
But I do see where you are coming from. Having read the Chivalry thread through numerous times, I understand that having the entire conversation deleted in an arbitrary motion, with somewhat questionable motives, is frustrating. But did you all not go too hard on Aros? No matter what you perceptions of Aros' thread were, his views, no matter how much you disagree, deserve respect too.
I still don't know where I stand on the issue. An my opinion doesn't really matter considering I never posted in the thread in question. I just thought it was interesting to see some of you, who normally remain somewhat reserved and civil, act so volatile in this thread.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:No matter what you perceptions of Aros' thread were, his views, no matter how much you disagree, deserve respect too.
Which views? The opinions he voiced in the Chivalry thread, which he didn't respect enough to keep around? Or his belief that threads which violate his sense of propriety should be eradicated from existence?
Posted by ZachC (Member # 12709) on :
I believe Aros made the point numerous times that he believed the thread had evolved to the point that the original goal was achieved. And at that point the thread had become inappropriate in nature.
Whether or not you agree with him is irrelevant. He made his decision, which was his to make, and the issue is over. If anyone feels so strongly about the issue of chivalry, then they are free to make their own thread on the topic, which they in turn will be able to keep or delete at their discretion.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
ZachC,
A few things to note.
quote:I have to admit, it seems pretty uncharacteristic for you guys to become so heated towards another poster. At times the discourse resembled a pack of wolves circling their prey.
Counting myself, there are really only about...3-5 people I would imagine could fit this characterization. The rest have plainly and politely stated their objections and their reasons, and left the discussion naturally as will happen. Considering the number of participants whose discussions were deleted by Aros in a fit of temper (or vigilance against trolls, or protecting the children, he still hasn't picked a motive), the wolf pack is pretty small indeed.
quote:But I do see where you are coming from. Having read the Chivalry thread through numerous times, I understand that having the entire conversation deleted in an arbitrary motion, with somewhat questionable motives, is frustrating. But did you all not go too hard on Aros? No matter what you perceptions of Aros' thread were, his views, no matter how much you disagree, deserve respect too.
First of all, I don't grant that everyone's views deserve respect simply by virtue of being believed by someone. It should be said that Aros believes in that notion even *less* than I and others do, by the way. Second, the motives weren't 'questionable', they're thoroughly contradictory and in several places openly dishonest. Plainly put, Aros is not telling the truth about what that thread had become. If you've read it, you'll know what I mean. Perhaps he believes it was.
quote:Whether or not you agree with him is irrelevant. He made his decision, which was his to make, and the issue is over. If anyone feels so strongly about the issue of chivalry, then they are free to make their own thread on the topic, which they in turn will be able to keep or delete at their discretion.
Why is it irrelevant? And yes, the decision was his to make, but it impacted others. It's as was mentioned earlier, in response to a comparison he made himself: if someone flips the board over when they're upset, that isn't a decision that ought to be accorded respect. And as for wolves circling, no one can know what might have happened with certainty, but I suspect that had the Aros's response not been what it was-contradictory explanations, dishonest defenses, and plays at apathy-this particular discussion wouldn't have gone the way it did either.
Posted by ZachC (Member # 12709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: ZachC,
A few things to note.
quote:I have to admit, it seems pretty uncharacteristic for you guys to become so heated towards another poster. At times the discourse resembled a pack of wolves circling their prey.
Counting myself, there are really only about...3-5 people I would imagine could fit this characterization. The rest have plainly and politely stated their objections and their reasons, and left the discussion naturally as will happen. Considering the number of participants whose discussions were deleted by Aros in a fit of temper (or vigilance against trolls, or protecting the children, he still hasn't picked a motive), the wolf pack is pretty small indeed.
quote:But I do see where you are coming from. Having read the Chivalry thread through numerous times, I understand that having the entire conversation deleted in an arbitrary motion, with somewhat questionable motives, is frustrating. But did you all not go too hard on Aros? No matter what you perceptions of Aros' thread were, his views, no matter how much you disagree, deserve respect too.
First of all, I don't grant that everyone's views deserve respect simply by virtue of being believed by someone. It should be said that Aros believes in that notion even *less* than I and others do, by the way. Second, the motives weren't 'questionable', they're thoroughly contradictory and in several places openly dishonest. Plainly put, Aros is not telling the truth about what that thread had become. If you've read it, you'll know what I mean. Perhaps he believes it was.
quote:Whether or not you agree with him is irrelevant. He made his decision, which was his to make, and the issue is over. If anyone feels so strongly about the issue of chivalry, then they are free to make their own thread on the topic, which they in turn will be able to keep or delete at their discretion.
Why is it irrelevant? And yes, the decision was his to make, but it impacted others. It's as was mentioned earlier, in response to a comparison he made himself: if someone flips the board over when they're upset, that isn't a decision that ought to be accorded respect. And as for wolves circling, no one can know what might have happened with certainty, but I suspect that had the Aros's response not been what it was-contradictory explanations, dishonest defenses, and plays at apathy-this particular discussion wouldn't have gone the way it did either.
All of these are valid points. Again, I never posted in the thread and only today started to follow this particular discussion. I only wished to play devil's advocate in this situation because to me, no one else seemed to be trying to empathize with Aros at all.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by ZachC: Whether or not you agree with him is irrelevant. He made his decision, which was his to make, and the issue is over.
The issue isn't over as long as people are talking about it. Only the act that generated the discussion is finalized.
(the issue was extra super doubleplusnotover while aros was lecturing and patronizing and arguing his decision)
Posted by vegimo (Member # 12618) on :
It's over except for the posturing.
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
Posturing??
Calling all sams
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
AROS IS A TERRIBLE PERSON AND I AM AWESOME
LOOK AT ME
I AM RENDERING JUDGMENT ON AROS
LOOK AT ME
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
where the heck are you anyway
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
The call came from inside your house... Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: The call came from inside your house...
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
he didn't come home last night
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Look on the front of your medicine cabinet. If you don't see him there, turn on the light.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
oh man, i was parkour the whole time! the joke never gets old!
wait, medicine cabinet
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
You must have a lot of medicine.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Well he is nuttier than a bag of ferrets.
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
Ferrets aren't very nutty...They're crunchy, yes, but that's because of the bones...unless you're eating the parts I'm not.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
I believe it should be, "nuttier then squirrel turds".
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
But am I tagged as the wood, or are you?
Trick question?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)