posted
Well a club is acceptable because it's something you could just find on the way to meeting the mob. Y'know, forming an unruly mob isn't something you exactly prepare for. What if you're in the local tavern and someone comes and tells you it's time to lay the smack down? You wouldn't have a fiery garden weasel then, would you?
But obviously you wouldn't be turned away, either. Clubs are acceptable. And really, being good and plastered isn't a bad thing. You're just supposed to do your mob-equipment experiments at the scene of the riot, not at HOME.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
::Notices that clubs and spades are handled:: If I bring the hearts and diamonds, does anyone want to play bridge?
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's basically a crude version of Hatrack = Sex, Drugs, Rock & Roll.
They think they are way 'open' minded when it comes to everything. They think they are far beyond Hatrack, and Gossip about everyone, and everything.
Simply put, it's a gossip circle that really likes to talk about sex and drugs.
It really isn't for me, as the past and present show. Some apparently like it though. To each their own.
Posts: 189 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If someone asks me what I think I tell them.
Even if they don't ask?
Cheese, You must have an uncanny ability to weigh a situation and find the very worst in it. I don't envy you your talent.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyDove: ::Notices that clubs and spades are handled:: If I bring the hearts and diamonds, does anyone want to play bridge?
It'd give those of us in the back something to do while we were waiting for the folks at the front of the mob to break through Mike's front gate. I say bring 'em! I'll try not to bleed all over the cards ::eyes Rakeesh resentfully::
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
There have been discussions about controlled substances before, and even totally illegal drugs. It's been awhile, though-Danzig is I think the most common participator in such conversations, and I haven't seen him on in awhile.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is a thread where people talk about sex, though it is clearly marked. The discussion there can be quite frank, and there have been a few posts that toed the line. Mike is pretty hands-on as moderators go so things get taken care of quickly. Admittedly, the discussion would be uncomfortable for some people. The circumscision discussion over there was more detailed.
The sex thread isn't one of those places people go to pick up chicks, or to get off on purient discriptions of people's sex lives, but I can see why younger, um, unmarried people might be uncomfortable with it. Which is, I think, why it's clear from the title what the thread is about.
ANYWHERE on sake, if someone starts to get their feelings hurt or get nasty with another poster, Mike usually steps in and asks people to be nice, too.
There are a lot of things Sake allows that Hatrack doesn't -- but there are a lot of things that people do here that would not be tolerated at sake.
Different places are different. I mean, duh. Wouldn't it be dull if everyone lived in New York and no one ever went to Chicago? If you're happier at Hatrack, good on yer.
I've been to sake more lately, because there's a lot less people talking at each other without listening to or understanding those who reasonably disagree with them.
I remember when two people on opposite sides of an issue could talk reasonably here and come away with a better understanding of each other's positions, and even respect for each other personally. I miss that.
Also, I can check it once a day for fifteen minutes and be totally caught up on everything.
Anyway,I'm sure it's much too slow at sake for most of your online interaction needs.
posted
No, I understand. And I chose not to view it as a "what's wrong with Hatrack post," because mostly it wasn't, but as a "What's right with Sake" post.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would it be fair to say, without intending to bag on Hatrack, that Hatrack has a lot more people, and, aside from its many wonderful qualities, lacks Sake's intimacy, and that it's also inevitable in a larger pool of people that there will be more friction? And that, Hatrack being largely self-moderated, direct rudeness will be "gotten away with" for longer here--which takes nothing away from Hatrack's strengths?
(And it's not about the moderation. To my knowledge, Mike has never really used his i[]powers,[/i] only his influence. But the thing is, those of us who are regulars there, are friends. And so we feel badly if we hurt one of our friends. There are, among the wonderful people here, some who will not feel badly if they hurt me, because they a) don't view me as a real person, 2) consider me an ideological opponent, or III) think I'm a jerk. Likewise, I have been guilty of being less than kind here on occasion, because there are people here who fail my troll test. It seems wrong to say that rude people deserve rudeness in return, but sometimes I get angry at people for "messing up" what I perceive as "my" Hatrack--because of what Hatrack has meant to me. Neither of those things is as likely to happen at Sake.
Is that a fair way of explaining why I feel so comfortable there without taking anything away from here?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry. My point was that the two are different. Which one you like best depends on what you want from an online forum you visit.
I need lower volume, in a couple of key ways.
I also prefer sour, tart or slightly bitter flavors to sweet or salty flavors, 'cause I'm weird like that. Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I don't like the What's Wrong With Hatrack posts.
You don't seem to have a problem with Dagonee's thread; you even posted to it. Is it a difference in phrasing or tone, or something more substantive? Because honestly I see no difference between what Olivet and Icarus have said here and what you just posted on Dag's thread. I assume that you do see a difference, but I'm not sure what it is...
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It feels like saying "I love my family because it's so much better than that one over there. Yours."
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
So you object because you feel it diminishes Sake?
When I read twink's question, I thought that I knew how you'd respond. I thought you'd say something like it was not productive to talk about the merits and shortcomings of one of your children in direct comparison to the other.
BTW, though I believe that this is often true when talking about one's children, it is frequently not true when talking about things. Especially when the criticism is balanced toward the positive side, as Olivet's and Ic's posts were.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it diminishes everything/one involved. Forum participation and loyalty isn't a zero sum game.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: It feels like saying "I love my family because it's so much better than that one over there. Yours."
Hm. This may tie in to why I don't really agree with your position on the Mormon President thread, either. I think saying things by implication is approximately the same as saying them explicitly, so I see no significant difference between saying "I'm right" and saying "you're wrong" in cases where the former necessarily implies the latter.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
My children, my husband and I are all more comfortable with my side of the family than with his. This is just something we all understand, and it goes without saying.
If we were to say publicly that we are all more comfortable with my family because they are more relaxed and accepting of us, it would be socially awkward.
It would also be true. All sides of that situation are aware of this fact, but it would uncomfortable to openly admit it. Maybe that's the sort of thing going on here. I'm not sure.
I also love Hatrack, though. I just can't spend the time necessary to keep up with everyone.It will always be special to me, even when I recognize very few of the posters.
This is the longest I've been here in weeks.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't like praising one forum by comparing Hatrack to it unfavorably.
It does kind of diminish sake as well. It's saying that it's main virtue is NotHatrack. Why is that kind of thing even necessary? If the goal is to praise it, isn't it possible to one likes the small population, sex threads, and California atmosphere without bringing up another place?
--
It's okay, of course, to not be able to take either place. It's okay to take breaks. It's okay for all of that.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey kat, I just made a post on the Mormon Pres thread that I think the second half of applies to this discussion, too. Basically, I think we're running into another cultural difference like the conversation dkw and I had with Tatiana and JT a few weeks ago about Northern V. Southern manners. Not saying either way is right or wrong, but I think it would be productive if we recognized that there is a cultural difference in the way people look at and discuss things at work here. I don't feel that comparitive discussion diminishes anything, as long as you're respectful and polite I think it adds clarity. I understand that you don't feel that way, but I hope you understand that the people doing it aren't doing it to be hurtful, they're doing it because that's the way they are used to discussing things and in their culture it is the accepted manner of discourse. Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd invite you all to God's Country, Indiana, but we really are trying to keep it a secret. *Smacks Head and mutters "shut up" to himself*
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
::nods:: I think that you're right, ElJay. It hadn't occurred to me, but it makes sense.
Kat, what do you mean by "california atmosphere"? I was following the rest of your post, but I'm kind of scratching my head over that part of it.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It felt like a total epiphany to me when I thought of it in the other thread, but I fully expect no one else will see it that way. Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
I think that you've hit it on the head. I didn't see the recent thread on North vs South, but I remember the old one and it amazed me how different the rules of polite socializing are from one coast to another.
I remember in Lost Boys, Card saying something to the effect that in the South, "Yes" means maybe and "Maybe" means no. To a Southerner, I'm sure this sounds gentle; as a Westerner, it sounds a bit disingenuous.
I suppose, in cases like this, it is more important to understand the intent than the verbage.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I object to the use of the phrase "hands on" in referring to Mike while mentioning the sex thread in the same sentence.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
