Hatrack River
Home   |   About Orson Scott Card   |   News & Reviews   |   OSC Library   |   Forums   |   Contact   |   Links
Research Area   |   Writing Lessons   |   Writers Workshops   |   OSC at SVU   |   Calendar   |   Store
E-mail this page
Hatrack River Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » How did people get so harsh towards children? (Page 6)

  This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   
Author Topic: How did people get so harsh towards children?
Sean Monahan
Member
Member # 9334

 - posted      Profile for Sean Monahan   Email Sean Monahan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I must grant you, you have an uncanny ability to make any thread on this forum all about you.
Posts: 976 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sinflower
Member
Member # 12228

 - posted      Profile for sinflower           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Dogs are different. I have three dogs that know better but one of them is ruled by her nose and stomach. Some men know better but are ruled by their penis and cheat on their wives....can you blame their nature?
But as you've said, your beagle is stupid and her "only" brain power is devoted to her nose and stomach. While men may be stupid, I optimistically choose to believe that they have some brain power left to devote to other things than their penises, thereby making your analogy flawed ^____^
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Sean Monahan:
I must grant you, you have an uncanny ability to make any thread on this forum all about you.

Me, or Malanthrop?

I don't think it's right to hit a dog for being a dog. Bernie would do some annoying things and I never hit him as he was just a rabbit doing rabbit things.
Like chewing up my playstation controller. Oddly enough, I miss being driven crazy by him. I'd always feel very bad if I yelled at him and I'd apologize.
Repeatedly.

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sean Monahan
Member
Member # 9334

 - posted      Profile for Sean Monahan   Email Sean Monahan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Syn, not you.
Posts: 976 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
malanthrop
Member
Member # 11992

 - posted      Profile for malanthrop           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess I have higher expectations of dogs than rabbits. A rabbit is to a dog what a cow is to a horse. Big difference. Cow's are stupid. The beagle wasn't stupid, she couldn't control her urges.

My point isn't about me or my dog. My point was about our natural inclination. Does our natural inclination excuse our behavior. I have three dogs that know it is wrong but one can't help herself. Pedophiles, homosexuals and adulterers can't help themselves either.

Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Glenn Arnold:
quote:
So the parent is tired, frustrated, angry -- losing control. And your claim is that if they have a controlled spanking plan in place they will be able to restrain themselves from impulsive hitting and implement the spanking plan. But if they have a non-spanking discipline plan in place they will not be able to restrain themselves? Why?
Because the non-spanking discipline plan didn't work. That's the whole point.

The plan at this point is not to control the spanking, but to control the situation. This is the situation where the parent is out of other responses. What do you do now, when you've sworn you won't hit the child, but you can't think of anything else to do? Let the child see that their parent isn't in control of themselves or the situation?

So what happens if the spanking doesn't work?

Also you missed the point of my question. Your argument was that if a parent doesn't have a spanking plan in place because they are against spanking the kid will be hit worse. That relies on the assumption that the parent has lost control of him/herself and is doing something that he/she considers to be wrong. If the parent is in control enough to step back and use the controlled spanking back-up plan, why are they not able to step back without it?

[ March 14, 2010, 08:38 AM: Message edited by: dkw ]

Posts: 9793 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I resent gays being compared to pedofiles, but more so I resent rabbits being called stupid.
Rabbits aren't stupid. Bernie was pretty brilliant. He was such an adorable big bunny. *hearts*

I'm with DKW on this...

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glenn Arnold
Member
Member # 3192

 - posted      Profile for Glenn Arnold   Email Glenn Arnold         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
So what happens if the spanking doesn't work?
Then you won't have been out of control and spanked your kid in anger. I suppose we can carry this further and say "what happens when your kid pushes you so far that you don't make the ultimatum, you just hit?" To which I reply, well, what would you do in that case? I've never done it. Having the plan prevented it.

quote:
Your argument was that if a parent doesn't have a spanking plan in place because they are against spanking the kid will be hit worse.
I've seen it happen. Call it anecdotal if you want. Some parents spank, some of them insist they will never spank. I've seen two cases where the parents who insisted they would never spank lost it and slapped their kids across the face. Hard. And I know that they have hit their kids at other times, but it must have been very embarrassing for them to know that I'd seen, because they had both had the same argument with me that you are having now.
Posts: 3670 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I assure you I'm not having it out of embarassment. I would truly like to understand why you think having a plan to spank is a necessary thing. So far it isn't making logical sense to me.

If I follow your last series right, you're saying that a parent has to be willing to spank if they've run out of other responses so as not to let the child see that the parent is not in control of the situation. But if the spank doesn't work either, it's okay to stop there. You don't have to escalate it further in order to not let the child see that you're not in control. Why is spanking the dividing line?

Posts: 9793 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raymond Arnold
Member
Member # 11712

 - posted      Profile for Raymond Arnold   Email Raymond Arnold         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I assure you I'm not having it out of embarassment.
He wasn't saying it was embarrassing for you, it was embarrassing for the other people to be seen hitting their child after having this kind of conversation about not hitting their children.

quote:
You don't have to escalate it further in order to not let the child see that you're not in control.
When you run out of other options (which is when we're saying spanking becomes a reasonable option in the first place), then not doing anything or walking away to cool off is not remaining control of the situation at all - you are allowing your child to continue doing whatever is they are
doing (hitting other children, stealing, destroying property, playing with matches or whatever is they are doing that absolutely needs to stop).

If everything other than spanking your child hasn't worked, its a safe assumption that the child is going to keep doing it. If you are a good parent, this should happen very rarely. But sometimes kids really are that obnoxious and sometimes circumstances will cause even the best parents to slip and let things get out of control. However many alternate plans you have (and you should have many), there is always a chance that they will all fail, and when that happens you either have one additional plan, or you don't.

And yes, sometimes a spanking won't be enough, (I have an anecdote about that I might or might not share, haven't decided yet), but a) that will rarely be the case, and b) if you're at that point then the situation is either very out of control or very specific, and there are few options that will make for a particularly healthy resolution.

Posts: 4105 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You're taking my quote a little out of context there. It was part of summarizing your dad's position -- my understanding of what he's said is that if spanking doesn't work then you don't escalate further. That is my question -- why is spanking the dividing line that you "have to" go to, but not further?

By the way, I hadn't made the connection that you two were related before this thread. Congrats, Glenn, you must have done something right. [Wink]

Posts: 9793 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scholarette
Member
Member # 11540

 - posted      Profile for scholarette           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I didn't realize Glenn and Raymond where related either. [Smile]
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raymond Arnold
Member
Member # 11712

 - posted      Profile for Raymond Arnold   Email Raymond Arnold         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I didn't realize Glenn and Raymond where related either.
Wait, until, like, now? As in, not even earlier in this thread when we were referring to each other?
Posts: 4105 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scholarette
Member
Member # 11540

 - posted      Profile for scholarette           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, I realized earlier in this thread when the reference was made. [Smile]
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
When you run out of other options (which is when we're saying spanking becomes a reasonable option in the first place), then not doing anything or walking away to cool off is not remaining control of the situation at all - you are allowing your child to continue doing whatever is they are
In any circumstance where I'm assuming you think you have 'run out of other options,' you're not supposed to either walk away and/or not do anything. There are other things you can/should do.

This book covers a lot of them, as well as the applied study of the countereffectual mechanisms of resorting to spanking.

http://www.amazon.com/Discipline-Book-Better-Behaved-Child-Birth/dp/0316779032

Posts: 14151 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*sigh* The Sears *hearts*
I love them so much because they understand that babies are babies!

I love how Martha Sears described taking her toddlers out and they are absorbed in some task. Instead of just yanking them up and making them scream and cry, she'll say, "bye bye" to their toys with them.
It's so sweet. Their baby book is so useful. Those folks KNOW about babies and children. Plus they have 8 kids.
Who seem to like them! I adore them!

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
malanthrop
Member
Member # 11992

 - posted      Profile for malanthrop           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Synesthesia:
I resent gays being compared to pedofiles, but more so I resent rabbits being called stupid.
Rabbits aren't stupid. Bernie was pretty brilliant. He was such an adorable big bunny. *hearts*

I'm with DKW on this...

My comparison between gays and pedophiles had nothing to do with victimization. Consensual behavior between homosexuals harms no one and is not really comparable to pedophilia. What they do have in common is their natural attraction. Pedophiles are naturally attracted to children, gays to each other and my beagle can't help but follow her nose. She knows she isn't suppose to according to the rules of the house...she can't help her nature. Pedophiles and gays can't help what they are attracted to. A cow will eat itself to death if it gets into an alfalfa field. The only thing that separates gays and pedophiles is the legality of their action. Both will continue in their behavior, despite the consequences. My beagle will eat my plate knowing she is going to be in trouble.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The only thing that separates gays and pedophiles is the legality of their action.
And, of course, the morality of their action.
Posts: 36937 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The only thing that separates gays and pedophiles is the legality of their action.
Just like the only thing that separates Malanthrop and pedophiles is that they can't resist molesting children and he can't resist being a complete asshole.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scholarette
Member
Member # 11540

 - posted      Profile for scholarette           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Looking at the gays I know, if there was an actual demonstrable harm to their actions, they probably would not engage in them. It is of course, impossible to say for certain based on a what if, but expecting someone to not engage in an activity that brings joy and love to their life just because is a little unreasonable. A pedophile though, can see a demonstrable harm in their actions and continue them anyway- which seems like a pretty significant difference to me.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
quote:
The only thing that separates gays and pedophiles is the legality of their action.
Just like the only thing that separates Malanthrop and pedophiles is that they can't resist molesting children and he can't resist being a complete asshole.
Whistled.
Posts: 10132 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dabbler
Member
Member # 6443

 - posted      Profile for dabbler   Email dabbler         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think malanthrop wouldn't have a problem with the following:

quote:
My comparison between heterosexuals and pedophiles had nothing to do with victimization. Consensual behavior between heterosexuals harms no one and is not really comparable to pedophilia. What they do have in common is their natural attraction. Pedophiles are naturally attracted to children, heterosexuals to the opposite gender.. The only thing that separates heterosexuals and pedophiles is the legality of their action. Both will continue in their behavior, despite the consequences.

Posts: 1260 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
quote:
The only thing that separates gays and pedophiles is the legality of their action.
Just like the only thing that separates Malanthrop and pedophiles is that they can't resist molesting children and he can't resist being a complete asshole.
This ... is not a situation where it's obvious he's being an asshole at all, he even feels confliction over the event, and it is not an action i categorically disagree with, because serial child abusers can chew broken glass and die for all I care in most situations.
Posts: 14151 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The thing I have issue with is Malanthrop casually comparing gay people with pedophiles or animals, who cannot control their urges. It's disgusting, and offensive, and he's either being a complete asshole or a crude bigot.

If you can't tell, I'm pissed that this kind of obnoxious, offensive crap is ignored and tolerated here so frequently of late.

It's sad that I get whistled for calling out an asshole, but there seems to be little outrage at his comparison of gays to sex offenders and animals. Classy.

Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:

It's sad that I get whistled for calling out an asshole, but there seems to be little outrage at his comparison of gays to sex offenders and animals. Classy.

It's not really for a BAD reason, or because people don't find that outrageous, it's that he's worn out outrage because of his consistent history. it's like how Snidely Whiplash is just flat-out an evil bastard (tying innocent women to train tracks? seriously? that's freaking grisly) but he's such a hapless caricature that people pretty much only laugh the more he tries.
Posts: 14151 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
The thing I have issue with is Malanthrop casually comparing gay people with pedophiles or animals, who cannot control their urges. It's disgusting, and offensive, and he's either being a complete asshole or a crude bigot.

If you can't tell, I'm pissed that this kind of obnoxious, offensive crap is ignored and tolerated here so frequently of late.

It's sad that I get whistled for calling out an asshole, but there seems to be little outrage at his comparison of gays to sex offenders and animals. Classy.

I'm not very tolerant of it. I got to admit you're rather right, but I'm too polite to say so...

or am I? [Confused]
It's too exhausting to argue with folks like that. I've retired. [Sleep]

Posts: 9883 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
mal's a troll. I don't think many people would argue with that. I've long since stopped giving any regard to the things he says, in part because I'm pretty sure he's playing a role to provoke reactions out of people. I don't see the things he says as being ignored or tolerated. Rather, people seem to spring up to contest with him, often by just hurling TOS violating personal insults and curses at him.

The thing is, mal, while he says many odious things, doesn't, as far as I can tell, break the TOS. He rarely even directly addresses individual people here. There's a little bit of gray area here, but with his opponents offering up constant nastiness and TOS violations in the face of him behaving poorly, but within the bounds of the TOS, I don't see how PJ could ever justify using it.

As much as I would like to, I certainly can't stop you from giving mal exactly what he posts here for and I can't make you act like an adult. I can whistle you when you commit blatant violations of the user's agreement here. And I choose to do so, because I judge these reactions as not only not helping, but actively contributing to the problem and restricting any moderator resolution of it.

Posts: 10132 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think Tom handled it pretty well.

I'm not sure how name-calling is likely to make the current atmosphere better.

Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by dabbler:
I think malanthrop wouldn't have a problem with the following:

quote:
My comparison between heterosexuals and pedophiles had nothing to do with victimization. Consensual behavior between heterosexuals harms no one and is not really comparable to pedophilia. What they do have in common is their natural attraction. Pedophiles are naturally attracted to children, heterosexuals to the opposite gender.. The only thing that separates heterosexuals and pedophiles is the legality of their action. Both will continue in their behavior, despite the consequences.

Well noted.
Posts: 13849 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The "despite the consequences" is what leads me to discount dabbler's edit.
Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ignoring Mal obviously doesn't work. He's not ever going to be restricted from being offensive or rude or obnoxious. I think it is silly to tiptoe around the fact that he's a tool and a troll and interact with him as though he should be given as many chances as necessary to eventually decide to be a contributing member of the community.

He's never going to be banned, his posts won't be locked or removed. He's a pustule on the board.

Yes, I'm stooping to his level. I find his behavior repulsive and vile and he's allowed to continue trolling a website that I enjoy for its generally high-quality discussion. I'm frustrated that nothing is being done, so I'm speaking out.

Even if it's unproductive, it sure feels good to just be upfront and say, yeah, he's being a complete jerk. Let's not pretend he's just misunderstood.

Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Smile]

So, to bring this back around to the discussion at hand, you decided that swatting his behind was a good idea because it would make you feel better.

I don't agree it was a good idea at all.

Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dabbler
Member
Member # 6443

 - posted      Profile for dabbler   Email dabbler         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So is the problem acknowledging that being homosexual has consequences? I'd be willing to grant that in the abstract. Being a female has consequences in terms of female-specific experiences (menstration), choices (women's clothing, for example), and reaction toward myself purely for being female. Those are specific to being female and wouldn't necessarily occur if I were male. Being homosexual has consequences as well. I don't assign negative outcome or negative value to the word consequence and I'm not sure it needs to. Quick dictionary perusal has the first definitions having to do with the order of sequence: antecedent - outcome.

Malanthrop chose homosexual as his comparison to pedophiles and it's surely disruptive. But when he said "Consensual behavior between homosexuals harms no one and is not really comparable to pedophilia" I took it to mean that he doesn't think homosexuals' behavior is harmful. So why not give him some slack and see what his point might be, instead of working yourself into a lather?

Posts: 1260 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Even if it's unproductive, it sure feels good to just be upfront and say, yeah, he's being a complete jerk.
It feels good for mal too. This is the feeling of power he comes here for.
Posts: 10132 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Papa Janitor
Member
Member # 7795

 - posted      Profile for Papa Janitor           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
MightyCow, malanthrop's posts in this thread, while interpretable as offensive, do not of themselves violate the rules of the forum. Your posts do, and clearly. Moreso, you're completely aware that they do, and defiantly post them anyway. As I've said elsewhere quite recently, I find this to be more problematic than someone having disagreeable opinions. Please refrain from the personal attacks.
Posts: 441 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I find it problematic that you find it *more* problematic. Considering especially that the second behavior follows from the first, and not t'other way 'round. You've got the guy rubbing filth all over the place, intentionally, and because it doesn't technically violate the rules, it's cool? You'll do nothing about it? Yeah, can't say I like that plan too much.
Posts: 9555 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sad that there seems to be a permissiveness to condone homophobic behavior here, in what I find to be an otherwise excellent discussion board full of ethical, compassionate, intelligent people.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Considering especially that the second behavior follows from the first, and not t'other way 'round.
"Correlation does not imply causality."

It's sort of like terrorism, actually, and how to respond to it. Do we say that since some people blew up some airplanes, we have a drastic pruning of civil liberties, or would that be objectionable?

Do we say that because malanthrop is an noxious troll, it's perfectly acceptable to be noxious back? And anyway, he didn't say it was cool, and what do you want him to do about the behavior he just described? It is within the rules. Do you want the moderator to go beyond the forum rules? Exactly how much policy do you think Papa Janitor sets around here?

quote:
I'm sad that there seems to be a permissiveness to condone homophobic behavior here, in what I find to be an otherwise excellent discussion board full of ethical, compassionate, intelligent people.
It seems to me much more likely the 'permissiveness' you note is actually a willingness to leave malanthrop alone to be noxious. Heaven knows I'm far from the best at it, but at least I don't blame my failure on that level on the moderators for not endorsing my mistake.
Posts: 16403 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You could have chosen to respond intelligently, Mighty Cow. Instead, you decided to call malanthrop names.

You want...what, approbation for this behavior?

Like it or not, malanthrop's opinion was couched in civil terms. You can groan and moan and whine about how he's putting a smiling mask over the face of PURE EVIL, and you're just straight shooting; but you know what? Tom just proved that you can make the same point in a reasoned, intelligent way, without name calling, without cursing, without insulting anyone.

quote:
You've got the guy rubbing filth all over the place, intentionally, and because it doesn't technically violate the rules, it's cool? You'll do nothing about it? Yeah, can't say I like that plan too much.
You've benefited from this particular quirk of our moderators. Live and let live, says I.
Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hear, hear to all points. Complaining about the fire to the firefighters by spraying a flamethrower at the affected area seems to me to be a curious method of criticism.
Posts: 16403 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nice defending the homophobic troll.

I don't give a rip if you like what I said, this isn't about me trying to get more love.

I just think it's pretty pathetic how many people kind of don't mind that Mal is directly comparing gays to animals and pedophiles, but they get up in arms if I say asshole.

Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
MC, I agree that Mal's sentiments are orders of magnitude more offensive than your insults, but the rules of the forum, for better or worse, are such that the former is permitted and the latter is not.

*shrug*

I didn't make the rules but I'm not going to flaunt them just because I'm pissed off.

Posts: 3272 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rakeesh:
quote:
Do you want the moderator to go beyond the forum rules? Exactly how much policy do you think Papa Janitor sets around here?
Yes. And there have been plenty of times you have wanted him to be able to do that as well, I imagine. That the Cards keep his authority in a mason jar under the sink is unfortunate. It makes him an ineffective moderator- coming from someone who could use effective moderation occasionally.
Posts: 9555 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've already given my two cents on the issue but this acts as a pretty good micro-example of ONE of the issues that comes up when the block terms of service is used as your forum's 'rules' instead of what it is intended for (a cursory legal precaution).
Posts: 14151 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Nice defending the homophobic troll.

No one's defended him or his comments.
Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Nice defending the homophobic troll.
Actually, I at least was defending Papa Janitor against bogus accusations.

quote:
I don't give a rip if you like what I said, this isn't about me trying to get more love.
Yeah, this is about you acting like you're actually defending the entire community at large when actually what happened was that malanthrop pissed you off, and you responded in violation of the rules, got called on it, and got pissier about it. Your problem is that you seem to think that people ignoring malanthrop serves as 'condoning' his behavior. That's not the way it works in an online setting. Here, the most effective way of dealing with him is what thankfully most posters do, and you're criticizing them for: ignore him.

quote:
I just think it's pretty pathetic how many people kind of don't mind that Mal is directly comparing gays to animals and pedophiles, but they get up in arms if I say asshole.
Well, speaking strictly for myself, the reason you were wrong isn't because you were mean to mal. He's earned it many times over, after all. It's where you take that anger out on Papa Janitor while acting holier-than-thou, incidentally behaving the same way towards the community at large. You're not the neighborhood watchman. You're not Hatrack's defender. And you're definitely not Hatrack conscience or whistleblower.

But even if you were, that still wouldn't change the fact that Papa Janitor does not, unless I'm mistaken, set moderation policy around here. So what you're doing there is busting on the guy who's just doing his job to the extent possible, a job that's needed, by the way. And then your style of complaint makes his job even more needed, but don't by any means let that help you self-moderate your behavior. Because then, good heavens! A dumbass on the Internet might be able to be wrong about something without being called an asshole!

And that just cannot stand. Not while MightyCow's on the case!

----

Orincoro,

quote:
Yes. And there have been plenty of times you have wanted him to be able to do that as well, I imagine. That the Cards keep his authority in a mason jar under the sink is unfortunate. It makes him an ineffective moderator- coming from someone who could use effective moderation occasionally.
So given this problem, how exactly is criticizing the guy simply doing his imperfect job supposed to help the situation besides making you feel better? Furthermore, if you need effective moderation as you say, complaining that lapses are actually the fault of the imperfect moderators...well, it's not a very sympathetic or persuasive statement.
Posts: 16403 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't intend to place blame for what I do on anyone else. I simply point out that I myself would benefit from better moderation at times. Am I not allowed to think that? I know you think it, so am I not allowed to agree? It wasn't the thrust of my argument anyway, so whatever. As usual you have to be the interpreter of everything I say, as uncharitable as you are. Now go and complain about it on Sake where your posse can cackle along.
Posts: 9555 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jake
Member
Member # 206

 - posted      Profile for Jake           Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We've actually been thinking about changing the name of sake to "Rakeesh's Posse", just to try to be more accurate.
Posts: 997 | Registered: Jul 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've noticed that the troupe is more likely to act up when I haven't been spending quality time with them.

We'd been having problems with our next-to-oldest daughter; defiance, rudeness, screaming, even bullying. Standard punishment is a time-out, but it wasn't really working so well. This particular child doesn't respond to corporal punishment at all, either...having tried that course earlier in her life, and had it fail, we were at a loss of what exactly to do.

It turns out that thirty minutes at the YMCA with me paying close and positive attention to her did wonders. Like...day and night wonders, that have lasted far beyond the initial time investment. It was eye-opening to see how quickly and drastically her attitude improved.

Sometimes, the hunger for attention is more than just a discipline issue. She was needing attention, and positive reinforcement; looking back on that period of our lives, I can see that I had not been giving her much to go on. No amount of discipline, corporal or otherwise could have effectively resolved the problem, IMO. Because what she needed wasn't discipline, patience, or education of any sort-- she was starving for someone to take time with her.

I think many behavioral problems can be resolved by consistent application of casual one-on-one time between parent and child.

Posts: 14504 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Orincoro,

quote:
I don't intend to place blame for what I do on anyone else.
Sure you do. Your complaints imply you want Hatrack to be a better place. You appear to think that with better moderation, it would be a better place. You think you, personally, would sometimes benefit from better moderation thus making Hatrack a better place. Therefore the fact that Hatrack is not a better place than it is is because you are not moderated more effectively. And the blame for this is on, well, the moderators. So whether or not you intend to blame anyone else for what you do, that is in fact what you are clearly doing.

quote:
It wasn't the thrust of my argument anyway, so whatever. As usual you have to be the interpreter of everything I say, as uncharitable as you are. Now go and complain about it on Sake where your posse can cackle along.
It was what personalized your argument, though. It was why you, specifically were making the argument-why it mattered to you. And anyway, I replied to more than just your 'part of the reason I screw up sometimes is Papa Janitor' argument.

But 'interpreting'? Well, I suppose. A pretty damn good interpretation, though, however unpleasant you find it. Or else point out the link in the chain that isn't sound.

Anyway, as to Sakeriver, that's part of your problem. See, I can count the number of times I've seen you mentioned on Sakeriver in the past month on two hands at most. Probably one hand. And at least one of those times - this one - was me, complaining about your unjust criticism of Papa Janitor for failing to control your behavior...and I get the distinct impression that some folks are irritated by my mentioning it over there at all.

My point is, we're not over there talking about you and cutting on you when you're not looking. Hell, I'm not even a common poster over there these days. But if I was, they'd be my 'crew', not my posse.

Posts: 16403 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2