# Whole lot of



## HDRider

locking and stuff going on...


----------



## poppy

It's security for the Pope's visit.


----------



## wr

Perhaps the Korean spammers have taken over our member's identities


----------



## Ozarks Tom

HDRider said:


> locking and stuff going on...


There sure is. I wrote a non-person specific post this afternoon, and got deleted for insulting a member. Apparently someone identified too closely with the description I gave. Oh well.


----------



## Evons hubby

Ozarks Tom said:


> There sure is. I wrote a non-person specific post this afternoon, and got deleted for insulting a member. Apparently someone identified too closely with the description I gave. Oh well.


Is there a reason for making insulting remarks? In general or to a specific poster? :shrug:


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is there a reason for making insulting remarks? In general or to a specific poster? :shrug:


Facts are often considered as insults by many , especially if one refuses to use a standard English dictionary as the guide to follow . There are many that hunt for anything they can find to get their feelings hurt they NEED and FEED off perceptions of victimization . :run:


----------



## Jolly

*The Church of the Perpetually Offended*


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Jolly said:


> *The Church of the Perpetually Offended*


Amen :run:


----------



## Irish Pixie

Sawmill Jim said:


> Facts are often considered as insults by many , especially if one refuses to use a standard English dictionary as the guide to follow . There are many that hunt for anything they can find to get their feelings hurt they NEED and FEED off perceptions of victimization . :run:





Jolly said:


> *The Church of the Perpetually Offended*


I know, right? I don't it understand either, they get so upset when their posts are deleted for personal attacks and insults.


----------



## Cornhusker

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is there a reason for making insulting remarks? In general or to a specific poster? :shrug:


Obama is a specific poster now?
I knew Hillary was, but Barry too?


----------



## poppy

Cornhusker said:


> Obama is a specific poster now?
> *I knew Hillary was*, but Barry too?



Careful there. That could be a considered a specific insult by poster or two. Or, I guess they might consider it an honor.:nanner:


----------



## wiscto

Let's see where have I heard all this before.... Oh right. I used to coach middle schoolers. "We didn't even do anything wrong coach." "Yea we didn't do anything wrong coach." "Yea! Yea! We really didn't!"

You guys feel like it's true yet, or do you need a few more minutes to get your stories straight? Tell ya what. Why don't you run some laps.


----------



## Ozarks Tom

The strange thing about my post being deleted is it started: Attention Trolls.

Now, doesn't everybody dislike trolls? I thought trolls were the bane of the internet discussion forums. How could an individual feel insulted unless they considered themselves one? Name me one member who would proudly state "I'm a troll, and proud of it". Well, on second thought don't name one - you'll get deleted.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> Let's see where have I heard all this before.... Oh right. I used to coach middle schoolers. "We didn't even do anything wrong coach." "Yea we didn't do anything wrong coach." "Yea! Yea! We really didn't!"
> 
> You guys feel like it's true yet, or do you need a few more minutes to get your stories straight? Tell ya what. Why don't you run some laps.


I guess it depends on if you are in the MS or not.
It's ok to be thin skinned and be "insulted" every other post if you are left of center now.
Everybody else is just whining


----------



## Cornhusker

Ozarks Tom said:


> The strange thing about my post being deleted is it started: Attention Trolls.
> 
> Now, doesn't everybody dislike trolls? I thought trolls were the bane of the internet discussion forums. How could an individual feel insulted unless they considered themselves one? Name me one member who would proudly state "I'm a troll, and proud of it". Well, on second thought don't name one - you'll get deleted.


Some of the trolls were offended or felt insulted most likely


----------



## wiscto

Ozarks Tom said:


> The strange thing about my post being deleted is it started: Attention Trolls.
> 
> Now, doesn't everybody dislike trolls? I thought trolls were the bane of the internet discussion forums. How could an individual feel insulted unless they considered themselves one? Name me one member who would proudly state "I'm a troll, and proud of it". Well, on second thought don't name one - you'll get deleted.


I really didn't care who you were talking to, and I still thought it was nasty and unneeded.


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> I guess it depends on if you are in the MS or not.
> It's ok to be thin skinned and be "insulted" every other post if you are left of center now.
> Everybody else is just whining


Awwww.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Ozarks Tom said:


> The strange thing about my post being deleted is it started: Attention Trolls.
> 
> Now, doesn't everybody dislike trolls? I thought trolls were the bane of the internet discussion forums. How could an individual feel insulted unless they considered themselves one? Name me one member who would proudly state "I'm a troll, and proud of it". Well, on second thought don't name one - you'll get deleted.


Another thing too if anyone ADMITS they are sick don't recommend a doctor either .You get hit for practicing medicine without a license :surrender:


----------



## poppy

Sawmill Jim said:


> Another thing too if anyone ADMITS they are sick don't recommend a doctor either .You get hit for practicing medicine without a license :surrender:



What did you go and do now, recommend a Veternarian?


----------



## Sawmill Jim

poppy said:


> What did you go and do now, recommend a Veternarian?


Much worse I am afraid a psychiatrist :icecream:


----------



## gibbsgirl

Haven't been on too much in recent days. Sounds like I missed some interesting stuff.


----------



## hippygirl

gibbsgirl said:


> Haven't been on too much in recent days. Sounds like I missed some interesting stuff.


Nah, same old song and dance...someone says something, a few get their collective panties in a wad over it, run crying to the mod, and poof! All is well in la-la land.


----------



## AmericanStand

I can't complain apparently I've been exceeding the site limits here with the words I use to describe those people sexually attracted to their own sex. 
I honestly thought it was a acceptable word since their organization uses it. 
In any case a mod cleaned it up and told me what the problem was. 
That's a huge help ! Knowing the limits specifically. 
Best of all He did all that without even awarding any points. 
I think that's the way moderation should work and a great example to others !


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> Let's see where have I heard all this before.... Oh right. I used to coach middle schoolers. "We didn't even do anything wrong coach." "Yea we didn't do anything wrong coach." "Yea! Yea! We really didn't!"
> 
> You guys feel like it's true yet, or do you need a few more minutes to get your stories straight? Tell ya what. Why don't you run some laps.


Another insulting post from the Mod Squad
Getting to be a habit


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> I really didn't care who you were talking to, and I still thought it was nasty and unneeded.


Look in the mirror


----------



## hippygirl

AmericanStand said:


> I can't complain apparently I've been exceeding the site limits here with the words I use to describe those people sexually attracted to their own sex.
> I honestly thought it was a acceptable word since their organization uses it.
> In any case a mod cleaned it up and told me what the problem was.
> That's a huge help ! Knowing the limits specifically.
> Best of all He did all that without even awarding any points.
> _*I think that's the way moderation should work*_ and a great example to others !


As do I, but when entire threads get deleted because someone gets (or "might" get) their widdle feewins hurt...

While I realize some of the deleted/locked threads had devolved into nothing more than mudslinging and one upmanship, some of them actually contained a lot of thought-provoking statements and ideas.

This is GC...I really wish folks who choose to read/post here would leave their victim mentality at the door.


----------



## HDRider

I have no respect for anyone that would report a posting to a mod.


----------



## gapeach

hippygirl said:


> Nah, same old song and dance...someone says something, a few get their collective panties in a wad over it, run crying to the mod, and poof! All is well in la-la land.


I don't run complaining to mods. I have reported one post since I have been here and it was never resolved. That was after being here 3 1/2 yrs.


----------



## hippygirl

gapeach said:


> I don't run complaining to mods. I have reported one post since I have been here and it was never resolved. That was after being here 3 1/2 yrs.


Same here...and for all the good it did, I'll never do it again...total waste of time and effort.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

gapeach said:


> I don't run complaining to mods. I have reported one post since I have been here and it was never resolved. That was after being here 3 1/2 yrs.


If my crystal ball wasn't in the shop I would explain the exemptions clause for liberal posters


----------



## painterswife

Sawmill Jim said:


> If my crystal ball wasn't in the shop I would explain the exemptions clause for liberal posters


All that happened was that the protected class here is no longer protected and everyone treated the same. I understand that those previously protected might not even have known it was happening and now think it has swung the other way.

Cry some more tears and then stop playing the victim and look at the posts that are getting deleted and why. You might learn something.


----------



## HDRider

painterswife said:


> All that happened was that the protected class here is no longer protected and everyone treated the same. I understand that those previously protected might not even have known it was happening and now think it has swung the other way.
> 
> Cry so more tears and then stop playing the victim and look at the posts that are getting deleted and why. You might learn something.


What am learning, and it appears you agree, is that the moderators have chosen sides.


----------



## painterswife

HDRider said:


> What am learning, and it appears you agree, is that the moderators have chosen sides.


No I disagree completely. You just think that because the protection from what ever side you are on is gone.


----------



## wiscto

Unbelievable. Referring to someone as the (explicit words) you need to scrape off your shoe, however cleverly you think you said it, is way across the line. Everyone here pretending not to know that is pretty obviously a bigger problem than the so called "side" the mods have chosen. Grow up.


----------



## where I want to

HDRider said:


> I have no respect for anyone that would report a posting to a mod.


Oh oh. I will report at the drop of a hat anything that looks to be a personal attack with no redeeming value. Unfortunate calling someone stupid has redeeming value if the mods agree with complainer but not if the mods don't agree. So the only thing that complaining usually does is get me into trouble. 
In fact, I have seen a post I reported stand while the disfavored responser using the same language gets deleted. 
I do it out of sheer stubbornness.


----------



## gapeach

Sawmill Jim said:


> If my crystal ball wasn't in the shop I would explain the exemptions clause for liberal posters


You don't need a crystal ball. You would have to be blind not to see.


----------



## HDRider

wiscto said:


> Unbelievable. Referring to someone as the (explicit words) you need to scrape off your shoe, however cleverly you think you said it, is way across the line. Everyone here pretending not to know that is pretty obviously a bigger problem than the so called "side" the mods have chosen. Grow up.


Who you talking to?


----------



## wiscto

Naahh.


----------



## hippygirl

HDRider said:


> Who you talking to?


I was wondering the same thing...


----------



## hippygirl

wiscto said:


> Naahh.



Naahh...what?


----------



## Ozarks Tom

wiscto said:


> Unbelievable. Referring to someone as the (explicit words) you need to scrape off your shoe, however cleverly you think you said it, is way across the line. Everyone here pretending not to know that is pretty obviously a bigger problem than the so called "side" the mods have chosen. Grow up.


There are some great books on reading comprehension, unfortunately, you have to be able to comprehend them.

There were no "explicit words" in the post you're referring to, how could there be when the phrase in question was referring to bubble gum? Also, there was no "someone" referred to. Methinks thou doest protest too much.

And yes, there is a bigger problem. It's called trolling, and it's engaged in frequently in GC and Politics. It seems to be just fine with the mods, while calling it out isn't.


----------



## wiscto

I guess you guys missed the, "Attention trolls" post where a certain person here thought he could word a post just carefully enough that calling someone the (explicit language) on the bottom of his shoe that he needs to scrape off wouldn't be obvious.

I've had some posts deleted and taken a citation point or whatever it is here. I said what I wanted to say, the posts were deleted, I took a hit, and I didn't complain about it. 

So who's whining?


----------



## wiscto

Ozarks Tom said:


> There are some great books on reading comprehension, unfortunately, you have to be able to comprehend them.
> 
> There were no "explicit words" in the post you're referring to, how could there be when the phrase in question was referring to bubble gum? Also, there was no "someone" referred to. Methinks thou doest protest too much.
> 
> And yes, there is a bigger problem. It's called trolling, and it's engaged in frequently in GC and Politics. It seems to be just fine with the mods, while calling it out isn't.


LMAO. You can say it. But only a certain bias crowd believes you... Because the rest of us can read and comprehend. And by the way. I can't go that far back in my posts anymore, but I remember y'all when I first started offering my opinion here. To say that trolling and hostility is a new thing, and one sided, is an insult to reality.


----------



## wr

wiscto said:


> LMAO. You can say it. But only a certain bias crowd believes you... Because the rest of us can read and comprehend. And by the way. I can't go that far back in my posts anymore, but I remember y'all when I first started offering my opinion here. To say that trolling and hostility is a new thing, and one sided, is an insult to reality.


You're in pretty good company because you and I were reported as socks within the same week.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Ozarks Tom said:


> There are some great books on reading comprehension, unfortunately, you have to be able to comprehend them.
> 
> There were no "explicit words" in the post you're referring to, how could there be when the phrase in question was referring to bubble gum? Also, there was no "someone" referred to. Methinks thou doest protest too much.
> 
> And yes, there is a bigger problem. It's called trolling, and it's engaged in frequently in GC and Politics. It seems to be just fine with the mods, while calling it out isn't.


Unfortunately many here speak English and refer to dictionaries from time to time for clarification .If someone would point me to the language they are using if might be a big help ,because by no stretch of anyone's immigration is it English :umno:


----------



## Irish Pixie

At some point doesn't the _definition_ of trolling need to be studied? Honestly, I don't think most of the people that say it's rampant know what it actually means. I'll help- trolling is not someone's opinion that you don't like, which is what the majority of the whining is about. 

The moderation is fair now, it wasn't before so many of you haven't experienced it. This is moderation at it's best- opinion can be expressed, personal attacks and/or insults cannot. It's pretty simple.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Sawmill Jim said:


> Unfortunately many here speak English and refer to dictionaries from time to time for clarification .If someone would point me to the language they are using if might be a big help ,because by no stretch of anyone's immigration is it English :umno:


Really? :rotfl: Proof reading is your friend when you are trying to talk smack about reading clarification.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Irish Pixie said:


> Really? :rotfl: Proof reading is your friend when you are trying to talk smack about reading clarification.


Now who is insulting who  

At least we now know some have reading skills of one word at a time .Now whether they understand it meaning is still a mystery as it is apparent they missed the rest of the posts meaning .:stirpot:

For your father entertainment using spell check and being near blind is no great fun .


----------



## wiscto

wr said:


> You're in pretty good company because you and I were reported as socks within the same week.


Thanks for sharing, I got a legit LOL out of that.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

wr said:


> You're in pretty good company because you and I were reported as socks within the same week.


Were those reports correct ?:help:


----------



## gapeach

I thought all the time that baiting, trolling and using another identity were all against the rules. I guess I don't know what is allowed and what isn't.


----------



## wiscto

Sorry folks. I showed up here brand spakin' new. You'll have to find some other way to kick me out. Although that kind of sounds like something Obama would do...


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> I thought all the time that baiting, trolling and using another identity were all against the rules. I guess I don't know what is allowed and what isn't.


What is your definition of baitingg and trolling?


----------



## Sawmill Jim

painterswife said:


> What is your definition of baitingg and trolling?


For some people not calling any names good start might be the mirror and their like bar :fussin:


----------



## painterswife

Sawmill Jim said:


> For some people not calling any names good start might be the mirror and their like bar :fussin:


What? Huh?


----------



## Ozarks Tom

Irish Pixie said:


> At some point doesn't the _definition_ of trolling need to be studied?


Wouldn't a good definition be your signature line? Irritating someone for your own amusement would pretty much describe it, wouldn't you think?


----------



## painterswife

Ozarks Tom said:


> Wouldn't a good definition be your signature line? Irritating someone for your own amusement would pretty much describe it, wouldn't you think?


How about Sawmills?


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> What is your definition of baitingg and trolling?



Not having any life but a message board, constantly asking silly and hateful questions about other people's posts to make them angry, so that they can run to report posts.

Just like your friend's signature line.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> Not having any life but a message board, constantly asking silly and hateful questions about other people's posts to make them angry, so that they can run to report posts.
> 
> Just like your friend's signature line.


I wonder who you are aiming that at. You seem to fit your explanation perfectly.


----------



## Woolieface

The kids that went weeping to the teacher in school are the same that go crying to every other "authority" in their life as they grow up (using the term loosely, perhaps).

They're also the people that will call the cops on you for your BBQ, notify DHS that they suspect you own too many guns and CPS that you don't give your kids enough drugs.


----------



## Ozarks Tom

wiscto said:


> LMAO. You can say it. But only a certain bias crowd believes you... Because the rest of us can read and comprehend. And by the way. I can't go that far back in my posts anymore, but I remember y'all when I first started offering my opinion here. To say that trolling and hostility is a new thing, and one sided, is an insult to reality.


I guess you're getting your information about the post in question second hand. I can assure you I've never used the word you accuse me of in that or any other post - anywhere. In the effort to not insult anyone individually I even avoided using examples which might identify someone. If someone thought I was addressing them, it's only from a guilty conscience.

Nobody said trolling and hostility are new, but in recent months they've been brought to new heights by the same individuals habitually. I just got tired of it and decided to make point.


----------



## Jolly

painterswife said:


> All that happened was that the protected class here is no longer protected and everyone treated the same. I understand that those previously protected might not even have known it was happening and now think it has swung the other way.
> 
> Cry some more tears and then stop playing the victim and look at the posts that are getting deleted and why. You might learn something.


I disagree.

It would be different if all were playing by the same rules, but I have seen some extreme levels of snark from folks on the Left. Remarks that are just obscure enough to be a personal attack, while still remaining within the law of the rule, if not the spirit.

All I ask is to treat everybody the same.


----------



## painterswife

Jolly said:


> I disagree.
> 
> It would be different if all were playing by the same rules, but I have seen some extreme levels of snark from folks on the Left. Remarks that are just obscure enough to be a personal attack, while still remaining within the law of the rule, if not the spirit.
> 
> All I ask is to treat everybody the same.


Then report the posts. The mods don't read everything. If you think there is a problem then you have to be part of the solution. Point them out. Not every post I think crosses the line gets deleted.

They can't delete posts willy nilly if you are following the rules.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Ozarks Tom said:


> Wouldn't a good definition be your signature line? Irritating someone for your own amusement would pretty much describe it, wouldn't you think?


I guess, if you're thin skinned and looking to be irritated. 

It is a meme that came up on my Facebook feed, and I think it's funny. As it's my signature line, and doesn't break any rules, I'm going to use it. There was whining about my last one too. I'll change this one when I find another I like better. I'm sure there will be some that won't like that one as well. 

There's been griping about the statement under my avatar too...

ETA: I suppose you have no issue at all with Sawmill Jim's sig line? Have you noticed that no one left of center has whined about it?


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> All that happened was that the protected class here is no longer protected and everyone treated the same. I understand that those previously protected might not even have known it was happening and now think it has swung the other way.
> 
> Cry some more tears and then stop playing the victim and look at the posts that are getting deleted and why. You might learn something.


Another insulting post from the Mod Squad
Anybody keeping track?


----------



## Cornhusker

HDRider said:


> Who you talking to?


Himself?


----------



## Jolly

Jolly said:


> I disagree.
> 
> It would be different if all were playing by the same rules, but I have seen some extreme levels of snark from folks on the Left. Remarks that are just obscure enough to be a personal attack, while still remaining within the law of the rule, if not the spirit.
> 
> All I ask is to treat everybody the same.





painterswife said:


> Then report the posts. The mods don't read everything. If you think there is a problem then you have to be part of the solution. Point them out. Not every post I think crosses the line gets deleted.
> 
> They can't delete posts willy nilly if you are following the rules.


I don't report posts.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> I guess you guys missed the, "Attention trolls" post where a certain person here thought he could word a post just carefully enough that calling someone the (explicit language) on the bottom of his shoe that he needs to scrape off wouldn't be obvious.
> 
> I've had some posts deleted and taken a citation point or whatever it is here. I said what I wanted to say, the posts were deleted, I took a hit, and I didn't complain about it.
> 
> So who's whining?


Did the author name any trolls or did you just step in front of the bullet so you could be insulted?


----------



## Cornhusker

Irish Pixie said:


> At some point doesn't the _definition_ of trolling need to be studied? Honestly, I don't think most of the people that say it's rampant know what it actually means. I'll help- trolling is not someone's opinion that you don't like, which is what the majority of the whining is about.
> 
> The moderation is fair now, it wasn't before so many of you haven't experienced it. This is moderation at it's best- opinion can be expressed, personal attacks and/or insults cannot. It's pretty simple.


It was always fair.
The main rule was "Be nice"
Some couldn't seem to achieve that lofty goal, so they got infracted, banned and resurrected as sock puppets.
Now they can get away with being mealy mouthed and bossy, but I don't live here, so they can act how they want, I don't care


----------



## painterswife

Jolly said:


> I don't report posts.


Then you can't fault the mods for not knowing you think a post is breaking the rules.


----------



## gapeach

What good does getting a post deleted do anyway? The post has already been made so most everyone has read it.
The person who made the post has already got his thrill out of it.


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> It was always fair.
> The main rule was "Be nice"
> Some couldn't seem to achieve that lofty goal, so they got infracted, banned and resurrected as sock puppets.
> Now they can get away with being mealy mouthed and bossy, but I don't live here, so they can act how they want, I don't care


Actually, you could get points amd be banned for questioning the mod gods. The be nice rule was not wielded evenly. That is why people who requested to be unbanned got a fair trial from the new mods and management. 

Posting in this thread before would easily get you enough infractions to be banned outright.


----------



## Jolly

painterswife said:


> Then you can't fault the mods for not knowing you think a post is breaking the rules.


I think the mods should have enough acumen and honesty to fairly enforce the rules given them.

They don't need my help.

I've modded forums before. At some point, if you constantly listen to a certain group of people, whatever their political bent, you're doing the rest of the board a disservice. Occasionally, a squeaky wheel needs no grease.


----------



## gapeach

I didn't hear anyone complaining. Cornhusker, I did not see your post til now but you are right. I think I may have gotten 2 infractions and had no problem with other posters til recently, even the liberals. I sure would not want to be a mod.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Cornhusker said:


> It was always fair.
> The main rule was "Be nice"
> Some couldn't seem to achieve that lofty goal, so they got infracted, banned and resurrected as sock puppets.
> Now they can get away with being mealy mouthed and bossy, but I don't live here, so they can act how they want, I don't care


Are you talking about me? I'm not a sock. I was banned unfairly, asked to come back when Angie was booted, went through the vetting, and tada! I'm back. 

It was never fair under the old admin. No one left of center was allowed an opinion, and if you questioned the uneven moderation you were given infractions. Do you honestly think that the admin we have now would even consider that?


----------



## painterswife

One person even got banned because of a joke on another forum about that poster being a sock. No proof, no reality and poof the mod gods banned them.


----------



## HDRider

How many infraction do you think I have?


----------



## arabian knight

Cornhusker said:


> It was always fair.
> The main rule was "Be nice"
> Some couldn't seem to achieve that lofty goal, so they got infracted, banned and resurrected as sock puppets.
> *Now they can get away with being mealy mouthed and bossy, but I don't live here, so they can act how they want*, I don't care


I have said that from the beginning their is a click going on here and the 4 have just went on and on and on with no reparations happening. But let one of The Others even put a word in a post that isn;t even dirty and Wammo~!
Things were sure a lot better a year ago you KNEW just what was wrong and didn't mess up, but now things are so den open and unfair it is really getting out of hand. Sure be tightened up like this board was a year ago~!!


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> Are you talking about me? I'm not a sock. I was banned unfairly, asked to come back when Angie was booted, went through the vetting, and tada! I'm back.
> 
> It was never fair under the old admin. No one left of center was allowed an opinion, and if you questioned the uneven moderation you were given infractions. Do you honestly think that the admin we have now would even consider that?


Yup, and they prove their bias daily!


----------



## painterswife

HDRider said:


> How many infraction do you think I have?


Does anyone care?


----------



## HDRider

painterswife said:


> Does anyone care?


Question for a question.


----------



## Cornhusker

Irish Pixie said:


> Are you talking about me? I'm not a sock. I was banned unfairly, asked to come back when Angie was booted, went through the vetting, and tada! I'm back.
> 
> It was never fair under the old admin. No one left of center was allowed an opinion, and if you questioned the uneven moderation you were given infractions. Do you honestly think that the admin we have now would even consider that?


I seem to remember lots of left leaning posters who pretty much ran amok and said what they wanted.
Some couldn't stop insulting others, couldn't seem to put together a sentence without swearing or insinuating a lewd act.
Some tried to get banned just so they could go to that other forum and brag about it.
Maybe some did get banned for not much, but if you irritate the dog guarding the flock, the dog will eventually bite.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

what does sock mean?


----------



## arabian knight

Laura Zone 10 said:


> what does sock mean?


A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock, originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person.[1] The term now includes other misleading uses of online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a person or organization,[2] or to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym[3] and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer. Many online communities attempt to block sockpuppets.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

So.....If I am Laura Zone 10 but I create Lisa from Mars and Leslie loves loons, and just be "me" under LZ10 but act like a complete lunatic under the other 2 names, does that make a sock puppet?? I think I am confused.

Wait I think I get it.........so I am really Laura Zone 10 but I create 2 or 3 other accounts and use those accounts to praise myself, defend myself...
Kinda like an imaginary friend?

Blocking shouldn't be that hard; follow the ISP?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

HDRider said:


> What am learning, and it appears you agree, is that the moderators have chosen sides.


That's exactly how it *used to be*, and still is to some extent.
It's called "life"


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Laura Zone 10 said:


> So.....If I am Laura Zone 10 but I create Lisa from Mars and Leslie loves loons, and just be "me" under LZ10 but act like a complete lunatic under the other 2 names, does that make a sock puppet?? I think I am confused.
> 
> Wait I think I get it.........so I am really Laura Zone 10 but I create 2 or 3 other accounts and use those accounts to praise myself, defend myself...
> Kinda like an imaginary friend?
> 
> Blocking shouldn't be that hard; follow the ISP?


Some can spoof IP's :run:


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Sawmill Jim said:


> Now who is insulting who
> 
> At least we now know some have reading skills of one word at a time .Now whether they understand it meaning is still a mystery as it is apparent they missed the rest of the posts meaning .:stirpot:
> 
> For your father entertainment using spell check and being near blind is no great fun .


Why do you care about her Father's entertainment?


----------



## Jolly

Laura Zone 10 said:


> So.....If I am Laura Zone 10 but I create Lisa from Mars and Leslie loves loons, and just be "me" under LZ10 but act like a complete lunatic under the other 2 names, does that make a sock puppet?? I think I am confused.
> 
> Wait I think I get it.........so I am really Laura Zone 10 but I create 2 or 3 other accounts and use those accounts to praise myself, defend myself...
> Kinda like an imaginary friend?
> 
> Blocking shouldn't be that hard; follow the ISP?


It's not as easy as it sounds...there are multiple ways around an ISP block.


----------



## Cornhusker

I don't know why some want to be kings or queens of an internet forum
Is it such a huge part of their lives?


----------



## kasilofhome

Not Taking The Bait. Or need to take brake..
NTTB

STBL....Soon TO Be Lock or straight,trans,bi,lesbian


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> I don't know why some want to be kings or queens of an internet forum
> Is it such a huge part of their lives?


Does high post count demonstrate wanting to be king or queen of an internet forum? I noticed yours and several other's higher counts. 

It would demonstrate to me that it is more part of your life than many others.


----------



## Ozarks Tom

Jolly said:


> It's not as easy as it sounds...there are multiple ways around an ISP block.


Great! Send me the instructions, and I'll show up a Swedish Trixie.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Bearfootfarm said:


> Why do you care about her Father's entertainment?


Why do you care if I care are you practicing to be Papa Smurf of these forums


----------



## poppy

Sawmill Jim said:


> Now who is insulting who
> 
> At least we now know some have reading skills of one word at a time .Now whether they understand it meaning is still a mystery as it is apparent they missed the rest of the posts meaning .:stirpot:
> 
> *For your father entertainment using spell check and being near blind is no great fun .*


I agree, but I think it is age discrimination. Typing a message is a bit more difficult when your sight isn't good and your brain runs faster than your fingers can type. I'm not a fast typist and I'm not a slow typist. I am a halffast typist.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

poppy said:


> I agree, but I think it is age discrimination. Typing a message is a bit more difficult when your sight isn't good and your brain runs faster than your fingers can type. I'm not a fast typist and I'm not a slow typist. I am a halffast typist.


I'm a two finger typist never typed a word till my son bought me this thing a few years ago . Yep my night driving is over too. I't heck getting old . I have times I just go to bed my eves just totally quit 

On a different note if I were younger I have a great idea on a good way to get rich


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Does high post count demonstrate wanting to be king or queen of an internet forum? I noticed yours and several other's higher counts.
> 
> It would demonstrate to me that it is more part of your life than many others.


No, post count has nothing to do with what I was talking about
I was thinking more about those who like to tell others what to post, when to post, where to post, etc.


----------



## poppy

Cornhusker said:


> I don't know why some want to be kings or queens of an internet forum
> Is it such a huge part of their lives?


Maybe just used to being queens in daily life?


----------



## Lisa in WA

Cornhusker said:


> I seem to remember lots of left leaning posters who pretty much ran amok and said what they wanted.
> Some couldn't stop insulting others, couldn't seem to put together a sentence without swearing or insinuating a lewd act.
> Some tried to get banned just so they could go to that other forum and brag about it.
> Maybe some did get banned for not much, but if you irritate the dog guarding the flock, the dog will eventually bite.


Is that the forum that you are a member of and go to almost every day, lurking but never, ever posting...just hoping someone will say something about you?


----------



## mollymae

Kinda like the wolves in idaho. The troll wolves.... weak.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Sawmill Jim said:


> Why do you care if I care are you practicing to be Papa Smurf of these forums


I just thought it was funny how you chide others for not being able to "understand", but your posts often don't make sense because they are so poorly written.




> Originally Posted by Sawmill Jim View Post
> Now who is insulting who
> 
> At least we now know some have reading skills of one word at a time .Now whether they understand it meaning is still a mystery as it is apparent they missed the rest of the posts meaning .
> 
> For your father entertainment using spell check and being near blind is no great fun .


----------



## kasilofhome

Sawmill Jim said:


> I'm a two finger typist never typed a word till my son bought me this thing a few years ago . Yep my night driving is over too. I't heck getting old . I have times I just go to bed my eves just totally quit
> 
> On a different note if I were younger I have a great idea on a good way to get rich


Jim...
And enlarging the words limits the number of letter you can see... first on has to enlarge the key board...keys to see the keys, the that limits the reading of one's posts toss in the auto correct...

I gave up driving at night ...too it sucks...I used to travel and never think about it now... fall thru early spring... it is deadly important to know sun rises and sunset times....summer is nice ...so little darkness.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

kasilofhome said:


> Jim...
> And enlarging the words limits the number of letter you can see... first on has to enlarge the key board...keys to see the keys, the that limits the reading of one's posts toss in the auto correct...
> 
> I gave up driving at night ...to sucks...I used to travel and never think about it now... fall thru early spring... it is deadly important to know sun rises and sunset times....summer is nice ...so little darkness.


I have the giant Readers Digest size font on my phone.....
Night driving? Uh no.......I only night drive on the way home from work. It's an "auto pilot' thing. It's worse if it's raining. I struggle to drive in the rain in the day time!!


----------



## AmericanStand

gapeach said:


> I thought all the time that baiting, trolling and using another identity were all against the rules. I guess I don't know what is allowed and what isn't.



They haven't all always been that way. There is some pretty interesting reading in the archives.


----------



## AmericanStand

Sawmill Jim said:


> I'm a two finger typist never typed a word till my son bought me this thing a few years ago . Yep my night driving is over too. I't heck getting old . I have times I just go to bed my eves just totally quit
> 
> On a different note if I were younger I have a great idea on a good way to get rich



You will never be a day younger than today !


----------



## AmericanStand

kasilofhome said:


> Jim...
> And enlarging the words limits the number of letter you can see... first on has to enlarge the key board...keys to see the keys, the that limits the reading of one's posts toss in the auto correct...
> 
> I gave up driving at night ...too it sucks...I used to travel and never think about it now... fall thru early spring... it is deadly important to know sun rises and sunset times....summer is nice ...so little darkness.



Jim and Kasilofhome try doing it on a tiny little phone in a shaking helicopter with a semi suicidal pilot. 
Throw in a touch of auto correct and I'm surprized I don't post in Swahili.


----------



## kasilofhome

Na, it's a kindle.


----------



## Cornhusker

AmericanStand said:


> Jim and Kasilofhome try doing it on a tiny little phone in a shaking helicopter with a semi suicidal pilot.
> Throw in a touch of auto correct and I'm surprized I don't post in Swahili.


You are in a helicopter with a semi suicidal pilot and posting to HT is how you keep from getting bored? :shocked:


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Bearfootfarm said:


> I just thought it was funny how you chide others for not being able to "understand", but your posts often don't make sense because they are so poorly written.


I bet some folks if they went to a proctologist would be charged by the acre for a examination


----------



## AmericanStand

Cornhusker said:


> You are in a helicopter with a semi suicidal pilot and posting to HT is how you keep from getting bored? :shocked:



Lol I'm pretty sure all chopper pilots are semisuicidal.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Sawmill Jim said:


> I bet some folks if they went to a proctologist would be charged by the acre for a examination


I don't understand. Can you explain please?


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> Did the author name any trolls or did you just step in front of the bullet so you could be insulted?


Oh I knew it wasn't me, chief. I wasn't trolling. It seemed to me like the person who blew up over nothing was blowing up over nothing, so I pointed out that his post was the nastiest one in the thread, hoping he'd realize....FINALLY....that opinions being given are not legitimate reasons to complain.


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> It was always fair.
> The main rule was "Be nice"
> Some couldn't seem to achieve that lofty goal, so they got infracted, banned and* resurrected as sock puppets.*
> Now they can get away with being mealy mouthed and bossy, but I don't live here, so they can act how they want, I don't care


So you're actually just going to go with that now? This should be fun...


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> So you're actually just going to go with that now? This should be fun...


Which part wasn't right?
Or are you just offended again?


----------



## AmericanStand

Lol if you think this site didn't used to be Deeply right wing look at the thread "why is he worth that much more"

Now I'd say the site is only mildly right wing. 

That still surprises me in a site with such hippie roots.


----------



## painterswife

AmericanStand said:


> Lol if you think this site didn't used to be Deeply right wing look at the thread "why are they worth that much"
> Now I'd say the site is only mildly right wing.
> 
> That still surprises me in a site with such hippie roots.


Can you link it?


----------



## AmericanStand

Sorry no link but you can google the corrected title


----------



## Irish Pixie

AmericanStand said:


> Sorry no link but you can google the corrected title


Is this the thread? http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/specialty-forums/general-chat/531036-why-he-worth-much-more.html

Interesting read.


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> Is this the thread? http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/specialty-forums/general-chat/531036-why-he-worth-much-more.html
> 
> Interesting read.


What was so interesting about it?


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> Which part wasn't right?
> Or are you just offended again?


LOL I know you saw the bolded part. "Offended" isn't the right way to put it. Cautiously amused. Are you going to blow up over nothing, too?


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> What was so interesting about it?


The vitriol of the posters mostly. The rather threatening nature of the former admin's posts too. It's a good example of what this forum used to be... and how much better it is now.


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> The vitriol of the posters mostly. The rather threatening nature of the former admin's posts too. It's a good example of what this forum used to be... and how much better it is now.


Sorry, I didn't see any of that. It's Not much better now, it's far worse. Ymmv.


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> Sorry, I didn't see any I that. It's Not much better now, it's far worse. Ymmv.


You probably would think that, the favorites of prior administrations usually do.


----------



## gapeach

Irish Pixie said:


> The vitriol of the posters mostly. The rather threatening nature of the former admin's posts too. It's a good example of what this forum used to be... and how much better it is now.


Your opinion is that of a very small minority. Deleting posts do very little to deter abrasive language and baiting.


----------



## gapeach

The same thing happens next time by the same people to the same people.


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> You probably would think that, the favorites of prior administrations usually do.


Sorry, I wasn't what you consider a "favorite", though i was never banned, unlike you and your friends, i did acumulate a number of badboy points anyway. Perspective is everything.


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> Sorry, I wasn't what you consider a "favorite", though i was never banned, unlike you and your friends, i did acumulate a number of badboy points anyway. Perspective is everything.


Don't be sorry. I'm sure many people had bad experiences with the prior admin. Unpleasant people cause unpleasant experiences.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> The same thing happens next time by the same people to the same people.


Yes it does, but you only want to acknowledge one side of the equation while pretending the other side doesn't exist.


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> Your opinion is that of a very small minority. Deleting posts do very little to deter abrasive language and baiting.


I am still allowed an opinion tho, right?

What would you do differently?


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> Don't be sorry. I'm sure many people had bad experiences with the prior admin. Unpleasant people cause unpleasant experiences.


I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Originally Posted by Irish Pixie View Post
> The vitriol of the posters mostly. The rather threatening nature of the former admin's posts too. It's a good example of *what this forum used to be*... and how much better it is now.


That thread was from this year, but the attitudes go back much farther


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences.


Don't put words in my mouth. That's not nice. 

You aren't trying to tell me what my experience was with the prior admin, are you? Cuz I don't remember you being privy to the conversations.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

JeffreyD said:


> I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that *unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences*.


"Unpleasant" is pretty subjective.
There are many who are equally "unpleasant" but never were banned
You aren't forced to read anything you don't care to.


----------



## AmericanStand

JeffreyD said:


> What was so interesting about it?



You might want to look at how clearly on one side some of the mods joined in. 
What you can't see is the PMs I got from moderation. 
Also if you look you will see how I was assumed to be on one side just for asking the question. 
There is a lot to learn there.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> LOL I know you saw the bolded part. "Offended" isn't the right way to put it. Cautiously amused. Are you going to blow up over nothing, too?


I never blow up over nothing
Like I said in another thread, I despise a bully.


----------



## arabian knight

Irish Pixie said:


> You probably would think that, the favorites of prior administrations usually do.


I sure don't know why you are saying THAT. I was BANNED for a number of Years. I then asked very polity to be brought back into the forum. So that is not a very good statement at all to say. And I will say this one more time it has not only gotten worse since this take over it has been made so just a few can say what ever they want and god forbid if someone comes up against them. THEY then get the points off not these few have seem to think they can rule this board like never ever has been done before~!!


----------



## Cornhusker

Irish Pixie said:


> Unpleasant people cause unpleasant experiences.


Makes one wonder why some go out of their way to be unpleasant.
I suppose they enjoy being contrary, getting a rise out of people and then going off to the other forum and having a good laugh


----------



## HDRider

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_NholHANoY[/ame]


----------



## kasilofhome

AmericanStand said:


> You might want to look at how clearly on one side some of the mods joined in.
> What you can't see is the PMs I got from moderation.
> Also if you look you will see how I was assumed to be on one side just for asking the question.
> There is a lot to learn there.


Lord knows a mod would not...NOT want my pm posted ...I got that message too.

Look.. see seems like some got bent out of shape over being corrected.. and got nasty about... some other all so go corrected and did not get vocal and nasty and feel so rejected that they became bitter. Really respect for rules and others is not natural for some. 

No, different than illegal immigrants that keep returning after deportation. Follow the rule that the legal immigrants do and all's well but some think that they are entitled to what the want or need not matter what and will not be welcomed.


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> Don't put words in my mouth. That's not nice.
> 
> You aren't trying to tell me what my experience was with the prior admin, are you? Cuz I don't remember you being privy to the conversations.


I didn't put words in your mouth any more than your doing in this very post! It's ok for you to do but you get your shorts in a bunch when others do the same. That's not nice is it!

And no, I'm not trying to tell you anything except that it was a nicer place when you and your friends were banned, even with the heavy handed penalties.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

arabian knight said:


> I sure don't know why you are saying THAT.
> 
> *I was BANNED for a number of Years.*
> 
> I then asked very polity to be brought back into the forum. So that is not a very good statement at all to say. And I will say this one more time it has not only gotten worse since this take over it has been made so just a few can say what ever they want and god forbid if someone comes up against them. THEY then get the points off not these few have seem to think they can rule this board like never ever has been done before~!!


When were you banned?
Was it from the entire forum, or just one section?


----------



## painterswife

JeffreyD said:


> I didn't put words in your mouth any more than your doing in this very post! It's ok for you to do but you get your shorts in a bunch when others do the same. That's not nice is it!
> 
> And no, I'm not trying to tell you anything except that it was a nicer place when you and your friends were banned, even with the heavy handed penalties.


Well we were still here, so I guess we were not the reason for the change, good or bad.


----------



## kasilofhome

and you were when you where banned... Yet we will never end hearing about how rough it was to be a sock puppet.. thinking of a new name having to try to be nice and blend in...

The horrors of posting under a different.t name..


----------



## painterswife

kasilofhome said:


> and you were when you where banned... Yet we will never end hearing about how rough it was to be a sock puppet.. thinking of a new name having to try to be nice and blend in...
> 
> The horrors of posting under a different.t name..


I did not know you had been a sock puppet. That is too bad you had that experience. I had a sock not a sock puppet and my experiemce was not at all like yours. No horrors, no rough time. Sorry your experience was so bad.


----------



## Irish Pixie

arabian knight said:


> I sure don't know why you are saying THAT. I was BANNED for a number of Years. I then asked very polity to be brought back into the forum. So that is not a very good statement at all to say. And I will say this one more time it has not only gotten worse since this take over it has been made so just a few can say what ever they want and god forbid if someone comes up against them. THEY then get the points off not these few have seem to think they can rule this board like never ever has been done before~!!


Oh, so you were resurrected like BearfootFarm, Painterswife, and myself. I didn't know that. Interesting...

Who banned you?


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> Sorry, I wasn't what you consider a "favorite", though i was never banned, unlike you and your friends, i did acumulate a number of badboy points anyway. Perspective is everything.





Irish Pixie said:


> Don't be sorry. I'm sure many people had bad experiences with the prior admin. Unpleasant people cause unpleasant experiences.





JeffreyD said:


> I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that unpleasant *people that were banned* are still causing unpleasant experiences.





Irish Pixie said:


> Don't put words in my mouth. That's not nice.
> 
> You aren't trying to tell me what my experience was with the prior admin, are you? Cuz I don't remember you being privy to the conversations.





JeffreyD said:


> I didn't put words in your mouth any more than your doing in this very post! It's ok for you to do but you get your shorts in a bunch when others do the same. That's not nice is it!
> 
> And no, I'm not trying to tell you anything except that it was a nicer place when you and your friends were banned, even with the heavy handed penalties.


Where did I mentioned banned people at all? Can you point it out please? If you can't your statement, "I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences." Is stating, rather baldly, that I said unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences. I said no such thing, you did, and are attributing them to me. 

That is a classic example of you putting words in my mouth. Poor form.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Cornhusker said:


> Makes one wonder why some go out of their way to be unpleasant.
> I suppose they enjoy being contrary, getting a rise out of people and then going off to the other forum and having a good laugh


I have no idea why they feel the need to retaliate. It's kinda sad... they had it their way via uneven moderation for years. Some people are just greedy, I guess.


----------



## JeffreyD

Irish Pixie said:


> Where did I mentioned banned people at all? Can you point it out please? If you can't your statement, "I'm sorry that you were wrong. And yes, you are right in that unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences." Is stating, rather baldly, that I said unpleasant people that were banned are still causing unpleasant experiences. I said no such thing, you did, and are attributing them to me.
> 
> That is a classic example of you putting words in my mouth. Poor form.


You are so completely confused even I can't help you, that a shame.

Poor form indeed!


----------



## gapeach

Cornhusker said:


> Makes one wonder why some go out of their way to be unpleasant.
> I suppose they enjoy being contrary, getting a rise out of people and then going off to the other forum and having a good laugh


Now *that* is really very childish. The more it is talked about the more is revealed that you really did not know about. You assume that everyone is an adult and some very smart people here. Some like me who are yrs behind the people who are up on everything. But still, sock puppets and going to other boards and saying things to a select audience is really being deceptive and also what we call in the south as "back biting". In other words, dishonest and sleazy. I am not even sure that I want to post with some of these people if they do things like that, what do they really know about each other and when do you have to start worrying about what they know about you or me? I really don't think I have anything to hide but I just assumed everybody is good people and no worries about anything done behind the back.


----------



## Irish Pixie

JeffreyD said:


> You are so completely confused even I can't help you, that a shame.
> 
> Poor form indeed!


I'm not the confused one. It's OK tho. No big deal.

You don't think it's really poor form to baldly state that someone said something when they didn't? It's seriously poor form to me- I have that crazy sense of honor tho.


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> Now *that* is really very childish. The more it is talked about the more is revealed that you really did not know about. You assume that everyone is an adult and some very smart people here. Some like me who are yrs behind the people who are up on everything. But still, sock puppets and going to other boards and saying things to a select audience is really being deceptive and also what we call in the south as "back biting". In other words, dishonest and sleazy. I am not even sure that I want to post with some of these people if they do things like that, what do they really know about each other and when do you have to start worrying about what they know about you or me? I really don't think I have anything to hide but I just assumed everybody is good people and no worries about anything done behind the back.


Why are you being mean to Cornhusker? He didn't use a "sock puppet" on the other forum, and as far as I know he's never posted there. I haven't been there in awhile tho, so maybe he has.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> Now *that* is really very childish. The more it is talked about the more is revealed that you really did not know about. You assume that everyone is an adult and some very smart people here. Some like me who are yrs behind the people who are up on everything. But still, sock puppets and going to other boards and saying things to a select audience is really being deceptive and also what we call in the south as "back biting". In other words, dishonest and sleazy. I am not even sure that I want to post with some of these people if they do things like that, what do they really know about each other and when do you have to start worrying about what they know about you or me? I really don't think I have anything to hide but I just assumed everybody is good people and no worries about anything done behind the back.


Lots of people here run to other forums, even the past mods. Angie has had her own forum for years and discussed all of us here and still does. Didn't she invite you?


----------



## gapeach

HDRider said:


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_NholHANoY



I love that music.


----------



## gapeach

Irish Pixie said:


> Why are you being mean to Cornhusker? He didn't use a "sock puppet" on the other forum, and as far as I know he's never posted there. I haven't been there in awhile tho, so maybe he has.


That is just a good example of you mis-strueing words to make your replies and to prove your points.


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> Lots of people here run to other forums, even the past mods. Angie has had her own forum for years and discussed all of us here and still does. Didn't she invite you?


No and I am glad she didn't. If I am a member of a forum, I don't need a hidey hole to go to and talk about other members. I would rather be honest and up front with the people in my life.


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> That is just a good example of you mis-strueing words to make your replies and to prove your points.


Well, who were you talking about then?


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> No and I am glad she didn't. If I am a member of a forum, I don't need a hidey hole to go to and talk about other members. I would rather be honest and up front with the people in my life.


You do realize that _anyone_ with internet access can read every word you've ever posted here, right? With the exception of politics forum (right now, it's been open in the past) that is. 

So the "people in your life" live all over the world.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> No and I am glad she didn't. If I am a member of a forum, I don't need a hidey hole to go to and talk about other members. I would rather be honest and up front with the people in my life.


Well, you might be the only one then. There are lots of other forums and msny of ypur fellow conservatives have and do talk about HT in them. Most of the mods as well. All of them modding GC and Politics have bedn on other forums I have been on.


----------



## gapeach

I guess this conversation has been a good learning experience.:shocked:


----------



## Evons hubby

Gotta love this thread, brings back so many memories of my child hood days on the play ground. "Did too, did not, did so, he did it first, no she did, ain't fair I'm tellin" The only thing missing is "My daddy can whip your daddy."


----------



## arabian knight

gapeach said:


> I guess this conversation has been a good learning experience.:shocked:


It sure has, what is it to some that want to know Who, What, and When, and how much of the site a person was banned? The entire site if some seem to think that is soooo important.~!!!!


----------



## Laura Zone 5

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Gotta love this thread, brings back so many memories of my child hood days on the play ground. "Did too, did not, did so, he did it first, no she did, ain't fair I'm tellin" The only thing missing is "My daddy can whip your daddy."


Seems lately there are more and more of threads just like this.
I myself have been sucked in and stooped low.

Seems like it's less about having a debate / discussion / exchange of ideas, and more of "my way is the only way" then "oh yeah, well you're dumb" then "Oh yeah, well you are the dumbest, no take backs".

I used to be able to glean from most posts.......now?
There are topics / threads where I can only see a couple of posts because I have so many on ignore......

It wasn't like that 6 months ago.


----------



## arabian knight

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Seems lately there are more and more of threads just like this.
> I myself have been sucked in and stooped low.
> 
> Seems like it's less about having a debate / discussion / exchange of ideas, and more of "my way is the only way" then "oh yeah, well you're dumb" then "Oh yeah, well you are the dumbest, no take backs".
> 
> I used to be able to glean from most posts.......now?
> There are topics / threads where I can only see a couple of posts because I have so many on ignore......
> 
> It wasn't like that 6 months ago.


----------



## Evons hubby

AmericanStand said:


> You might want to look at how clearly on one side some of the mods joined in.
> What you can't see is the PMs I got from moderation.
> Also if you look you will see how I was assumed to be on one side just for asking the question.
> There is a lot to learn there.





Laura Zone 10 said:


> Seems lately there are more and more of threads just like this.
> I myself have been sucked in and stooped low.
> 
> Seems like it's less about having a debate / discussion / exchange of ideas, and more of "my way is the only way" then "oh yeah, well you're dumb" then "Oh yeah, well you are the dumbest, no take backs".
> 
> I used to be able to glean from most posts.......now?
> There are topics / threads where I can only see a couple of posts because I have so many on ignore......
> 
> It wasn't like that 6 months ago.


no it sure wasn't. I rember the days when spoiled brats would have their posts deleted and be tossed out for repeating their nonsense. I had only been posting in GC for about a week when chuck offered to show me door for posting a joke that some found offensive. Not a dirty one either! I learned quick and never had much trouble from the admins since. I've now enjoyed the forum for quite a few years without much scolding.


----------



## Irish Pixie

arabian knight said:


> It sure has, what is it to some that want to know Who, What, and When, and how much of the site a person was banned? The entire site if some seem to think that is soooo important.~!!!!


Who?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

arabian knight said:


> It sure has, what is it to some that want to know Who, What, and When, and how much of the site a person was banned? *The entire site* if some seem to think that is soooo important.~!!!!


That's strange since someone has used your name to post every year since you've joined, even though you said you were "banned for a number of years"

Maybe a sock puppet stole your name.


----------



## HDRider

I don't like sock puppets...

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-HFbNhTTKQ[/ame]


----------



## Txsteader

AmericanStand said:


> You might want to look at how clearly on one side some of the mods joined in.


And you don't see that happening now?


----------



## Cornhusker

Irish Pixie said:


> I have no idea why they feel the need to retaliate. It's kinda sad... they had it their way via uneven moderation for years. Some people are just greedy, I guess.


A lot of the unpleasant people claim they were picked on way back when.
Now that they think it's all swinging their way, they are still unpleasant, crowing about some sort of victory, but still playing the victim, still complaining about some thing or another.
It's perplexing for sure.


----------



## mreynolds

Don't understand all the banning myself. 

To the mods:

Don't ban anyone attacking me please. I can take care of myself.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Well, you might be the only one then. There are lots of other forums and msny of ypur fellow conservatives have and do talk about HT in them. Most of the mods as well. All of them modding GC and Politics have bedn on other forums I have been on.


Could I get a link to those forums please?


----------



## wr

mreynolds said:


> Don't understand all the banning myself.
> 
> 
> 
> To the mods:
> 
> 
> 
> Don't ban anyone attacking me please. I can take care of myself.



Nobody has been banned in quite some time and we actually prefer not to ban anybody.


----------



## mreynolds

wr said:


> Nobody has been banned in quite some time and we actually prefer not to ban anybody.


Thanks WR, that is good to know. Like I said, didn't have time really to read all the posts just glossed over it. I guess I should get all the info first but I did mean what I said. I don't care what others opinions are. If I don't agree it doesn't mean I am right and they are wrong. It just means we don't agree.


----------



## Evons hubby

mreynolds said:


> Thanks WR, that is good to know. Like I said, didn't have time really to read all the posts just glossed over it. I guess I should get all the info first but I did mean what I said. I don't care what others opinions are. If I don't agree it doesn't mean I am right and they are wrong. It just means we don't agree.


I look at it a bit differently.... If someone agrees with me it means they are properly informed and have their head on straight, if they don't agree with me they are improperly informed and it's my obligation to update their education. If I do my job correctly then they agree with me and all is well with the world. If they still don't agree with me then I have failed through no fault of theirs. So far it would appear that I am not a very good teacher. :Bawling:


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> Could I get a link to those forums please?


You did not get an invite either?


----------



## Evons hubby

Cornhusker said:


> Could I get a link to those forums please?





painterswife said:


> You did not get an invite either?


Before y'all get to feeling special..... I wasn't invited either.... And that works for me!


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Txsteader said:


> And you don't see that happening now?


*Show *your examples so everyone can "see" it.

I suspect all you can show is some moderators stating their views on certain issues, whereas the example presented already shows a moderator/administrator telling a poster: 

"It means you appear to have no idea and are just trying to stir up trouble." and: 

"But I know you don't have any idea what it takes to be responsible for a company or many companies."

You only saw the tip of the iceberg


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> You did not get an invite either?





Yvonne's hubby said:


> Before y'all get to feeling special..... I wasn't invited either.... And that works for me!


This smacks of discrimination :viking:
Obviously they aren't inviting good looking people.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Bearfootfarm said:


> *Show *your examples so everyone can "see" it.
> 
> I suspect all you can show is some moderators stating their views on certain issues, whereas the example presented already shows a moderator/administrator telling a poster:
> 
> "It means you appear to have no idea and are just trying to stir up trouble." and:
> 
> "But I know you don't have any idea what it takes to be responsible for a company or many companies."
> 
> You only saw the tip of the iceberg


Positively vile in PMs. Unfortunately I lost them when I was reinstated, actually I have no idea if they were still there or they were deleted...


----------



## Irish Pixie

Cornhusker said:


> A lot of the unpleasant people claim they were picked on way back when.
> Now that they think it's all swinging their way, they are still unpleasant, crowing about some sort of victory, but still playing the victim, still complaining about some thing or another.
> It's perplexing for sure.


Kind of what you and others are doing now? Huh. Perhaps you are confused?


----------



## arabian knight

A mirror might be a good thing to look into


----------



## AmericanStand

To me it seems as if moderation is much more open to all. 
The only thing I'm disgusted with is the bullying name calling.


----------



## Evons hubby

AmericanStand said:


> To me it seems as if moderation is much more open to all.
> The only thing I'm disgusted with is the bullying name calling.


it does get a bit old. Not exactly sure which part of "be nice" that nonsense is a part of.


----------



## gapeach

Bullying, baiting, bullying, saying that people are playing a victim by people who seem to be victims advocates, Using their same little "I will call you out" if you, blah,blah,blah, tactics all of these things are wrong and a big pain in the posterior. There is nothing like this that I have seen in the last 4 yrs like it until it started about 6 months ago.


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> Bullying, baiting, bullying, saying that people are playing a victim by people who seem to be victims advocates, Using their same little "I will call you out" if you, blah,blah,blah, tactics all of these things are wrong and a big pain in the posterior. *There is nothing like this that I have seen in the last 4 yrs like it until it started about 6 months ago*.


That's because no one left of center was allowed an opinion. 

Everything you've indicated- bullying, baiting, saying that people are playing a victim, etc. is exactly what your "gang" has been doing for the last six months. It was just pointed back at you (collective you). 

I think the tactics are a huge pain in the butt too.


----------



## Patchouli

Jolly said:


> I disagree.
> 
> It would be different if all were playing by the same rules, but I have seen some extreme levels of snark from folks on the Left. Remarks that are just obscure enough to be a personal attack, while still remaining within the law of the rule, if not the spirit.
> 
> All I ask is to treat everybody the same.


So basically what you are saying here is one side is actually clever enough post and not get in trouble and the other not so much. Might want to think about that for a minute.


----------



## Patchouli

I have to say I find the complete irony of a thread started in order to whine about supposed whiners highly amusing. 

If you don't like baiting and trolling don't do it. Ignore those who do. My Daddy always told me the best way to get someone who was picking on you to stop was to quit satisfying them with your reactions. I am all for more measured and adult conversations but they all seem to end in the same cat fights. Just say no. Don't engage. Keep the conversation on the up and up. Ultimately the Mods can't fix the problem. It's the posters who have to make the right choices.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Irish Pixie said:


> Positively vile in PMs. Unfortunately I lost them when I was reinstated, actually I have no idea if they were still there or they were deleted...


All my saved PM's were still there. I don't think any were deleted but I really don't know for sure. I don't PM much at all.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Bearfootfarm said:


> All my saved PM's were still there. I don't think any were deleted but I really don't know for sure. I don't PM much at all.


There was an issue with having too many PMs (I kept all the really nasty ones) and at that point only having storage for X amount of PMs.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Originally Posted by Jolly View Post
> I disagree.
> 
> It would be different if all were playing by the same rules, but I have seen some extreme levels of snark *from folks on the Left*. Remarks that are just obscure enough to be a personal attack, while still remaining within the law of the rule, if not the spirit.
> 
> All I ask is to treat everybody the same.


That parroted line about all the "snark" coming from the left sounds like something a 4 year old would say, while poking out her lower lip, and stomping her foot,

Don't pretend you and your buddies don't troll like everyone else


----------



## wiscto

http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/7556714-post8.html

Seems to me like this was standard stuff back when I was just a lurker here. Looks like trolling to me.


----------



## painterswife

wiscto said:


> http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/7556714-post8.html
> 
> Seems to me like this was standard stuff back when I was just a lurker here. Looks like trolling to me.


Spot on.


----------



## gapeach

Irish Pixie said:


> That's because no one left of center was allowed an opinion.
> 
> Everything you've indicated- bullying, baiting, saying that people are playing a victim, etc. is exactly what your "gang" has been doing for the last six months. It was just pointed back at you (collective you).
> 
> I think the tactics are a huge pain in the butt too.


If that is so, it is very strange that you are the first to do it.


----------



## gapeach

Irish Pixie said:


> There was an issue with having too many PMs (I kept all the really nasty ones) and at that point only having storage for X amount of PMs.


I can believe that. I've never sent you a pm but if I did, it would a nasty one. They probably were using restraint at that.


----------



## Irish Pixie

gapeach said:


> I can believe that. I've never sent you a pm but if I did, it would a nasty one. They probably were using restraint at that.


And that says a lot about you as a human being. I've never felt the need to be personally nasty enough to even consider sending a PM like that.


----------



## gapeach

Irish Pixie said:


> That's because no one left of center was allowed an opinion.
> 
> Everything you've indicated- bullying, baiting, saying that people are playing a victim, etc. is exactly what your "gang" has been doing for the last six months. It was just pointed back at you (collective you).
> 
> I think the tactics are a huge pain in the butt too.


Maybe the moderation took a 90degree angle that is way out of range of what it should be.
Maybe it is too acute for this group of posters.


----------



## Patchouli

gapeach said:


> I can believe that. I've never sent you a pm but if I did, it would a nasty one. They probably were using restraint at that.


:shocked: And it's the Left side that has issues here?


----------



## gapeach

Patchouli said:


> :shocked: And it's the Left side that has issues here?


I don't have any issues. If I did, I would have sent her a pm. :happy2:

Don't be jumping to conclusions~


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> I can believe that. I've never sent you a pm but if I did, it would a nasty one. They probably were using restraint at that.


That looks a lot like baiting to me.


----------



## Irish Pixie

painterswife said:


> That looks a lot like baiting to me.


Rather insulting as well.


----------



## SLFarmMI

I've only been here a couple of years, but I've been around long enough to see that the nastiness has been coming in equal measure from both sides, conservatives and liberals. Without fail, if a conservative poster posts something, a liberal poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. And if a liberal poster posts something, a conservative poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. I've noticed the nastiness on both sides has been increasing over the last couple of months. It's getting so bad that I wonder if a thread as innocuous as "Hello, it's Sunday" would escape the nastiness.

I've also noticed a distinct lack, from both sides, of standing behind the words that are posted. No matter what the topic, it appears that when a poster is called out for being nasty or insulting, there is usually a "the other side was nasty first" or "but you said..." argument coming. As I tell my students, "Own your words. You said it, own it." 

I've noticed that many of us (myself included) have forgotten the "be nice" rule. I'd like this site to get back to that rule. It is possible to argue, passionately even, without being nasty or insulting.

That's my 2 cents.


----------



## Evons hubby

SLFarmMI said:


> I've only been here a couple of years, but I've been around long enough to see that the nastiness has been coming in equal measure from both sides, conservatives and liberals. Without fail, if a conservative poster posts something, a liberal poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. And if a liberal poster posts something, a conservative poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. I've noticed the nastiness on both sides has been increasing over the last couple of months. It's getting so bad that I wonder if a thread as innocuous as "Hello, it's Sunday" would escape the nastiness.
> 
> I've also noticed a distinct lack, from both sides, of standing behind the words that are posted. No matter what the topic, it appears that when a poster is called out for being nasty or insulting, there is usually a "the other side was nasty first" or "but you said..." argument coming. As I tell my students, "Own your words. You said it, own it."
> 
> I've noticed that many of us (myself included) have forgotten the "be nice" rule. I'd like this site to get back to that rule. It is possible to argue, passionately even, without being nasty or insulting.
> 
> That's my 2 cents.


I am one of those that stands by their words. On the rare occasion if another poster offers evidence that something I posted was in error, I will accept the facts, alter my way of thinking and move on content in the knowledge that I have learned something today.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am one of those that stands by their words. On the rare occasion if another poster offers evidence that something I posted was in error, I will accept the facts, alter my way of thinking and move on content in the knowledge that I have learned something today.


I do too. Everyone screws up, and it's the height of arrogance to think you're never wrong.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

SLFarmMI said:


> I've only been here a couple of years, but I've been around long enough to see that the nastiness has been coming in equal measure from both sides, conservatives and liberals. Without fail, if a conservative poster posts something, a liberal poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. And if a liberal poster posts something, a conservative poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. I've noticed the nastiness on both sides has been increasing over the last couple of months. It's getting so bad that I wonder if a thread as innocuous as "Hello, it's Sunday" would escape the nastiness.
> 
> I've also noticed a distinct lack, from both sides, of standing behind the words that are posted. No matter what the topic, it appears that when a poster is called out for being nasty or insulting, there is usually a "the other side was nasty first" or "but you said..." argument coming. As I tell my students, "Own your words. You said it, own it."
> 
> I've noticed that many of us (myself included) have forgotten the "be nice" rule. I'd like this site to get back to that rule. It is possible to argue, passionately even, without being nasty or insulting.
> 
> *That's my 2 cents*.


If I used the "like" feature, I'd use it for your post.

I've been trying to point out it's *both* sides, but that just makes everyone hate you


----------



## gapeach

SLFarmMI said:


> I've only been here a couple of years, but I've been around long enough to see that the nastiness has been coming in equal measure from both sides, conservatives and liberals. Without fail, if a conservative poster posts something, a liberal poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. And if a liberal poster posts something, a conservative poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. I've noticed the nastiness on both sides has been increasing over the last couple of months. It's getting so bad that I wonder if a thread as innocuous as "Hello, it's Sunday" would escape the nastiness.
> 
> I've also noticed a distinct lack, from both sides, of standing behind the words that are posted. No matter what the topic, it appears that when a poster is called out for being nasty or insulting, there is usually a "the other side was nasty first" or "but you said..." argument coming. As I tell my students, "Own your words. You said it, own it."
> 
> I've noticed that many of us (myself included) have forgotten the "be nice" rule. I'd like this site to get back to that rule. It is possible to argue, passionately even, without being nasty or insulting.
> 
> That's my 2 cents.


Thanks, I agree with you. IF a conservative posts, there are certain topics that a liberal will jump out cocked and ready to shoot you down. When one does it, the rest of the Mod squad chimes in and calls you out.

So what do you do, sit there and take it or retaliate?

I also would like to get back to being nice but you cannot have someone jumping on you with all 4's if you post a topic that they have decided is not a good one. An don't dare post anything to one of their topics like Abortion and Planned Parenthood unless it is agreement.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> Thanks, I agree with you. IF a conservative posts, there are certain topics that a liberal will jump out cocked and ready to shoot you down. When one does it, the rest of the Mod squad chimes in and calls you out.
> 
> So what do you do, sit there and take it or retaliate?
> 
> I also would like to get back to being nice but you cannot have someone jumping on you with all 4's if you post a topic that they have decided is not a good one. An don't dare post anything to one of their topics like Abortion and Planned Parenthood unless it is agreement.


Sounds like you don't think both sides do the same thing? 

The whole calling some of us the mod squad is baiting but you continue to do it.


----------



## where I want to

It would be somewhat effective if every single post that offers nothing but variations on the themes of why someone else is wrong, without a single rationale or fact added, were simply deleted. In both directions.
But, as I was told when I objected to a poster accusing another poster of vile things of which there was zero indication had occured, the moderator felt it was an "important topic." So, like many, that original poster left, never to be heard from again.


----------



## SLFarmMI

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am one of those that stands by their words. On the rare occasion if another poster offers evidence that something I posted was in error, I will accept the facts, alter my way of thinking and move on content in the knowledge that I have learned something today.


Yes, I have noticed that about you and respect that about you.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> When one does it, the rest of *the Mod squad* chimes in and calls you out.
> 
> So what do you do, sit there and take it or retaliate?
> 
> I* also would like to get back to being nice *but you cannot have someone jumping on you with all 4's if you post a topic that they have decided is not a good one.


You missed a good chance when you resorted to the name calling (that's not even original.)


----------



## Evons hubby

gapeach said:


> Thanks, I agree with you. IF a conservative posts, there are certain topics that a liberal will jump out cocked and ready to shoot you down. When one does it, the rest of the Mod squad chimes in and calls you out.
> 
> *So what do you do, sit there and take it or retaliate?*
> 
> I also would like to get back to being nice but you cannot have someone jumping on you with all 4's if you post a topic that they have decided is not a good one. An don't dare post anything to one of their topics like Abortion and Planned Parenthood unless it is agreement.


I usually ask for actual evidence that refutes whatever I had posted. Which rarely happens and it eases my mind knowing my thoughts were correct all along. No need to retaliate or even respond to personal attacks.


----------



## gapeach

The Mod Squad? Have they ever objected to it? If they have, I gladly apologize right now and will never call them that again.


----------



## gapeach

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I usually ask for actual evidence that refutes whatever I had posted. Which rarely happens and it eases my mind knowing my thoughts were correct all along. No need to retaliate or even respond to personal attacks.


I don't consider you Mod Squad status. You hang in there with them on Abortion and PP but you and Bearfoot Farm are not the people who jump on you cocked and ready to call you out, troll or bait.


----------



## AmericanStand

There is a reason that sports teams don't bring their own referees.


----------



## Evons hubby

SLFarmMI said:


> Yes, I have noticed that about you and respect that about you.


Thanks for noticing.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> The Mod Squad? Have they ever objected to it? If they have, I gladly apologize right now and will never call them that again.


It is baiting and I object to not being treated as an individual. I had hoped the childish name calling would stop on it's own. I doubt it will.


----------



## where I want to

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I usually ask for actual evidence that refutes whatever I had posted. Which rarely happens and it eases my mind knowing my thoughts were correct all along. No need to retaliate or even respond to personal attacks.


If you like facts, then go back and look at what happens. An insulting personal post, done persistently enough, will get a response sooner or later. And that gets more snark, repeated ad nauseum. Until just about every thread gets hijacked into that exchange if it includes any of the hot button topics. 

I have put so many people on ignore that there are whole threads in which there are one or two posts readable. It gets confusing after awhile. Sometimes to the point of having three or more coversations going on simultaneously and you don't know who is talking to whom about what.


----------



## AmericanStand

Everyone wants to think they sit square in the middle of common sense. The way it looks on a scale of 1 to 100 is that a moderator siting at say 75 thinks they are well balanced. From what they can see there are some to both the left and right of them. 
But it's obvious that if they are willing to let the argument rage 20 points from their view it will take in all but the most extreme of one side while Note even extending to the center of the discussion.


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> It is baiting and I object to not being treated as an individual. I had hoped the childish name calling would stop on it's own. I doubt it will.


I did not know that you objected to it. Last time I will call you that.
I would like to get along with you and not have these problems if I continue to post here. You will have to do your part too though and not try to dictate what I post. If you don't like it, ignore it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> The Mod Squad? *Have they ever objected to it?* If they have, I gladly apologize right now and will never call them that again.


Why should anyone *have to* "object" to being labeled in a clearly derogatory manner?

It's just more of the "us against them" BS that is ignored by all those who say all the "unpleasant" things come from the left/liberals/perverts or whatever silly adjective they want to toss out that makes them feel superior.

Go back and look at the posts with all the *real* name calling and baiting, note who said it, and who "liked" it.

You'll start to see a pattern


----------



## Cornhusker

Patchouli said:


> :shocked: And it's the Left side that has issues here?


Yes, that is correct :fussin:


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Sounds like you don't think both sides do the same thing?
> 
> The whole calling some of us the mod squad is baiting but you continue to do it.


That was me
It's not meant to be baiting, it's meant to point out that some tend to get bossy, tell us what we can post, where it should be posted and what our response should be or not, how wrong we are, what kind of footnotes, evidence, links, sworn testimony, etc we should have before our opinions are valid.
Gets kind of old, y'know?


----------



## where I want to

Cornhusker said:


> Yes, that is correct :fussin:


Everyone has issues. But not many go on seek and destroy missions.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> I did not know that you objected to it. Last time I will call you that.
> I would like to get along with you and not have these problems if I continue to post here. You will have to do your part too though and not try to dictate what I post. If you don't like it, ignore it.


How many times do I say it. You can post whatever topic you like. I however can also express my opinion on that topic. 

Calling names is not needed to express your opinion.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> It is baiting and I object to not being treated as an individual. I had hoped the childish name calling would stop on it's own. I doubt it will.


If you want to be treated as an individual, don't run in a pack.
It's pretty easy


----------



## gapeach

Bearfootfarm said:


> Why should anyone *have to* "object" to being labeled in a clearly derogatory manner?
> 
> It's just more of the "us against them" BS that is ignored by all those who say all the "unpleasant" things come from the left/liberals/perverts or whatever silly adjective they want to toss out that makes them feel superior.
> 
> Go back and look at the posts with all the *real* name calling and baiting, note who said it, and who "liked" it.
> 
> You'll start to see a pattern


When you are mad, you automatically agree with those that are on your side. I don't know which one on the left but one of them indicated that they were not disagreeable with the Mod Squad label. I'm not going to sift thru the posts to find it. If it is degrading, then I won't use it any more. 
I think the ones from the left are those that continually do the baiting, trolling and calling names. You may disagree. I don't know. You have not been attacked like I have.


----------



## gapeach

Cornhusker said:


> If you want to be treated as an individual, don't run in a pack.
> It's pretty easy


and don't "like" every comment that those of your pack make. It is really silly and childish.


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> That was me
> It's not meant to be baiting, it's meant to point out that some tend to get bossy, tell us what we can post, where it should be posted and what our response should be or not, how wrong we are, what kind of footnotes, evidence, links, sworn testimony, etc we should have before our opinions are valid.
> Gets kind of old, y'know?


Our your hands clean? 

Several have picked up on it and you all use it to bait and troll. To say otherwise is ingenuous.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Cornhusker said:


> That was me
> It's not meant to be baiting, it's meant to point out that some tend to get bossy, tell us what we can post, where it should be posted and what our response should be or not, how wrong we are, what kind of footnotes, evidence, links, sworn testimony, etc we should have before our opinions are valid.
> Gets kind of old, y'know?


Again, you'd have to be pretending to think that doesn't come from both sides.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> and don't "like" every comment that those of your pack make. It is really silly and childish.


Oh come on, everyone except BFF is doing that including you


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> If you want to be treated as an individual, don't run in a pack.
> It's pretty easy


Just because you believe that does not make it true. My friends on here and I are very different people with many very different viewpoints but with some that are similar.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Our your hands clean?
> 
> Several have picked up on it and you all use it to bait and troll. To say otherwise is ingenuous.


Maybe we have a different definition of baiting and trolling


----------



## gapeach

I know that I do it as much as anybody but I am ready to either get out or get along. At almost 75 years old I really don't need fussin' and feudin' , being called out, being called names in my life. I am what I am and am not going to worry about being called out....or called names either. :soap:


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> I think the ones from the left are those that continually do the baiting, trolling and calling names.
> *You may disagree*. I don't know.
> *You have not been attacked like I have*.


LOL 
How could you NOT know I disagree, when I've said it multiple times?

Would you like a link to an entire thread devoted to attacking me?

http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/ad...pport/540454-sincere-question-moderators.html

The first step towards solving a problem is admitting it exists.


----------



## Cornhusker

Bearfootfarm said:


> Again, you'd have to be pretending to think that doesn't come from both sides.


I've never said that at all.
I speak from my own personal experiences, I don't rampage around every corner of this forum correcting the wrong thinking of everyone who has an idea or opinion that I don't happen to agree with.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Just because you believe that does not make it true. My friends on here and I are very different people with many very different viewpoints but with some that are similar.


My opinion:cowboy:


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> and don't "like" every comment that those of your pack make. *It is really silly and childish*.


Yes, it is:
Cornhusker:


> If you want to be treated as an individual, don't run in a pack.
> It's pretty easy
> Like
> Sawmill Jim and gapeach like this.


----------



## where I want to

gapeach said:


> I know that I do it as much as anybody but I am ready to either get out or get along. At almost 75 years old I really don't need fussin' and feudin' , being called out, being called names in my life. I am what I am and am not going to worry about being called out....or called names either. :soap:


The ignore function helps although it can be a PITA. I only see the flood of personal insults when they are quoted in someone else's post. I was ignoring everyone who quoted the insults but I've not been as rigorous with that lately. There have been a couple of thread where virtually all the posts were ignored but, once you make up your mind that you knew what these people would say on every issues anyway and didn't need to bother reading it, it really does smooth the way.


----------



## Evons hubby

Oh yeah! Well my daddy can whip your momma! If she's really drunk. Ok so my daddy is a woosie. :shrug:


----------



## Txsteader

I know one thing for sure. Since the ownership transfer, Melissa & a lot of others leaving, and now what's going on here in GC, HT is going down the tubes.


----------



## gapeach

BFF, I am going to give this some serious research tomorrow. Thanks.


----------



## AmericanStand

I'Umm could someone Tell me who's in my pack ?
And is it the right left liberal or conservative one ?


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Txsteader said:


> I know one thing for sure. Since the ownership transfer, Melissa & a lot of others leaving, and now what's going on here in GC, HT is going down the tubes.


I think you are right soon there will be many less posters or discussion .

As I see it I took quite a lot of a lots of humiliation for some words my spell check put it that I could not see good .Non ask for in anyway .This to me was a classic example of what liberals do .

I even looked up the doctrine of the Church of Satan just trying to find why someone would be so evil to attack a poster for honest mistakes ,just for the purpose to humiliate someone . I found even their members would not stoop so low .

I found the death of this country won't be ISIS, terrorist ect but liberalism ie liberals ,

http://www.americadeathwatch.com/top-ten-hypocrisies-of-liberals.php


----------



## painterswife

Sawmill Jim said:


> I think you are right soon there will be many less posters or discussion .
> 
> As I see it I took quite a lot of a lots of humiliation for some words my spell check put it that I could not see good .Non ask for in anyway .This to me was a classic example of what liberals do .
> 
> I even looked up the doctrine of the Church of Satan just trying to find why someone would be so evil to attack a poster for honest mistakes ,just for the purpose to humiliate someone . I found even their members would not stoop so low .
> 
> I found the death of this country won't be ISIS, terrorist ect but liberalism ie liberals ,
> 
> http://www.americadeathwatch.com/top-ten-hypocrisies-of-liberals.php


You don't wish others to humilate you but your tagg line seems to be an attempt to put down liberals. I don't see you practising what you preach.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Sawmill Jim said:


> I think you are right soon there will be many less posters or discussion .
> 
> *As I see it I took quite a lot of a lots of humiliation for some words* my spell check put it that I could not see good .Non ask for in anyway .This to me was a classic example of what liberals do .
> 
> I even looked up the doctrine of the Church of Satan just trying to find why someone would be *so evil to attack a poster* for honest mistakes ,just for the purpose* to humiliate someone* . I found even their members would not stoop so low .
> 
> I found the death of this country won't be ISIS, terrorist ect but liberalism ie liberals ,
> 
> http://www.americadeathwatch.com/top-ten-hypocrisies-of-liberals.php


I guess you mean the one where you were telling others how poor their reading comprehension skills were?

I also believe it was just before you (very creatively) called me a big ass.

Sorry, but I'm not buying your act when you're also saying people here are worse than Satanists


----------



## Tobster

SLFarmMI said:


> I've only been here a couple of years, but I've been around long enough to see that the nastiness has been coming in equal measure from both sides, conservatives and liberals. Without fail, if a conservative poster posts something, a liberal poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. And if a liberal poster posts something, a conservative poster will (within about 10 posts or so) post something nasty and insulting. I've noticed the nastiness on both sides has been increasing over the last couple of months. It's getting so bad that I wonder if a thread as innocuous as "Hello, it's Sunday" would escape the nastiness.
> 
> I've also noticed a distinct lack, from both sides, of standing behind the words that are posted. No matter what the topic, it appears that when a poster is called out for being nasty or insulting, there is usually a "the other side was nasty first" or "but you said..." argument coming. As I tell my students, "Own your words. You said it, own it."
> 
> I've noticed that many of us (myself included) have forgotten the "be nice" rule. I'd like this site to get back to that rule. It is possible to argue, passionately even, without being nasty or insulting.
> 
> That's my 2 cents.


I believe much of what you observed about the postings on this forum extend beyond HT. The web seems full of individuals who spend a lot of time surfing and googling, as a result of those actions they become convinced their opinions are now those of an expert. One person spends years reading books, studying, attending seminars, analysis of observation and another person reads one article on the internet and the person who reads the one article suddenly feels their opinion on the matter is as valid as person who has spent years on the subject. The web is full of experts whose knowledge is an inch deep and a mile wide, to disagree with them is to insult them. They prefer a world of black and white. On most matters of importance, the details and circumstances are complicated, nuanced and evolving. Everyone has an opinion but not all opinions are equal. Try arguing that and the blather on GC is what you get.


----------



## gapeach

AmericanStand said:


> I'Umm could someone Tell me who's in my pack ?
> And is it the right left liberal or conservative one ?


You may be liberal on a lot of things but I don't see you as someone who is mean or tries to degrade people. I think you are very smart and fair.


----------



## AmericanStand

Oh GAPeach you are obviously of greatly superior intellect and Beauty. 
I may be in love. 

Funny I usually think of myself as very conservative.


----------



## wiscto

AmericanStand said:


> Funny I usually think of myself as very conservative.


Yea I'm used to being yelled at by a crowd of 20 something social justice warriors, to be honest. For anything from not believing we have to immediately outlaw contact sports because of the concussions, to not believing in a 60% tax for the super rich or using words that have been outlawed by the left.


----------



## Patchouli

gapeach said:


> Thanks, I agree with you. IF a conservative posts, there are certain topics that a liberal will jump out cocked and ready to shoot you down. When one does it, the rest of the Mod squad chimes in and calls you out.
> 
> So what do you do, sit there and take it or retaliate?
> 
> I also would like to get back to being nice but you cannot have someone jumping on you with all 4's if you post a topic that they have decided is not a good one. An don't dare post anything to one of their topics like Abortion and Planned Parenthood unless it is agreement.


Ignore it if you think it is baiting or childish.


----------



## Patchouli

Cornhusker said:


> If you want to be treated as an individual, don't run in a pack.
> It's pretty easy


This may come as a shock to you but you are part of a pretty obvious cohort yourself. :idea:


----------



## Patchouli

Sawmill Jim said:


> I think you are right soon there will be many less posters or discussion .
> 
> As I see it I took quite a lot of a lots of humiliation for some words my spell check put it that I could not see good .Non ask for in anyway .This to me was a classic example of what liberals do .
> 
> I even looked up the doctrine of the Church of Satan just trying to find why someone would be so evil to attack a poster for honest mistakes ,just for the purpose to humiliate someone . I found even their members would not stoop so low .
> 
> I found the death of this country won't be ISIS, terrorist ect but liberalism ie liberals ,
> 
> http://www.americadeathwatch.com/top-ten-hypocrisies-of-liberals.php


 If I remember correctly you pointed out someone else's mistakes first and then someone pointed out the irony. Number one rule of correcting other people is be very, very careful in your next few posts not to make a mistake yourself. 

And really comparing people to Satanists?


----------



## Evons hubby

Patchouli said:


> If I remember correctly you pointed out someone else's mistakes first and then someone pointed out the irony. Number one rule of correcting other people is be very, very careful in your next few posts not to make a mistake yourself.
> 
> And really comparing people to Satanists?


Satanists are people too.


----------



## Sawmill Jim

Patchouli said:


> If I remember correctly you pointed out someone else's mistakes first and then someone pointed out the irony. Number one rule of correcting other people is be very, very careful in your next few posts not to make a mistake yourself.
> 
> And really comparing people to Satanists?


If I remember I pointed out someone was incorrect in their understanding of words and were attempting to shed light on their theology of liberalism .

The church of Satan has a web site compare them to liberalism and see for your self .

Many liberals don't believe in God or Satan so why the


----------



## Evons hubby

Sawmill Jim said:


> If I remember I pointed out someone was incorrect in their understanding of words and were attempting to shed light on their theology of liberalism .
> 
> The church of Satan has a web site compare them to liberalism and see for your self .
> 
> Many liberals don't believe in God or Satan so why the


Many conservatives don't beleive in God or satan either, their are some, such as myself, that beleive in God and the bible, but aren't too fond of any organized religion. I also know many liberals who beleive in God, satan and are quite religious. It's really difficult to sort folks out into well defined groups. It's kinda like the war between the sexes,,,,, which will never be won,,,,, too durn much fraternization with the enemy!


----------



## AmericanStand

wiscto said:


> Yea I'm used to being yelled at by a crowd of 20 something social justice warriors, to be honest. For anything from not believing we have to immediately outlaw contact sports because of the concussions, to not believing in a 60% tax for the super rich or using words that have been outlawed by the left.



Are they yelling Conservative or Liberal ?
You see as a conservative American stand I stand with the Eisenhower administration. 

That was a pretty conservative time right?
During that time top level income tax rate was 90 %. 
It wasn't till a bunch of liberal Republicans came along and upset the status quo that it was lowered. 
This United States of America seem to run pretty well during that time. 

But somehow things have gotten all turned around and a bunch of liberal tax cutting , don't pay the bills people want to call my old fashioned conservative stand liberal. !

See how complicated one small faucet a persons political leaning can be ?


----------



## mmoetc

Can I be Linc? I always wanted a big Afro.


----------



## AmericanStand

But your a no fro bro !


----------



## Irish Pixie

Patchouli said:


> This may come as a shock to you but you are part of a pretty obvious cohort yourself. :idea:


^^THIS! Whereas most members have dialed down the name calling, anti-whatever "side" you've ratcheted it up. Just reread your last 20 posts. I'm trying, why don't you? 

If this board is to become more mellow _everyone_ needs to be involved.


----------



## AmericanStand

Patchouli said:


> This may come as a shock to you but you are part of a pretty obvious cohort yourself. :idea:



Irish pixie I see this as a pretty innocuous post how does it ratchet things up?


----------



## Irish Pixie

AmericanStand said:


> Irish pixie I see this as a pretty innocuous post how does it ratchet things up?


I was agreeing with Patchouli, not using that post as an example of ratcheting.


----------



## Tiempo

wiscto said:


> Yea I'm used to being yelled at by a crowd of 20 something social justice warriors, to be honest. For anything from not believing we have to immediately outlaw contact sports because of the concussions, to not believing in a 60% tax for the super rich or using words that have been outlawed by the left.


I find myself often in the same boat as a distinctly liberal leaning yet not so much the bleeding heart hyper thought controlling variety. I had some feminists mad at me just yesterday, even though, in many ways I am feminist, just not radically so.


----------



## Cornhusker

It may surprise you all to know that I'm not a rabid conservative.
I lean that way, sure, but I do have some leanings some would call mildly liberal. :fussin:


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> It may surprise you all to know that I'm not a rabid conservative.
> I lean that way, sure, but I do have some leanings some would call mildly liberal. :fussin:


I am not surprised. Very few people fit the boxes that the labels of conservative or liberal confine them to.


----------



## wiscto

I honestly think that this is the real problem in this country.... The impatient extremes will now no longer compromise, they will no longer seek new information to check their "facts," they will no longer wait for all of the facts to come in, and they won't tolerate anyone who does do any of that. And unfortunately, they no longer have to, because the snake oil salesmen in the 24 hour news cycle and the blogospheres realized about 15 years ago that they can make the most money on those who are ready and willing to jump to conclusions and be angry.....because they will then watch more 24 hour news and read more BS blogs as a result. Those are usually the people who are mainly looking for someone to blame for something (anything really), because that is the least complicated "truth" to grab onto. So the 24 hour news snake oil salesman and their blogosphere minions serve blame up on a silver platter, with a glaze of half truth and a sprinkle of blatant lie. Then the BS spreads through the chatter boxes and gossip circles, and the easy targets run around lumping everyone into the "Liberal" or "Conservative" category without really listening to anyone with open minds. 

Basically, they've gone tribal. And I'd give them about another ten years before they're painting themselves and throwing rocks at each other...and maybe howling at the moon. Probably another twenty before they start flinging their own feces at each other. We are seeing the total degeneration of American minds. The rest of us, even though we are the majority by far, will be stuck in the middle. 

And of course.... If you ask the people who are doing all the damage, they'll do what they have been trained to do. Blame it on the Liberals or the Conservatives depending on which tribe they belong to.

:soap:


----------



## Irish Pixie

wiscto said:


> I honestly think that this is the real problem in this country.... The impatient extremes will now no longer compromise, they will no longer seek new information to check their "facts," they will no longer wait for all of the facts to come in, and they won't tolerate anyone who does do any of that. And unfortunately, they no longer have to, because the snake oil salesmen in the 24 hour news cycle and the blogospheres realized about 15 years ago that they can make the most money on those who are ready and willing to jump to conclusions and be angry.....because they will then watch more 24 hour news and read more BS blogs as a result. Those are usually the people who are mainly looking for someone to blame for something (anything really), because that is the least complicated "truth" to grab onto. So the 24 hour news snake oil salesman and their blogosphere minions serve blame up on a silver platter, with a glaze of half truth and a sprinkle of blatant lie. Then the BS spreads through the chatter boxes and gossip circles, and the easy targets run around lumping everyone into the "Liberal" or "Conservative" category without really listening to anyone with open minds.
> 
> Basically, they've gone tribal. And I'd give them about another ten years before they're painting themselves and throwing rocks at each other...and maybe howling at the moon. Probably another twenty before they start flinging their own feces at each other. We are seeing the total degeneration of American minds. The rest of us, even though we are the majority by far, will be stuck in the middle.
> 
> And of course.... If you ask the people who are doing all the damage, they'll do what they have been trained to do. Blame it on the Liberals or the Conservatives depending on which tribe they belong to.
> 
> :soap:


Spot on.


----------



## Tricky Grama

Cornhusker said:


> Maybe we have a different definition of baiting and trolling


Herein lies the rub.
Or something like that. Gapeach was just accused of baiting or trolling, not going to go back & see which & for sure, there was NONE there...
Just appears that some can do & say whatever they wish & BAM! others are chided for ...posting.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> I honestly think that this is the real problem in this country.... The impatient extremes will now no longer compromise, they will no longer seek new information to check their "facts," they will no longer wait for all of the facts to come in, and they won't tolerate anyone who does do any of that. And unfortunately, they no longer have to, because the snake oil salesmen in the 24 hour news cycle and the blogospheres realized about 15 years ago that they can make the most money on those who are ready and willing to jump to conclusions and be angry.....because they will then watch more 24 hour news and read more BS blogs as a result. Those are usually the people who are mainly looking for someone to blame for something (anything really), because that is the least complicated "truth" to grab onto. So the 24 hour news snake oil salesman and their blogosphere minions serve blame up on a silver platter, with a glaze of half truth and a sprinkle of blatant lie. Then the BS spreads through the chatter boxes and gossip circles, and the easy targets run around lumping everyone into the "Liberal" or "Conservative" category without really listening to anyone with open minds.
> 
> Basically, they've gone tribal. And I'd give them about another ten years before they're painting themselves and throwing rocks at each other...and maybe howling at the moon. Probably another twenty before they start flinging their own feces at each other. We are seeing the total degeneration of American minds. The rest of us, even though we are the majority by far, will be stuck in the middle.
> 
> And of course.... If you ask the people who are doing all the damage, they'll do what they have been trained to do. Blame it on the Liberals or the Conservatives depending on which tribe they belong to.
> 
> :soap:


I believe it's the "government" doing it.
Think about the division that has happened in the last 2 or 3 decades.
Look how much more sharply divided we are just since Obama.
The push towards race division, class envy, terms such as "white privilege", 1 percenters, "Tea Baggers", and on and on and on.
All day every day we are pelted with rhetoric from both sides designed to keep us bickering while the elite line their pockets and gain more power.


----------



## Cornhusker

Irish Pixie said:


> Spot on.


Monica?


----------



## Agriculture

Txsteader said:


> I know one thing for sure. Since the ownership transfer, Melissa & a lot of others leaving, and now what's going on here in GC, HT is going down the tubes.


I disagree. I lurked here occasionally back when. What I saw was a bunch of happy foolish folks who thought that farming was all misty mornings, rainbows and unicorn farts, and a group of smarmy moderators who didn't care what information people were given as long as everyone was slap happy in their little gigglefest. Anyone who came out with the truth, and dog forbid corrected someone was seen as a threat to Mayberry, and was severely reprimanded or banned by Aunt Bea, even when their information was correct. No thanks. I'm not interested in that sort of childish nonsense and promotion of ignorance. 

Now with the changes, here I am, for better or worse, but at least people are now allowed the novel idea of having a difference of opinion. Sure, when you get people who know for sure what they're talking about it sometimes comes with the confidence to stand their ground when also discussing their opinions. So what? I'd rather have that than a bunch of idiots being sheltered by another bunch of idiots all in their little world of make believe.

I honestly don't take much notice about who is "on my side" or not. There are maybe three or 4 people here who have distinctive enough screen names or avatars for me to even remember who is a good guy or a bad guy from my point of view. Mostly I get them all confused and only respond to specific posts or ideas not people. I have had people tell me that they love some of what I post and hate others. Good, and so what? I post what I think, regardless of who will or will not like it. It gets way too constraining and well just more work than I care to put into it to try to qualify what I write based on what my friends or enemies will think. Now there are a few in the past who liked to follow me around intent on debating everything that I write simply because they've decided that they don't like me. They're allowed to because of the more enlightened policy on moderation. I can have a little fun with them if I want, or I can ignore them. I don't need anyone to act like a smothering nursemaid to look out for me. I can stick up for myself.

I was on another forum for family milk cows for a while, but was soon booted off for daring to have an opinion and correcting someone who had some false information. Not that I wish any harm to anyone, but I still check in occasionally to see when, not if, the people who buy little Jersey bull calves and treat them like kittens get injured or killed from following the advice to just keep hugging them and loving them until they "know" not to hurt anyone. Those moderators there are sure doing a god job of protecting everyone's feelings. Too bad they can't help to protect their skulls or rib cages.


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> I believe it's the "government" doing it.
> Think about the division that has happened in the last 2 or 3 decades.
> Look how much more sharply divided we are just since Obama.
> The push towards race division, class envy, terms such as "white privilege", 1 percenters, "Tea Baggers", and on and on and on.
> All day every day we are pelted with rhetoric from both sides designed to keep us bickering while the elite line their pockets and gain more power.


Obama ran as a centrist in 2008. Obamacare is almost word for word the same plan that Republicans proposed in 1996 or 1997. The right's narrative of his administration has had just as much to do with our problems as Obama himself.


----------



## Tiempo

> I believe it's the "government" doing it


I believe it's on the people. We all are capable of independent thought and action (I would hope) and as adults should be able to behave accordingly no matter the idiocy in government.

ETA, IOW and IMO (  )...blaming it on anyone but the individuals is a cop out.


----------



## arabian knight

wiscto said:


> Obama ran as a centrist in 2008. Obamacare is almost word for word the same plan that Republicans proposed in 1996 or 1997. The right's narrative of his administration has had just as much to do with our problems as Obama himself.


CENTRIST? Are you flipping kidding???? He is so far from the center one can not even SEE it.
And NOW he is even further away to the detriment of the USA and American people AND The Constitution~!


----------



## kasilofhome

Divisionist..


----------



## where I want to

If the government rewards one group but only taxes the other, what it going to happen? If the government investigates one group for actions while not investigating another for the same thing, what is going to happen?

Obama won his elections by promising different government beneficence for different groups. He left out the details of how this was going to be done.


----------



## wiscto

arabian knight said:


> CENTRIST? Are you frickin kidding???? He is so far form the center one can not even SEE it.
> And NOW he is even further away to the detriment of the USA and American people AND The Constitution~!


Hate to tell you this, but he ran as a centrist in 2008. He actually ran on "compromise". I wasn't talking about where he is now. I'm talking about how he ran in 2008. Because in 2008 running as a moderate or as a centrist was a path to victory. He sounded more centrist than McCain, who was running to the right, so he won.

And what I'm trying to say is that pretending to be moderate and centrist used to be the way to win. Obama and the Tea Party have so dominated the airwaves with their extremism over the past 7 years that no one knows HOW to run. Which is one of the reasons why Trump is winning. He doesn't care "how" to run, and that's what people want. Ironically, he's more moderate than the Tea Party. By far. 

I wouldn't expect someone on the far right to know where the middle is.


----------



## Evons hubby

wiscto said:


> I wouldn't expect someone on the far right to know where the middle is.


If you consider the great compromise of 1778 as being the center, today you would find the "far right" sitting way to the left of center.


----------



## arabian knight

You are sooooo wrong I don't know what the CENTER is~! Wrong, Wrong, on all counts.
I have taken MNAY tests on the next over the years see where a person is on the chart. and EVERY time and I mean every time I am JUST RIGHT of Center~! So don't tell ME I don't know where and what the center is~!


----------



## wiscto

Yvonne's hubby said:


> If you consider the great compromise of 1778 as being the center, today you would find the "far right" sitting way to the left of center.


I'm more of a realist...


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> Obama ran as a centrist in 2008. Obamacare is almost word for word the same plan that Republicans proposed in 1996 or 1997. The right's narrative of his administration has had just as much to do with our problems as Obama himself.


And there's part of the problem
You will defend Obama even when nobody is attacking.
I never mentioned the Obamacare scam, I talked about his division of this country.
Even the most adoring Obama fan can't deny he's a bigot with an agenda


----------



## Agriculture

I am/was an Obama fan, but I must admit that he's really disappointing me a lot lately. He's pushing the pendulum way too far to the other side now. That thing with the kid with the clock is really bothering me and making me start to think that he's pushing an agenda. Unfairly discriminated against muslim or not, the kid used very poor judgement, but he gets rewarded for it.

Well at least Obama is not stupid. W was just plain stupid. 

In the end, does it really matter? Both used the force and power of the entire US government and the American people to fulfill their personal agendas. I have to frequently remind myself that they are all politicians, first and to the end, so why am I surprised when I pick up the snake and it bites me?


----------



## wiscto

Cornhusker said:


> And there's part of the problem
> You will defend Obama even when nobody is attacking.
> I never mentioned the Obamacare scam, I talked about his division of this country.
> Even the most adoring Obama fan can't deny he's a bigot with an agenda


It isn't a defense. That's the ironic thing about your post. You see it as a defense because you can't think about Obama objectively. Remember, YOU replied to MY post in which I blamed both the Left and Right extremists. You're the one who then claimed that it was the "government" and then you used it as an opportunity to blame it on Obama. 

I'm not defending him so much as pointing out that both extremes are at fault. And I'm going to defend the original Tea Party and Obama both right now... Because the 24 hour news cycle snake oil salesmen painted them both in the worst possible light, often with outright lies, and that ugly narrative has overwhelmed the truth. Both the Tea Party and Obama had to fight that fight in the 2012 election, and that was the monster the 24 hour news cycle created.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> It isn't a defense. That's the ironic thing about your post. You see it as a defense because you can't think about Obama objectively. Remember, YOU replied to MY post in which I blamed both the Left and Right extremists. You're the one who then claimed that it was the "government" and then you used it as an opportunity to blame it on Obama.
> 
> I'm not defending him so much as pointing out that both extremes are at fault. And I'm going to defend the original Tea Party and Obama both right now... Because the 24 hour news cycle snake oil salesmen painted them both in the worst possible light, often with outright lies, and that ugly narrative has overwhelmed the truth. Both the Tea Party and Obama had to fight that fight in the 2012 election, and that was the monster the 24 hour news cycle created.


You do make a good point about the 24 hour news.
However, I still contend Obama is a corrupt bigot with an agenda.
My opinion of course.


----------



## Patchouli

Sawmill Jim said:


> If I remember I pointed out someone was incorrect in their understanding of words and were attempting to shed light on their theology of liberalism .
> 
> The church of Satan has a web site compare them to liberalism and see for your self .
> 
> Many liberals don't believe in God or Satan so why the


Now you are going to try and pretend like that wasn't hurled out as an insult. We're not stupid. It doesn't matter what we believe it matters what you believe. And it is pretty obvious you believe in Satan and you believe equating people with the devil is an insult.


----------



## where I want to

Patchouli said:


> Now you are going to try and pretend like that wasn't hurled out as an insult. We're not stupid. It doesn't matter what we believe it matters what you believe. And it is pretty obvious you believe in Satan and you believe equating people with the devil is an insult.


Just as you don't believe and equate being religious with being ignorant. That's pretty insulting yet never stopped such commenters.


----------



## Patchouli

where I want to said:


> Just as you don't believe and equate being religious with being ignorant. That's pretty insulting yet never stopped such commenters.


I have never, ever called a religious person ignorant. Religious beliefs or lack thereof does not show intelligence or ignorance. I have no idea why you think I hate religious people but I absolutely do not. You have some sort of personal snit with me I have no idea why. Whatever.


----------



## Evons hubby

Cornhusker said:


> It may surprise you all to know that I'm not a rabid conservative.
> I lean that way, sure, but I do have some leanings some would call mildly liberal. :fussin:


That slight liberal lean you speak of, is that the part that keeps you from shooting liberals on site?


----------



## Evons hubby

wiscto said:


> I'm more of a realist...


Are you saying today's far right is not a considerable distance to the left of where we began? Or are you saying that it is unrealistic to involve our early goverment in the equation?


----------



## Evons hubby

where I want to said:


> Just as you don't believe and equate being religious with being ignorant. That's pretty insulting yet never stopped such commenters.


I don't think religious people are ignorant, gullible maybe but not ignorant.


----------



## AmericanStand

arabian knight said:


> CENTRIST? Are you flipping kidding???? He is so far from the center one can not even SEE it.
> And NOW he is even further away to the detriment of the USA and American people AND The Constitution~!



Lol the only reason to think of him as not a centrist is where you veiw him from. 
He seems just right of center to me.


----------



## wiscto

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Are you saying today's far right is not a considerable distance to the left of where we began? Or are you saying that it is unrealistic to involve our early goverment in the equation?


I'm saying that if I'm going to deal with the American people in the here and now, because they're my neighbors/friends/and countrymen, I'm going to define the middle as the place between the modern extremes which exist today, scaled to percentage of population. 

I'm also not saying that "the middle" is always the right place to be. I doubt there is a right place to be, most of the time, because the consequences of our decisions are pretty rarely seen before they occur. What I am saying is that the extremes of this country have generally decided that blatant lies and generally misleading half truths are now acceptable. In general you don't find that from the people "in the middle." But this isn't 2008 anymore. The moderates are being pushed to the side by those who will not tolerate the existence of any world not of their own design.


----------



## where I want to

Patchouli said:


> I have never, ever call d a religious person ignorant. Religious beliefs or lack thereof does not show intelligence or ignorance. I have no idea why you think I hate religious people but I absolutely do not. You have some sort of personal snit with me I have no idea why. Whatever.


I was going to say that you shouldn't take it personally. But in truth, I seem to remember your creating a thread on Christians destroying art at a Moscow museum but no such thread on the ISIS destruction of antiquities. Another thread on an Orthodox Jew stabbing 6 peopke but nothing on the mass beheadings under the name of Islam. 
Then there is your remarks in another thread that "we (Christians) are no longer winning converts because we are jerks" and the "Church is dead".

There are lots of posts- I dare say most posts- that you have made to berate various Christians and one on Jews while as far as I remember a total absence of equivalent moral judgements on the failings of other religions or athetists. 

So maybe you are being tarred with the association others who seem to post even ruder things on religion, but it would be nice to hear either an equivalent criticism of other religions or an occasional support of a Christian charity or organization.something where the principles are applied equally so that it is clear that principles are at issue, not just hatred of a certain religion.


----------



## Cornhusker

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I don't think religious people are ignorant, gullible maybe but not ignorant.


Like Obamaphiles?


----------



## Cornhusker

Patchouli said:


> Now you are going to try and pretend like that wasn't hurled out as an insult. We're not stupid. It doesn't matter what we believe it matters what you believe. And it is pretty obvious you believe in Satan and you believe equating people with the devil is an insult.


Keep going, the world needs more mind readers.:indif:


----------



## Evons hubby

wiscto said:


> I'm saying that if I'm going to deal with the American people in the here and now, because they're my neighbors/friends/and countrymen, I'm going to define the middle as the place between the modern extremes which exist today, scaled to percentage of population.
> 
> I'm also not saying that "the middle" is always the right place to be. I doubt there is a right place to be, most of the time, because the consequences of our decisions are pretty rarely seen before they occur. *What I am saying is that the extremes of this country have generally decided that blatant lies and generally misleading half truths are now acceptable. *In general you don't find that from the people "in the middle." But this isn't 2008 anymore. The moderates are being pushed to the side by those who will not tolerate the existence of any world not of their own design.


I am pretty far right on many issues.... I have no use for half truths, lies, and the manipulation of the words written in our constitution for the purpose of furthering any agenda.... Pretty sure you are well aware of that last part.


----------



## wiscto

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I am pretty far right on many issues.... I have no use for half truths, lies, and the manipulation of the words written in our constitution for the purpose of furthering any agenda.... Pretty sure you are well aware of that last part.


I'm sure you are aware that I was speaking in general terms, and that the only specifics I gave were people who have been influenced and polarized by the 24 hour news cycles and now dominate the national dialogue. So this is kind of a personal twist that you're putting on it, and I guess I could play along, but I'm not going to.


----------



## Irish Pixie

Cornhusker said:


> Like Obamaphiles?


Tit for tat?


----------



## AmericanStand

Cornhusker said:


> Like Obamaphiles?



Just had to be a bully. ? Low on your quota of insults ?
What was the point ?


----------



## wannabfarmer

After reading all of this I'm just going to put people back on ignore. I don't respect or value their opinion at all. I think this thread was ridiculous, it was even more ridiculous for a mod to come in and read it actually make a post and ignore everything else going on.


----------



## HDRider

wannabfarmer said:


> After reading all of this I'm just going to put people back on ignore. I don't respect or value their opinion at all. I think this thread was ridiculous, it was even more ridiculous for a mod to come in and read it actually make a post and ignore everything else going on.


It is ridiculous that 10 words or so can lead to 15 pages and a pretty clear delineation of our two sects. 

Think what 2,000 years of this bickering might lead too.


----------



## Tricky Grama

wiscto said:


> Hate to tell you this, but he ran as a centrist in 2008. He actually ran on "compromise". I wasn't talking about where he is now. I'm talking about how he ran in 2008. Because in 2008 running as a moderate or as a centrist was a path to victory. He sounded more centrist than McCain, who was running to the right, so he won.
> 
> And what I'm trying to say is that pretending to be moderate and centrist used to be the way to win. Obama and the Tea Party have so dominated the airwaves with their extremism over the past 7 years that no one knows HOW to run. Which is one of the reasons why Trump is winning. He doesn't care "how" to run, and that's what people want. Ironically, he's more moderate than the Tea Party. By far.
> 
> I wouldn't expect someone on the far right to know where the middle is.


Oh. I thought you meant the ideas of the Rs were being carried out...I think that's what several got from that post.

However, in this post you've said the TP is extreme...could you provide us w/why you think that is?


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wannabfarmer said:


> After reading all of this I'm just going to put people back on ignore. I don't respect or value their opinion at all. I think this thread was ridiculous, it was even more ridiculous for a mod to come in and read it actually make a post and ignore everything else going on.


Funny, (not funny ha ha but funny ironic) that there are a couple topics / threads that when click to see the conversation: I cannot see 90% of the content because I have a handful on ignore. That's a good sign this is not a topic I want to comment on, or I will get an infraction!


----------



## wr

wannabfarmer said:


> After reading all of this I'm just going to put people back on ignore. I don't respect or value their opinion at all. I think this thread was ridiculous, it was even more ridiculous for a mod to come in and read it actually make a post and ignore everything else going on.


Mods have given members this opportunity to sort out their own differences while we consider our options as well.

If we proceed with greater enforcement by way of infractions, it looks to me like there would be approximately 3 members left standing by noon so it might be a good idea for members to decide if they'd like to get serious about finding middle ground. 

If you think things are toxic here, you could spend a day dealing with my pm's. They range from profanity riddled, threats of 'destroying' GC if I don't ban certain members, simple basic 'or else' threats and in one case, threatening to contact my employer and let them know that I 'spend my time on GC when I should be working.'


----------



## painterswife

wr said:


> Mods have given members this opportunity to sort out their own differences while we consider our options as well.
> 
> If we proceed with greater enforcement by way of infractions, it looks to me like there would be approximately 3 members left standing by noon so it might be a good idea for members to decide if they'd like to get serious about finding middle ground.
> 
> If you think things are toxic here, you could spend a day dealing with my pm's. They range from profanity riddled, threats of 'destroying' GC if I don't ban certain members, simple basic 'or else' threats and in one case, threatening to contact my employer and let them know that I 'spend my time on GC when I should be working.'


WR. I don't envy you your position.

I like that you are not infracting and banning. I understand it is hard to police the posts. I however am very glad that we can discuss so much more now with out the ban hammer coming down on those that question the mods.


----------



## Agriculture

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Funny, (not funny ha ha but funny ironic) that there are a couple topics / threads that when click to see the conversation: I cannot see 90% of the content because I have a handful on ignore. That's a good sign this is not a topic I want to comment on, or I will get an infraction!


Yet here you are, so what is your point? Participate or not, but just popping in looking for attention means what exactly? Hint: the ignore button is useless if you don't actually, um,_ ignore_ people.


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> WR. I don't envy you your position.
> 
> I like that you are not infracting and banning. I understand it is hard to police the posts. I however am very glad that we can discuss so much more now with out the ban hammer coming down on those that question the mods.


You and a few others are the only ones who see it that way. That is because you can run roughshod over other people. Why do you think the posts are deleted and threads closed?


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> You and a few others are the only ones who see it that way. That is because you can run roughshod over other people. Why do you think the posts are deleted and threads closed?


Funny but I believe that the most deleted and ugly posts in the last couple months have been from what you would call your side. How can I run rough shod over anyone when I don't have control over who gets deleted or infracted? I say what I want in a way that is within the rules. I don't insult or attack the person though I sure do say what I want about the posts.


----------



## gapeach

You may not see it but you and the others make very hateful comments. You call people out.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> You may not see it but you and the others make very hateful comments. You call people out.


I call out the posts. Please show me my hateful posts. If I have, then I will personally ask for them to be removed and apologize.


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> You and a few others are the only ones who see it that way. That is because you can run roughshod over other people. Why do you think the posts are deleted and threads closed?


Nobody is blameless in this matter and instead of pointing fingers, it might be a good time to sort out your collective differences without name calling and insults. 

There seems to be a pervasive feeling that Team A owned GC and Politics and their ownership is being threatened. Carbon Media Group actually owns ALL of HT and members are guests here, who should probably consider acting like guests. 

I doubt very much if anyone here would call a neighbor a troll over a cup of coffee because they have different politics nor would they shout profanities at the server so why would it be okay to do it here?

Mods do not ban members just because another member demands it. It has not happened in the past and it will not start now. 

Mods have also agreed that the term Mod Squad and any abbreviations will be treated as a personal attack and infractions will be meted out accordingly.


----------



## AmericanStand

I think infraction points is a good thing. 
It should come with a analysis Of the post it's for and attached to the post so we can see what's wrong and adjust our Behavior. 
Banning seems to be pointless.


----------



## gapeach

I think that there should be points with the infractions and if you get a certain amount there should some kind of suspension. IF you have a certain amt of suspensions, maybe there should be a ban.


----------



## where I want to

If people, all people were not allowed posts that consist of nothing but personal criticism, ie the "why are you so stupid/mean/ignorant/wrong/liberal/conservative/etc as to say that", people (the collective "you") would at least be a bit more circumspect. A post should have something, even the smallest thing, more to say than that. 
If they wish to rephrase it to include that something more, then fine.


----------



## wannabfarmer

people normally wouldn't freak out over a cup of coffee but here on the internet a few get big headed on their views and if someone else has a different view they feel it is their job to put down their view in a slightly confrontational way and sit back and egg it on. i'm glad people have different opinions because its healthy to get a different view point. its not healthy to have your opinion bashed and bombarded by the same few people no matter the topic. 
i was being baited about a month ago i forget the topic but i mentioned to persons user name and said they were baiting and I GOT 2 POINTS!?!?!? sooo by those standards baiting is fine with the "be nice" rules but calling someone on it is not? 
i'm not far right or far left on any topic i have my view point and if that puts me on a certain side fine. wr if you can't see a collective 5 people go after the same people over and over its sad. no i don't want your job but maybe if you handled things a little bit differently you might stop getting bad pm's. 
this whole let the sides settle their problems in here was a great idea (immense sarcasm). this accomplished nothing except once again rile people up. i've been on many forums and don't always agree with certain people. this is the first forum that the rules are not defined and its just at the will of the mod. i'm sorry i supported this site if this is what my money went to.


----------



## wr

AmericanStand said:


> I think infraction points is a good thing.
> It should come with a analysis Of the post it's for and attached to the post so we can see what's wrong and adjust our Behavior.
> Banning seems to be pointless.


Unfortunately, banning is a natural consequence of infractions because the system handles that at the magic 12 points. 

Mods have been pretty clear on reasons we've been deleting threads, which is what members requested and thus far, it has only served to result in another bashing mods thread, caustic and threatening pm's to me.

I can assure you, we've been quite clear and a couple of those expressing outrage about unfair treatment, know exactly why they were reprimanded (seldom with infractions). I have sent pm's to individuals suggesting ways to correct behavior such as swearing and name calling while some have taken it to heart and corrected their approach, others have decided that giving them that opportunity is 'picking on them.'

On each of the most recently locked threads, I cleaned them up once, offered a warning and by the time I'd cleaned up another, the previous thread was back to personal insults.


----------



## wr

wannabfarmer said:


> people normally wouldn't freak out over a cup of coffee but here on the internet a few get big headed on their views and if someone else has a different view they feel it is their job to put down their view in a slightly confrontational way and sit back and egg it on. i'm glad people have different opinions because its healthy to get a different view point. its not healthy to have your opinion bashed and bombarded by the same few people no matter the topic.
> i was being baited about a month ago i forget the topic but i mentioned to persons user name and said they were baiting and I GOT 2 POINTS!?!?!? sooo by those standards baiting is fine with the "be nice" rules but calling someone on it is not?
> i'm not far right or far left on any topic i have my view point and if that puts me on a certain side fine. wr if you can't see a collective 5 people go after the same people over and over its sad. no i don't want your job but maybe if you handled things a little bit differently you might stop getting bad pm's.
> this whole let the sides settle their problems in here was a great idea (immense sarcasm). this accomplished nothing except once again rile people up. i've been on many forums and don't always agree with certain people. this is the first forum that the rules are not defined and its just at the will of the mod. i'm sorry i supported this site if this is what my money went to.


Maybe it could have and if you'd chosen to take your concerns to me by way of pm, I would have been prepared to listen, just as I have in many other cases but if you're going to start a thread to holler for allies and run down the team of mods that made that decision, there doesn't seem like you're overly receptive to discussion. 

Wouldn't a simple pm rather than insulting the mod team have been a bit more adult?


----------



## gapeach

wr, I am truly sorry that you are getting threatening pms. That just should not be acceptable. I would like to ask you because I have no idea how the infraction point system works now. Are points cumulative or do they expire in a certain amt of time if there are no more infractions? In other words, can you wipe your slate clean after a certain length of time?

I think we all need to know what is acceptable and what is not.


----------



## wannabfarmer

i got one pm from you when i got my points and it was not clear and i asked a question back and got no response. i'm not going down the team of mods and i am receptive to a solution i've sent pm's to others also with only one reply and it also was not helpful. i've already put people back on ignore as i shouldn't have to do because they do offer a different opinion which i like i just don't like the constant sly baiting comments after they state their opinion and that is what is being let by as ok but when someone gets fired up and calls them on it they are the ones getting their posts deleted. i do agree some use language and name call but they know nothing is being done from higher up so why bother reporting it? why bother sending a pm? i think collectively the mods need to put up a standard rule set not just "be nice". it would save a lot of time and aggravation for the mods and us.
i started that thread because i wasn't getting any answers or help and could tell that the mods handling the situation were being one sided. if i get points for a certain reason and it is explained to me great. what i got was a vague "name calling" that said to me that the mod only looked at my post and i was being given points for calling someone a troll which is exactly what they were doing and continue to do. they didn't get points for baiting but i got points for saying they were. i wasn't close to being banned i just felt that was completely uncalled for.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> You and a few others are the only ones who see it that way. That is because you can run roughshod over other people. Why do you think the posts are deleted and threads closed?


That song is old.
Posts are deleted and threads are closed for clearly obvious reasons.

One just has to be intellectually honest enough to admit they know the reasons, and stop pretending it's one small group that causes problems, or that all this is somehow "new"


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> wr, I am truly sorry that you are getting threatening pms. That just should not be acceptable. I would like to ask you because I have no idea how the infraction point system works now. Are points cumulative or do they expire in a certain amt of time if there are no more infractions? In other words, can you wipe your slate clean after a certain length of time?
> 
> I think we all need to know what is acceptable and what is not.


We changed them after Alicegate to expiring instead of a lifetime infractions. Ultimately, you and mods can always read them and they will show as active or expired but the record exists. 

If you'd like to send me a pm about this issue, I will gladly discuss it with you and I'm sure we can reach a reasonable conclusion but it will take me a while to get through my inbox and answer questions on this thread.


----------



## kasilofhome

wr said:


> Maybe it could have and if you'd chosen to take your concerns to me by way of pm, I would have been prepared to listen, just as I have in many other cases but if you're going to start a thread to holler for allies and run down the team of mods that made that decision, there doesn't seem like you're overly receptive to discussion.
> 
> Wouldn't a simple pm rather than insulting the mod team have been a bit more adult?



Been there done that. Got the the shirt..


----------



## gapeach

Bearfootfarm said:


> That song is old.
> Get some new, original material


Why? It's the same old song and dance every day. I am surprised that you haven't noticed too.


----------



## wr

where I want to said:


> If people, all people were not allowed posts that consist of nothing but personal criticism, ie the "why are you so stupid/mean/ignorant/wrong/liberal/conservative/etc as to say that", people (the collective "you") would at least be a bit more circumspect. A post should have something, even the smallest thing, more to say than that.
> If they wish to rephrase it to include that something more, then fine.


I agree and again, no 'side' is blameless.


----------



## Evons hubby

Is it really all that difficult to be nice? :shrug:


----------



## painterswife

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is it really all that difficult to be nice? :shrug:


Different people have different ideas of what is nice.

Some think name calling is fine. Some think labelling is fine. Some don't like being told what others believe if their opinion is different.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> Why? It's the same old song and dance every day. I am surprised that you haven't noticed too.


I see it's "the same every day". That's why it's old
It's been pretty much the same for years, and it's *not* all from just one side.

You know the "behind the scenes" backstabbing that some do, but you won't admit that side pokes and prods as much as anyone else.

Wasn't it you who said it was like middle school all over again?


----------



## TripleD

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is it really all that difficult to be nice? :shrug:


Not too difficult for me. I haven't been here that long. No infractions, no posts deleted just a friendly exchange of pms from one of the mods....


----------



## wr

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is it really all that difficult to be nice? :shrug:


Canadians have it down to such a science that it takes us 20 minutes to figure out who should go next a 4 way intersection. The local nun always allowed to go first, the folks that own the funeral home always have primary consideration, elders after that, then comes anyone who's found to be running late, after that is anyone heading to Timmies for their morning double double and timbits and then it's time to start over again :rotfl:


----------



## where I want to

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Is it really all that difficult to be nice? :shrug:


Depends on the level of spit coming at you. But also, nice has no uniform definition. I remember a rapist told me once that women did not appreciate how nice he was being when he didn't finish them off afterwards.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> heading to Timmies for their morning double double and timbits and then it's time to start over again


Up until then I thought you were speaking English.
Evidently Canadians have another language besides French


----------



## HDRider

Make the infraction score board public.


----------



## TripleD

HDRider said:


> Make the infraction score board public.


I thought about that too. People would try to bait or troll you to get you banned.


----------



## TripleD

where I want to said:


> Depends on the level of spit coming at you. But also, nice has no uniform definition. I remember a rapist told me once that women did not appreciate how nice he was being when he didn't finish them off afterwards.


Its just general chat. I'm a lot nicer here than taking spit in public. Its a lot easier getting out of jail than a grave....


----------



## gibbsgirl

HDRider said:


> Make the infraction score board public.


Now there's an idea I hadn't thought of yet!

I really don't like when posts get deleted. If it contains a problem, I wish the mods would leave it and write what was wrong, so people would have some point of reference to understand what the standards or rules really meant with how they are applied.

It's vague and difficult to understand where the lines are many times. Seeing deleted posts and a reason doesn't really connect the dots. Moderating is subjective, many times, and IMO it doesn't"t help to not see what words and context were used that was considered wrong.


----------



## HDRider

TripleD said:


> I thought about that too. People would try to bait or troll you to you banned.


I'd say take your best shot. Some seem to be doing that now. 

I belive in transparency. Let people see how many points I have. 

Why would anyone object to that?

That said, almost anything said on here, regardless of how innocuous, gets slammed and raises objections.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

TripleD said:


> I thought about that too. People would try to bait or troll you to you banned.


They do that now, and some even encourage others to gang up on certain people they don't like


----------



## TripleD

Bearfootfarm said:


> They do that now, and some even encourage others to gang up on certain people they don't like


That's not me Bearfoot . I am in my own camp alone.......


----------



## Bearfootfarm

HDRider said:


> I'd say take your best shot. Some seem to be doing that now.
> 
> I belive in transparency. Let people see how many points I have.
> 
> Why would anyone object to that?
> 
> That said, almost anything said on here, regardless of how innocuous, gets slammed and raises objections.


If it were to be made public, it could be used a "proof" the moderators were favoring one group over another.

It would be a simple matter for someone to purposely get a few points and then start whining because certain others had none.

(Not that they don't already do that now)


----------



## painterswife

HDRider said:


> Make the infraction score board public.


Not a new idea.

03/26/15, 12:03 PM
painterswife 
Sock puppet reinstated

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 7,042
I don't get the infraction system. I see certain people say the most awful things over and over and I would think that if they are getting infractions like I did they would have been banned several times.

That is why I think the infractions should be public.
Wanda, hippygirl, Raeven and 2 others like this.


----------



## wr

Bearfootfarm said:


> Up until then I thought you were speaking English.
> Evidently Canadians have another language besides French


I think Tim Hortons has opened up a few stores in the US but it's a Canadian thing. A typical coffee order is XL double double (2 cream & 2 sugar) and timbits are just little donut balls. 

Canadians have taken great pride in the pay it forward thing and it's very common at Timmies. It's not uncommon for someone to come in and spend $100+ for the next coffees sold and if you use the drive through, you have a 50% chance that someone ahead has paid for your coffee or it's your turn to buy someone else's coffee. 

Ultimately, the coffee isn't exceptional in any way but it's become more of an institution simply because they facilitate random acts of kindness.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

TripleD said:


> That's not me Bearfoot . I am in my own camp alone.......


I didn't mean to imply it was you.
I just know that it happens and has for many years.


----------



## keenataz

Bearfootfarm said:


> Up until then I thought you were speaking English.
> Evidently Canadians have another language besides French


It is secret code that only we inderstand. And I'll have a Smiley cookie please


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Ultimately, the coffee isn't exceptional in any way but it's become more of an institution simply because they facilitate random acts of kindness.


I figured it was something like that

Here on GC, "random acts of kindness" seem to make some think you're setting up a trap for them.


----------



## HDRider

Bearfootfarm said:


> If it were to be made public, it could be used a "proof" the moderators were favoring one group over another.
> 
> It would be a simple matter for someone to purposely get a few points and then start whining because certain others had none.
> 
> (Not that they don't already do that now)


And in fact it might be proof. If the mods are fair it would be evident. 

If a person is intellectually honest and the least bit self aware they know when they are being an a hole. Otherwise it might aid in their self improvement program.


----------



## where I want to

HDRider said:


> And in fact it might be proof. If the mods are fair it would be evident.
> 
> If a person is intellectually honest and the least bit self aware they know when they are being an a hole. Otherwise it might aid in their self improvement program.


Like nice, hole perspective is interpreted differently. And most people are pretty shy on a good view of their own status. 



And what is even more to the point, I imagine the immediate urge to "like" this very post will include many with no perspective at all.


----------



## wr

gibbsgirl said:


> Now there's an idea I hadn't thought of yet!
> 
> I really don't like when posts get deleted. If it contains a problem, I wish the mods would leave it and write what was wrong, so people would have some point of reference to understand what the standards or rules really meant with how they are applied.
> 
> It's vague and difficult to understand where the lines are many times. Seeing deleted posts and a reason doesn't really connect the dots. Moderating is subjective, many times, and IMO it doesn't"t help to not see what words and context were used that was considered wrong.


You've mentioned this several times and I'm open to suggestion so if you'd like to prepare a set of rules you think might be better, you're welcome to pm them to me and the mods can review but how many rules do you think adults truly need? 

If I delete profanity, does it serve any purpose if I put the profanity back in the reason line and will it make things better if I my comments include such gems as, 'called another member puke face', ' 'called another member a troll', used the term 'azzhole'? Why delete in the first place if we're just going to put it back?


----------



## where I want to

I was going to suggest that maybe changing the rule to not being mean rather than being nice might make a difference but then, as I was writing it, I decided that the same perception problem infecting "nice" also effects "mean." 

Maybe the rule should be "bullying not permitted."


----------



## Bearfootfarm

HDRider said:


> And in fact it might be proof. If the mods are fair it would be evident.
> 
> *If a person is intellectually honest* and the least bit self aware they know when they are being an a hole. Otherwise it might aid in their self improvement program.


If more were, there wouldn't be the constant turmoil and whining

The reality is they know exactly what they are doing but think others can't see it.


----------



## gapeach

wr said:


> You've mentioned this several times and I'm open to suggestion so if you'd like to prepare a set of rules you think might be better, you're welcome to pm them to me and the mods can review but how many rules do you think adults truly need?
> 
> If I delete profanity, does it serve any purpose if I put the profanity back in the reason line and will it make things better if I my comments include such gems as, 'called another member puke face', ' 'called another member a troll', used the term 'azzhole'? Why delete in the first place if we're just going to put it back?



The whole thing is that everyone has to have the same rules and have equal moderation for all. If everybody knows the boundaries, then it is easier in th long run. Yes, adults have to know their limits too and not be so immature. 
I know that I am guilty too of mostly losing my temper when my posts are picked at and "may" be taken as meaning something that I did not or criticized because of the source or topic.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

where I want to said:


> I was going to suggest that maybe changing the rule to not being mean rather than being nice might make a difference but then, as I was writing it, I decided that the same perception problem infecting "nice" also effects "mean."
> 
> Maybe the rule should be "bullying not permitted."


It's still too vague and open to different interpretations.

No matter what the rules are, there will be those who want to *control* what others say, which is what is generally all comes down to.

I think the best rule would be "NO WHINING"


----------



## painterswife

where I want to said:


> I was going to suggest that maybe changing the rule to not being mean rather than being nice might make a difference but then, as I was writing it, I decided that the same perception problem infecting "nice" also effects "mean."
> 
> Maybe the rule should be "bullying not permitted."


And that can subjective as well.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> WR. I don't envy you your position.
> 
> I like that you are not infracting and banning. I understand it is hard to police the posts. I however am very glad that we can discuss so much more now with out the ban hammer coming down on those that question the mods.


Who says they aren't infracting?


----------



## HDRider

Bearfootfarm said:


> If more were, there wouldn't be the constant turmoil and whining
> 
> The reality is they know exactly what they are doing but think others can't see it.


That would be the self improvement part of the program


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> Who says they aren't infracting?


Correct, not accurate.

Not infracting to the extent is was before. I can tell that because of the number of deleted posts for unsulting some have got in that last month and are still here.


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> The whole thing is that everyone has to have the same rules and have equal moderation for all. If everybody knows the boundaries, then it is easier in th long run. Yes, adults have to know their limits too and not be so immature.
> I know that I am guilty too of mostly losing my temper when my posts are picked at and "may" be taken as meaning something that I did not or criticized because of the source or topic.


Then clarify your position rather than calling members names, swearing and them and insulting a mod because they tried to clarify a comment. 

Do you truly believe that's how to win a discussion? The guys had a fairly serious debate on estate taxes recently and I believe there was one or two deletions and they went back to discussion. It's a great example on discussion and debate.


----------



## Cornhusker

wr said:


> Mods have also agreed that the term Mod Squad and any abbreviations will be treated as a personal attack and infractions will be meted out accordingly.


I don't want be obstinate, but there are those who act like mini mods, constantly deriding, chastising, bossing, telling people what they can post, what they can't post, demanding links while providing none, and it goes on and on.
That's where the term Mod Squad came from, it wasn't meant as a personal attack, it was meant to point out the fact they are in reality, not mods.
I guess we just take the abuse quietly and meekly from now on?


----------



## Cornhusker

Bearfootfarm said:


> That song is old.
> Posts are deleted and threads are closed for clearly obvious reasons.
> 
> One just has to be intellectually honest enough to admit they know the reasons, and stop pretending it's one small group that causes problems, or that all this is somehow "new"


So if a person has a complaint, we should run it by you to see if it's "old"?


----------



## Bearfootfarm

HDRider said:


> That would be the self improvement part of the program


No "program" is needed.
"*Self* improvement" doesn't depend on anything other than one's self


----------



## Cornhusker

Not worth pointing out the obvious


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> Correct, not accurate.
> 
> Not infracting to the extent is was before. I can tell that because of the number of deleted posts for unsulting some have got in that last month and are still here.


I don't know how you can tell the extent of the infractions, aren't they private?
Unless you have someone telling you who all gets infratcions?


----------



## wr

Cornhusker said:


> I don't want be obstinate, but there are those who act like mini mods, constantly deriding, chastising, bossing, telling people what they can post, what they can't post, demanding links while providing none, and it goes on and on.
> That's where the term Mod Squad came from, it wasn't meant as a personal attack, it was meant to point out the fact they are in reality, not mods.
> I guess we just take the abuse quietly and meekly from now on?


I don't want to be hard headed either but I believe I have stated several times that nobody is blameless.


----------



## painterswife

Cornhusker said:


> I don't know how you can tell the extent of the infractions, aren't they private?
> Unless you have someone telling you who all gets infratcions?


I can't tell. However if person A got an infraction for every post that insulted someone then person A would not be posting. All personal observation and assumption on my part.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Cornhusker said:


> So if a person has a complaint, *we should run it by you* to see if it's "old"?


No need for that
I'm always happy to tell you what I think, the same way you do


----------



## Cornhusker

wr said:


> I don't want to be hard headed either but I believe I have stated several times that nobody is blameless.


Yes you have :cowboy:


----------



## kasilofhome

wr said:


> I don't want to be hard headed either but I believe I have stated several times that nobody is blameless.


That I agree.

I hear how folks can talk about pm s they got from mods in the past. You wrote of pm s you got.

I got a pm from a mod talking about another mod in a negative way... and I lost respect for that mod.


----------



## Cornhusker

painterswife said:


> I can't tell. However if person a got an infraction for every post that insulted someone then person A would not be posting. All personal observation and assumption on my part.


If people got an infraction for every post someone else thought was insulting, there would most likely be nobody here.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> You've mentioned this several times and I'm open to suggestion so if you'd like to prepare a set of rules you think might be better, you're welcome to pm them to me and the mods can review but how many rules do you think adults truly need?
> 
> If I delete profanity, does it serve any purpose if I put the profanity back in the reason line and* will it make things better *if I my comments include such gems as, 'called another member puke face', ' 'called another member a troll', used the term 'azzhole'? Why delete in the first place if we're just going to put it back?


Absolutely not.
I am the member who called another member, a puke sack.
I received an infraction for it, as I should, because I was not nice.

However. the member that I directed that comment to, eloquently called me stupid, then proceeded to continue to hurl very well worded insults, with no infraction.

I accept full responsibility for being 'not nice'. I CHOSE to use the word, puke sack.....I allowed 3 other members to badger and bait and I fell for it hook, line and sinker.

Several posts, well written posts, trying to humiliate me for having poor math skills (something I said UP FRONT, then THANKED another member for showing me how to do the math) IS NOT NICE......yet this member was not only allowed to continue to use his words to to insult and humiliate.....and when I 'reported' a post that this member had quoted a deleted post? It's still there....

I guess the 'equality' members are seeking would mean that the mods, look at the entire thread, and see who continues to bait and insight, and then lay out an infraction for this 'not nice' behavior too.

Now, I choose to back out when I can see the 3-4 members begin to weave that web that insights 'insulting-personal attack-profanity laden' responses.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Originally Posted by Cornhusker View Post
> I don't know *how you can tell* the extent of the infractions, aren't they private?
> Unless you have someone telling you who all gets infratcions?


There can't be as many infractions because there aren't nearly as many posts being deleted as was once common.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

kasilofhome said:


> That I agree.
> 
> I hear how folks can talk about pm s they got from mods in the past. You wrote of pm s you got.
> 
> I got a pm from a mod talking about another mod in a negative way... and I lost respect for that mod.



I have had 2 mods send me PM's there were rude and hostile. 
Members unfortunately, cannot put mods on ignore.


----------



## wr

where I want to said:


> I was going to suggest that maybe changing the rule to not being mean rather than being nice might make a difference but then, as I was writing it, I decided that the same perception problem infecting "nice" also effects "mean."
> 
> Maybe the rule should be "bullying not permitted."


Can you define bullying any clearer than be nice and does that mean anyone who disagrees with someone else might be considered bullying?


----------



## Cornhusker

Bearfootfarm said:


> There can't be as many infractions because there aren't nearly as many posts being deleted as was once common.


Not all deleted posts result in an infraction.
Not all infractions cause a post to be deleted


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> Can you define bullying any clearer than be nice and does that mean anyone who disagrees with someone else might be considered bullying?


bulÂ·ly

[&#712;bo&#861;ol&#275;]

*VERB

*


use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants: 
"a local man was bullied into helping them"synonyms: persecute Â· oppress Â· tyrannize Â· browbeat Â· harass Â· torment Â· intimidate Â· strong-arm Â· dominate Â· push around Â· bullyrag Â· coerce Â· pressure Â· pressurize Â· press Â· push Â· force Â· compel Â· badger Â· goad Â· prod Â· browbeat Â· intimidate Â· dragoon Â· strong-arm Â· bulldoze Â· railroad Â· lean on




http://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/what-is-it/index.html


----------



## kasilofhome

I flag a post... yet it remained after others were deleted...I copied it as clearly it was not offensive not to have been deleted.... put it in my Sig... gave credit to the writer and got an infraction.. I can take it. But think... why if it wasn't offensive... did it become offensive?


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> I can't tell. However if person A got an infraction for every post that insulted someone then person A would not be posting. All personal observation and assumption on my part.


It seems like some people think that is what it is all about.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Cornhusker said:


> Not all deleted posts result in an infraction.
> Not all infractions cause a post to be deleted


I realize a deletion in and of itself isn't necessarily an infraction, since many come from quoting deleted comments, or posting materials not allowed.

If someone gets an infraction for "attacking/insulting" the post is almost always deleted.

I can't think of any case where something you posted would get you an infraction but not be deleted unless it was edited.


----------



## painterswife

kasilofhome said:


> I flag a post... yet it remained after others were deleted...I copied it as clearly it was not offensive not to have been deleted.... put it in my Sig... gave credit to the writer and got an infraction.. I can take it. But think... why if it wasn't offensive... did it become offensive?


I have flagged several posts that are still there.


----------



## wr

Laura Zone 10 said:


> Absolutely not.
> I am the member who called another member, a puke sack.
> I received an infraction for it, as I should, because I was not nice.
> 
> However. the member that I directed that comment to, eloquently called me stupid, then proceeded to continue to hurl very well worded insults, with no infraction.
> 
> I accept full responsibility for being 'not nice'. I CHOSE to use the word, puke sack.....I allowed 3 other members to badger and bait and I fell for it hook, line and sinker.
> 
> Several posts, well written posts, trying to humiliate me for having poor math skills (something I said UP FRONT, then THANKED another member for showing me how to do the math) IS NOT NICE......yet this member was not only allowed to continue to use his words to to insult and humiliate.....and when I 'reported' a post that this member had quoted a deleted post? It's still there....
> 
> I guess the 'equality' members are seeking would mean that the mods, look at the entire thread, and see who continues to bait and insight, and then lay out an infraction for this 'not nice' behavior too.
> 
> Now, I choose to back out when I can see the 3-4 members begin to weave that web that insights 'insulting-personal attack-profanity laden' responses.


Member did not call you stupid, they made a comment about infractions. You took a general comment as personal unless you can point me to a thread that in fact says, Laura, you are stupid.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> Member did not call you stupid, they made a comment about infractions. You took a general comment as personal unless you can point me to a thread that in fact says, Laura, you are stupid.


 
His intentions were clear, to anyone with eyes.......
HIS well chosen words, called me stupid, without saying stupid, and get an infraction.

And it was not just '1 post'......he continued to begin every post after that with another well word insult and inuendo that I was stupid.

Anyone with good eyesight could see that.......and I have plenty of PMs that other members sent saying the same thing.

SO WHAT I am hearing you say is this: If I can use well chosen words to insult a member, it's ok. Just not outright straight forward language (puke sack) but if I can weave and spin some pretty words, then it's ok??


----------



## Evons hubby

Bearfootfarm said:


> There can't be as many infractions because there aren't nearly as many posts being deleted as was once common.


This puts me in mind of the black lives matter group wanting to do away with the laws they consistently break in order to reduce the crime rate. Without so many rigid rules... Fewer infractions


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Laura Zone 10 said:


> bulÂ·ly
> 
> [&#712;bo&#861;ol&#275;]
> 
> *VERB
> 
> *
> 
> 
> use *superior strength or influence* to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants:





So, how can one have "superior strength" when we are all just posters on the internet?

I certainly don't have any "influence", and have no way to "force" anyone to do anything at all, since I'm just sitting here at home.

I can't even "make" you read this, so if it makes you mad, it can't possibly be my fault, if you already knew from past experience that some things I say may make you mad.

If you think the posts you read are bad, you should see the ones I type and then delete instead of hitting "submit" 



> His intentions were clear, to anyone with eyes.......
> HIS well chosen words, called me stupid, without saying stupid, and get an infraction.
> 
> And it was not just '1 post'......he continued to begin every post after that with another well word insult and inuendo that I was stupid.
> 
> Anyone with good eyesight could see that.......and I have plenty of PMs that other members sent saying the same thing.


I have no doubt the PM's fly at times, and I bet I could name a few of the senders, but that still wouldn't change what was *really* said.


----------



## gapeach

Cornhusker said:


> I don't want be obstinate, but there are those who act like mini mods, constantly deriding, chastising, bossing, telling people what they can post, what they can't post, demanding links while providing none, and it goes on and on.
> That's where the term Mod Squad came from, it wasn't meant as a personal attack, it was meant to point out the fact they are in reality, not mods.
> I guess we just take the abuse quietly and meekly from now on?


You are so right and they listen to nothing anybody says. It is about control and they have to have it. They tell you what you can post, what you can say, what you can't. They want to rule and dictate what is posted and what cannot be along with your sources. They have to approve those too.


----------



## HDRider

Bearfootfarm said:


> No "program" is needed.
> "*Self* improvement" doesn't depend on anything other than one's self


Maybe you need to google self improvement. 

Consider that my contribution to your self improvement program.


----------



## wr

Laura Zone 10 said:


> bulÂ·ly
> 
> [&#712;bo&#861;ol&#275;]
> 
> *VERB
> 
> *
> 
> 
> use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants:
> "a local man was bullied into helping them"synonyms: persecute Â· oppress Â· tyrannize Â· browbeat Â· harass Â· torment Â· intimidate Â· strong-arm Â· dominate Â· push around Â· bullyrag Â· coerce Â· pressure Â· pressurize Â· press Â· push Â· force Â· compel Â· badger Â· goad Â· prod Â· browbeat Â· intimidate Â· dragoon Â· strong-arm Â· bulldoze Â· railroad Â· lean on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.stopbullying.gov/cyberbullying/what-is-it/index.html


So, not too far out of line from be nice. In either case, try and apply one rule to various members with a broad age range and a broader delivery method and you're still going to come up with subjective calls, which is exactly why we have 4 mods weigh in on big issues. 

Members wanted more mods and we have 4, with other mods weighing in on these things. Now members complain because our responses are not immediate and apparently 4 diverse mods are not playing fair.


----------



## painterswife

Laura Zone 10 said:


> ​
> His intentions were clear, to anyone with eyes.......
> HIS well chosen words, called me stupid, without saying stupid, and get an infraction.
> 
> And it was not just '1 post'......he continued to begin every post after that with another well word insult and inuendo that I was stupid.
> 
> Anyone with good eyesight could see that.......and I have plenty of PMs that other members sent saying the same thing.
> 
> SO WHAT I am hearing you say is this: If I can use well chosen words to insult a member, it's ok. Just not outright straight forward language (puke sack) but if I can weave and spin some pretty words, then it's ok??


I thought he was pretty eloquent in saying that you were offering opinions without doing your homework. Not a crime but you made the numbers a part of a tirade against couples that wanted to get married in their county but did not bother to check the numbers. You then did not bother to check them again when you came back on the poster about his check your math. Never said you were stupid. Very much said you did not do your homework.


----------



## kasilofhome

From alicegated to mobgate


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> You are so right and they listen to nothing anybody says. It is about control and they have to have it. They tell you what you can post, what you can say, what you can't. They want to rule and dictate what is posted and what cannot be along with your sources. They have to approve those too.


That's a two sided thing too and again, either members sort it out today or mods will be happy to do it for you. 

If someone doesn't accept weaselzipper or TMZ as a credible source, that's fine. You can't force them to nor are you forced to accept someone else's source.


----------



## Cornhusker

wr said:


> Member did not call you stupid, they made a comment about infractions. You took a general comment as personal unless you can point me to a thread that in fact says, Laura, you are stupid.


I think she's referring to the thread where they ganged up and made fun of her math skills.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> So, not too far out of line from be nice. In either case, try and apply one rule to various members with a broad age range and a broader delivery method and you're still going to come up with subjective calls, which is exactly why we have* 4 mods weigh in on big issues.*
> 
> Members wanted more mods and we have 4, with other mods weighing in on these things. Now members complain because our responses are not immediate and apparently 4 diverse mods are not playing fair.



What are considered "big issues"?

I haven't heard anyone complain about "immediate" responses. 
I think everyone here knows that being a mod is volunteer / part time, and if you report something at 2 am good chances are you are gonna have to wait.

But when you report something, immediately AFTER the mod posts something, then make a post replying to the MOD that was just online, yet days later, it's still there??


----------



## kasilofhome

oh Dttb....equals don't take the bait.


----------



## wr

Cornhusker said:


> I think she's referring to the thread where they ganged up and made fun of her math skills.


I know the thread well and it was reviewed by mods in it's entirety. Are we always right? Probably not but a group of mods seems like a better option than one mod making these decisions.


----------



## Evons hubby

gapeach said:


> You are so right and they listen to nothing anybody says. It is about control and they have to have it. They tell you what you can post, what you can say, what you can't. They want to rule and dictate what is posted and what cannot be along with your sources. They have to approve those too.


I find this interesting, I have yet to have anyone tell me what I can or cannot post openly on the board. Angie and Melissa and chuck have sent me a PM now and again explaining why a message got deleted but never a member. :shrug:


----------



## gapeach

Yvonne's hubby said:


> I find this interesting, I have yet to have anyone tell me what I can or cannot post openly on the board. Angie and Melissa and chuck have sent me a PM now and again explaining why a message got deleted but never a member. :shrug:


The group of several would not do that to you.


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> The group of several would not do that to you.


Now why would you say that? How about treat us as individuals. Yvonne's Hubby posts gets taken on all the time by people you don't agree with.

I personally only agree with him part of the time. I just decided when I want to call out his posts and when I don't. Kind of like I do with you.


----------



## kasilofhome

Personally I would love to see Yvonne'husband as a mod.
Why...he keeps his cool.. is clear and pretty non bias.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

HDRider said:


> Maybe you need to *google self improvement*.
> 
> Consider that my contribution to your self improvement program.


One can "google" many things.
It's not evidence they are "needed"

For true "self improvement" *in this context* all one *needs* is a real desire to improve.


----------



## wr

Laura Zone 10 said:


> What are considered "big issues"?
> 
> I haven't heard anyone complain about "immediate" responses.
> I think everyone here knows that being a mod is volunteer / part time, and if you report something at 2 am good chances are you are gonna have to wait.
> 
> But when you report something, immediately AFTER the mod posts something, then make a post replying to the MOD that was just online, yet days later, it's still there??


I'm not sure which mod but if it was me, I could have composed my thoughts up to an hour before I posted. I may have had a business call or attended to something in the office before I review and submit.


----------



## kasilofhome

Days..... 


Been there lived thru it.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

wr said:


> I know the thread well and it was reviewed by mods in it's entirety. Are we always right? Probably not but a group of mods seems like a *better option than one mod *making these decisions.


Infinitely better


----------



## Evons hubby

kasilofhome said:


> Personally I would love to see Yvonne'husband as a mod.
> Why...he keeps his cool.. is clear and pretty non bias.


:hysterical: be careful what you ask for! Years ago I regularly visited a chat room and one of the mods gave me a "boot" button. That lasted a very short time!


----------



## gibbsgirl

wr said:


> You've mentioned this several times and I'm open to suggestion so if you'd like to prepare a set of rules you think might be better, you're welcome to pm them to me and the mods can review but how many rules do you think adults truly need?
> 
> If I delete profanity, does it serve any purpose if I put the profanity back in the reason line and will it make things better if I my comments include such gems as, 'called another member puke face', ' 'called another member a troll', used the term 'azzhole'? Why delete in the first place if we're just going to put it back?


I'm less concerned with what the rules are, and more interested in being able to 1) follow threads without stuff being gone and 2) get a feel for how the rules are being interpreted and applied 

When a post if gone and there is a brief note, its not always obvious what was there that was a problem. There's no point of reference for anyone to make use of.

I got a post deleted for calling someone Yoda. Same thread, someone else was called Hitler, it stayed. Days before I called someone else Eeyore, it stayed. So, I'm a little fuzzy on what is an offense it out of line and it makes it difficult to adjust what's being said and be "participating within the rules" when everyone can"t see what was wrong.

My opinion, I'd rather see mids leave stuff, add a note about a problem, and just assign points or whatever. Or, bounce people out for a few days from posting when they have to "note" some amount of posts as problematic.

I'd think that would let the users get a feel for what the parameters are expected to be and might make it more manageable for the mods if they hopped into a post and said something like "don't include curse words. This is the third post we've had to moderate today by you, you're locked from posting for three days."

Just my thoughts.


----------



## wr

gibbsgirl said:


> I'm less concerned with what the rules are, and more interested in being able to 1) follow threads without stuff being gone and 2) get a feel for how the rules are being interpreted and applied
> 
> When a post if gone and there is a brief note, its not always obvious what was there that was a problem. There's no point of reference for anyone to make use of.
> 
> I got a post deleted for calling someone Yoda. Same thread, someone else was called Hitler, it stayed. Days before I called someone else Eeyore, it stayed. So, I'm a little fuzzy on what is an offense it out of line and it makes it difficult to adjust what's being said and be "participating within the rules" when everyone can"t see what was wrong.
> 
> My opinion, I'd rather see mids leave stuff, add a note about a problem, and just assign points or whatever. Or, bounce people out for a few days from posting when they have to "note" some amount of posts as problematic.
> 
> I'd think that would let the users get a feel for what the parameters are expected to be and might make it more manageable for the mods if they hopped into a post and said something like "don't include curse words. This is the third post we've had to moderate today by you, you're locked from posting for three days."
> 
> Just my thoughts.


Perhaps mods missed other sarcastic and unkind comments. If you have concerns, you're always welcome to either report a post and we'll gladly look into it. 

Having said that, some have taken to reporting just about anything and everything so it does take a while to get through them. 

The timed lockout thing has been used to a certain degree but it's labor intensive and we are running across some that simply were forgotten. We happened upon a member that was site banned for a couple days, several years ago and never actually got reinstated. Perhaps somebody got busy and forgot them or perhaps Admin at that time had a change of heart.


----------



## gibbsgirl

wr said:


> Can you define bullying any clearer than be nice and does that mean anyone who disagrees with someone else might be considered bullying?


I don't care for posts that really only say someone else is wrong, etc. I'd rather hear about what someone else's thoughts are than simply that they disagree or don't like a post.

Those type seem to fill some threads pretty quickly.

But, some people seem bent on contrary discussions sometimes. I'd rather look and see if there's common ground or agreement about something, than just quote a part of someone else and harp on that being wrong. 

But, to each there own.


----------



## AmericanStand

where I want to said:


> Depends on the level of spit coming at you. But also, nice has no uniform definition. I remember a rapist told me once that women did not appreciate how nice he was being when he didn't finish them off afterwards.



Let me define nice for you and a few others. 
Depending on who you are nice is the way you talk with your mother ,priest , boss or the girl your trying to date.


----------



## kasilofhome

Yea, like when tenant was miss spelled add profanity and vile personal attacks came when you did the delete it was crazy and the comments left were made nonsense.. ask you to delete the replies to the deleted post... ww3 stated... so I ask to take the whole thing down.

Notes for deleted post should not contain fabricated comments from a mod.
Working on a doing a law suit.... does not mean it's in litigation... that was not a truthful statement. The mod has no knowledge of the matter and to add that was a pot stirring event.


----------



## Evons hubby

gapeach said:


> The group of several would not do that to you.


Why do you spose that is? I am nothing special, just another poster who tosses my opinions out to be discussed. :shrug:


----------



## AmericanStand

TripleD said:


> I thought about that too. People would try to bait or troll you to get you banned.



So ? They do now it's just not public.


----------



## gapeach

I don't know unless it is because they like you.


----------



## kasilofhome

wr said:


> Perhaps mods missed other sarcastic and unkind comments. If you have concerns, you're always welcome to either report a post and we'll gladly look into it.
> 
> Having said that, some have taken to reporting just about anything and everything so it does take a while to get through them.
> 
> The timed lockout thing has been used to a certain degree but it's labor intensive and we are running across some that simply were forgotten. We happened upon a member that was site banned for a couple days, several years ago and never actually got reinstated. Perhaps somebody got busy and forgot them or
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps Admin at that time had a change of heart.



Interesting choice of words..certainly not meant to take a dig at any one... just on the line... totally questionable yet still innocent.

Masterful


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> If it were to be made public, it could be used a "proof" the moderators were favoring one group over another.
> 
> 
> 
> It would be a simple matter for someone to purposely get a few points and then start whining because certain others had none.
> 
> 
> 
> (Not that they don't already do that now)



It can't prove something unless it exsisted. 
If someone got points the proof of the why would be there for all to see.


----------



## painterswife

kasilofhome said:


> Interesting choice of words..certainly not meant to take a dig at any one... just on the line... totally questionable yet still innocent.
> 
> Masterful


She was talking about me. I report everything now. It is the in thing. 

Seems you think everything is an intended dig.


----------



## gibbsgirl

I had a thread about the scotus gay marriage ruling that was pretty interesting I thought. Some questionable posts, but lots added that was interesting to read.

At some point mid thread, it changed to say "thread deleted" AND "under mod review"

Those messages right there confused me. Never heard from any mods about it being reopened.

Checked it for awhile, but never saw it openable again to read let alone post in.

Have no idea what was wrong in it or ability for any of us to go see anything noted to get a practical understanding of what's expected or tolerated.

That's another example of why I think leaving posts and just noting problems is better.

Seems the IT guys should be able to see it there's a way to let mods schedule temporary suspensions of members. If not, mods could suspend and just keep a list of who's out and when they're to be reactivated.

If it takes that much time to stay up on moderating, seems like there's be some amount of moderating alleviated by just setting users to temp suspend when it got out of bounds.

Y'all are gonna do whatever you're gonna do. You asked for ideas, so I'm just tossing them out here.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> I don't care for posts that really only say someone else is wrong, etc. *I'd rather hear about what someone else's thoughts are* than simply that they disagree or don't like a post.


Sometime their thoughts *are* that they disagree.

Lots of folks have told me they disagree with things I've said, or they didn't "like" what I posted. 

I don't get mad about it, or run whining to someone to punish them in some way.

It's just the internet you know. It's not worth agonizing or scheming over.


----------



## gibbsgirl

Bearfootfarm said:


> Sometime their thoughts *are* that they disagree.
> 
> Lots of folks have told me they disagree with things I've said, or they didn't "like" what I posted.
> 
> I don't get mad about it, or run whining to someone to punish them in some way.
> 
> It's just the internet you know. It's not worth agonizing or scheming over.


Who's agonizing or scheming?

People are going to disagree. My point is that conversations dull rapidly IMO when people who disagree don't take the next step and allow others to read what their "better" ideas are.

That gives people something to think over and ponder. Keeps it interesting IMO.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> It can't prove something unless it exsisted.
> If someone got points *the proof of the why* would be there for all to see.


What difference would that make in the scenario I described?
If it shows the entire post, it defeats the purpose of the deletions.


----------



## wr

gibbsgirl said:


> I had a thread about the scotus gay marriage ruling that was pretty interesting I thought. Some questionable posts, but lots added that was interesting to read.
> 
> At some point mid thread, it changed to say "thread deleted" AND "under mod review"
> 
> Those messages right there confused me. Never heard from any mods about it being reopened.
> 
> Checked it for awhile, but never saw it openable again to read let alone post in.
> 
> Have no idea what was wrong in it or ability for any of us to go see anything noted to get a practical understanding of what's expected or tolerated.
> 
> That's another example of why I think leaving posts and just noting problems is better.
> 
> Seems the IT guys should be able to see it there's a way to let mods schedule temporary suspensions of members. If not, mods could suspend and just keep a list of who's out and when they're to be reactivated.
> 
> If it takes that much time to stay up on moderating, seems like there's be some amount of moderating alleviated by just setting users to temp suspend when it got out of bounds.
> 
> Y'all are gonna do whatever you're gonna do. You asked for ideas, so I'm just tossing them out here.


That is correct and quite honestly, the status of that should have been changed or cleaned up and brought back and that would be that forgotten about thing I just mentioned.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gibbsgirl said:


> Who's agonizing or scheming?
> 
> People are going to disagree. My point is that conversations dull rapidly IMO when people who disagree don't take the next step and *allow others to read what their "better" ideas are.*
> 
> That gives people something to think over and ponder. Keeps it interesting IMO.


Most here present their "better" ideas in most cases.



> Who's agonizing or scheming?


You're kidding, right?
Look around, read some threads
It's quite rampant


----------



## wiscto

Tricky Grama said:


> Oh. I thought you meant the ideas of the Rs were being carried out...I think that's what several got from that post.
> 
> However, in this post you've said the TP is extreme...could you provide us w/why you think that is?


Nah. I mean we're talking about 5 years worth of Tea Party evolution, and I feel lazy today. But look at John Boehner. What did he call them? Unrealistic. Because they think that, as a minority caucus, they can overrun the majority of their own party, the moderate majority of the country, the other party, and if they can't do it in the elections, they're willing to use extreme tactics.... Such as trying to take down their own Speaker of the House because he's not being obstinate enough toward the other side of the aisle. Listen to what the Tea Party says about the GOP..."they aren't conservative enough." How else do you define extremism? They want to completely de-fund Planned Parenthood, even though the majority of PP's work is in cancer screening, STD screening, and contraception which ultimately prevents abortions. How is that not an extreme measure? They're on the extreme right of today's politics. * I didn't ask everyone to agree that being extreme is a bad thing, but they are on one extreme of our current political spectrum.
*



HDRider said:


> Make the infraction score board public.


People see what they want to see. People believe what they want to believe. What looks fair to one side will look unfair to the other side. In my opinion, people here aren't objective enough for that to work.




kasilofhome said:


> "*Originally Posted by wr View Post
> Perhaps mods missed other sarcastic and unkind comments. If you have concerns, you're always welcome to either report a post and we'll gladly look into it.
> 
> Having said that, some have taken to reporting just about anything and everything so it does take a while to get through them.
> 
> The timed lockout thing has been used to a certain degree but it's labor intensive and we are running across some that simply were forgotten. We happened upon a member that was site banned for a couple days, several years ago and never actually got reinstated. Perhaps somebody got busy and forgot them or
> 
> 
> 
> perhaps Admin at that time had a change of heart."*
> 
> 
> Interesting choice of words..certainly not meant to take a dig at any one... just on the line... totally questionable yet still innocent.
> 
> Masterful


See, in my opinion, this is a perfect example of someone seeing what they want to see....even when it isn't there.


----------



## wr

kasilofhome said:


> Interesting choice of words..certainly not meant to take a dig at any one... just on the line... totally questionable yet still innocent.
> 
> Masterful


It was an honest response to a member's suggestion we give members a 3 day time out for certain behaviors. 

I was discussing the fact that a member who had received a 3 day ban about a decade ago still remained banned which evidences the fact that a manual time out system is flawed.


----------



## AmericanStand

wr said:


> Can you define bullying any clearer than be nice and does that mean anyone who disagrees with someone else might be considered bullying?



Bullying = name calling , insults , belittling. Marginalizing.


----------



## kasilofhome

Could it be a dig... could it be innocent...

It's one or the other you know what you meant readers will see it just as any post and will make up their own minds... just as you and other mods do.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> So, how can one have "superior strength" when we are all just posters on the internet?
> 
> I certainly don't have any "influence", and have no way to "force" anyone to do anything at all, since I'm just sitting here at home.
> 
> I can't even "make" you read this, so if it makes you mad, it can't possibly be my fault, if you already knew from past experience that some things I say may make you mad.
> 
> If you think the posts you read are bad, you should see the ones I type and then delete instead of hitting "submit"
> 
> 
> I have no doubt the PM's fly at times, and I bet I could name a few of the senders, but that still wouldn't change what was *really* said.



The definition of bully that was cited is either incomplete or poor. 
Very poor for a online forum.


----------



## nchobbyfarm

:bdh:

Stay or don't. Seems pretty simple.


----------



## Agriculture

Laura Zone 10 said:


> ​
> His intentions were clear, to anyone with eyes.......
> HIS well chosen words, called me stupid, without saying stupid, and get an infraction.
> 
> And it was not just '1 post'......he continued to begin every post after that with another well word insult and inuendo that I was stupid.
> 
> Anyone with good eyesight could see that.......and I have plenty of PMs that other members sent saying the same thing.
> 
> SO WHAT I am hearing you say is this: If I can use well chosen words to insult a member, it's ok. Just not outright straight forward language (puke sack) but if I can weave and spin some pretty words, then it's ok??





Laura Zone 10 said:


> I have had 2 mods send me PM's there were rude and hostile.
> Members unfortunately, cannot put mods on ignore.


Oh for dog's sake get over yourself. Everyone is against you. It's not you, it's them. You post some incorrect math equations, others point that out, and that means that they're making fun of you? For telling the truth? And then you can't handle it, and can't hold your own in a spirited debate, so you go running to moderators crying like a little girl for them to protect you. Here's a few suggestions: learn math, or don't post the answers to simple arithmetic. Learn how to write a good argument, or stay out of it and let the heavy hitters play in the big leagues. 

Whenever I hear that word bully anymore, I automatically tune out the source as a pathetic little troublemaker who doesn't have the skills to hold his own, and is just looking for attention and a reason to stifle all debate, even among those who can handle it. If he doesn't know how to participate then we shouldn't be allowed to either. Someone else should step in and stick up for the poor unfortunate sap, because his feelings are just too delicate. Give me a break. That kind of crying wolf hurts those who really do need protection from actual bullies, since the term is so overused that people are starting to roll their eyes when they hear it rather than take it seriously anymore.

There is an Irish saying: Irish Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell, and having them look forward to the trip.


----------



## wr

gibbsgirl said:


> I don't care for posts that really only say someone else is wrong, etc. I'd rather hear about what someone else's thoughts are than simply that they disagree or don't like a post.
> 
> Those type seem to fill some threads pretty quickly.
> 
> But, some people seem bent on contrary discussions sometimes. I'd rather look and see if there's common ground or agreement about something, than just quote a part of someone else and harp on that being wrong.
> 
> But, to each there own.


I don't care for them either but it's not my place to tell a member that they have to bring more to the discussion, just as it's not my place to tell members what they can discuss and what direction a thread can take.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> The definition of bully that was cited is either incomplete or poor.
> Very poor for a online forum.


The fact remains no one can "bully" another in an online forum when there is an "ignore" feature, and the ability to NOT read what anyone says unless you choose to do so.


----------



## AmericanStand

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Why do you spose that is? I am nothing special, just another poster who tosses my opinions out to be discussed. :shrug:



Lol nope you are pretty special on this board. 
You are pretty far to the right with the occasional jump right off the metering in either direction. 
One of the few I have to read every word of to know where you are heading.


----------



## M5farm

Bearfootfarm said:


> The fact remains no one can "bully" another in an online forum when there is an "ignore" feature, and the ability to NOT read what anyone says unless you choose to do so.


technically that's true but with todays society everyone is looking for someone to blame. if the internet has no bearing on how you live your life its no big deal. but if you rely on social media and forums to boost your ego and give you a purpose, they really think it is bullying. SAD but true. 

Now why is certain 4 letter words acceptable and others are not? I'm not a sailor and only use a couple in conversations both are slang words for relieving ones self of waste.


----------



## Cornhusker

Agriculture said:


> Oh for dog's sake get over yourself. Everyone is against you. It's not you, it's them. You post some incorrect math equations, others point that out, and that means that they're making fun of you? For telling the truth? And then you can't handle it, and can't hold your own in a spirited debate, so you go running to moderators crying like a little girl for them to protect you. Here's a few suggestions: learn math, or don't post the answers to simple arithmetic. Learn how to write a good argument, or stay out of it and let the heavy hitters play in the big leagues.
> 
> Whenever I hear that word bully anymore, I automatically tune out the source as a pathetic little troublemaker who doesn't have the skills to hold his own, and is just looking for attention and a reason to stifle all debate, even among those who can handle it. If he doesn't know how to participate then we shouldn't be allowed to either. Someone else should step in and stick up for the poor unfortunate sap, because his feelings are just too delicate. Give me a break. That kind of crying wolf hurts those who really do need protection from actual bullies, since the term is so overused that people are starting to roll their eyes when they hear it rather than take it seriously anymore.
> 
> There is an Irish saying: Irish Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell, and having them look forward to the trip.


I don't know if that was a personal attack, but it was very typically rude.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> What difference would that make in the scenario I described?
> If it shows the entire post, it defeats the purpose of the deletions.



To be clear I am against deletions. 
I guess it would be more like public shaming.


----------



## Patchouli

where I want to said:


> I was going to say that you shouldn't take it personally. But in truth, I seem to remember your creating a thread on Christians destroying art at a Moscow museum but no such thread on the ISIS destruction of antiquities. Another thread on an Orthodox Jew stabbing 6 peopke but nothing on the mass beheadings under the name of Islam.
> Then there is your remarks in another thread that "we (Christians) are no longer winning converts because we are jerks" and the "Church is dead".
> 
> There are lots of posts- I dare say most posts- that you have made to berate various Christians and one on Jews while as far as I remember a total absence of equivalent moral judgements on the failings of other religions or athetists.
> 
> So maybe you are being tarred with the association others who seem to post even ruder things on religion, but it would be nice to hear either an equivalent criticism of other religions or an occasional support of a Christian charity or organization.something where the principles are applied equally so that it is clear that principles are at issue, not just hatred of a certain religion.


ound: I am not sure which is funnier and more ironic this post or the people who liked it. Trust me honey I don't need to start a thread for Islam or Atheists or any group outside of Judeo-Christianity because there are a whole pile of people here happy to do it as soon as the stories hit the news. 

It is especially ironic that you can actually remember and name the 3 posts I have made on Jews and Christians because there are only 3! Now here's an exercise for you: name me all of the posts started here about Muslim atrocities. And who is most likely to post them. I can come up with 6 posters off the top of my head most likely to go after Muslims. And I can't begin to come up with a mental list of posts because there are too many. My very few posts are a rebuttal to that tide of attacks. 

I'll take you seriously about tackling both sides when you tackle a few of the flaming Islam haters here who post absolutely outrageous lies about Muslims. Until then I think we have a pot and kettle situation here.


----------



## HDRider

Agriculture said:


> Oh for dog's sake get over yourself. Everyone is against you. It's not you, it's them. You post some incorrect math equations, others point that out, and that means that they're making fun of you? For telling the truth? And then you can't handle it, and can't hold your own in a spirited debate, so you go running to moderators crying like a little girl for them to protect you. Here's a few suggestions: learn math, or don't post the answers to simple arithmetic. Learn how to write a good argument, or stay out of it and let the heavy hitters play in the big leagues.
> 
> Whenever I hear that word bully anymore, I automatically tune out the source as a pathetic little troublemaker who doesn't have the skills to hold his own, and is just looking for attention and a reason to stifle all debate, even among those who can handle it. If he doesn't know how to participate then we shouldn't be allowed to either. Someone else should step in and stick up for the poor unfortunate sap, because his feelings are just too delicate. Give me a break. That kind of crying wolf hurts those who really do need protection from actual bullies, since the term is so overused that people are starting to roll their eyes when they hear it rather than take it seriously anymore.
> 
> There is an Irish saying: Irish Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell, and having them look forward to the trip.


That was mean.


----------



## Cornhusker

Patchouli said:


> I'll take you seriously about tackling both sides when you tackle a few of the flaming Islam haters here who* post absolutely outrageous lies *about Muslims. Until then I think we have a pot and kettle situation here.


Which _lies _would that be?


----------



## M5farm

Patchouli said:


> ound: I am not sure which is funnier and more ironic this post or the people who liked it. Trust me honey I don't need to start a thread for Islam or Atheists or any group outside of Judeo-Christianity because there are a whole pile of people here happy to do it as soon as the stories hit the news.
> 
> It is especially ironic that you can actually remember and name the 3 posts I have made on Jews and Christians because there are only 3! Now here's an exercise for you: name me all of the posts started here about Muslim atrocities. And who is most likely to post them. I can come up with 6 posters off the top of my head most likely to go after Muslims. And I can't begin to come up with a mental list of posts because there are too many. My very few posts are a rebuttal to that tide of attacks.
> 
> I'll take you seriously about tackling both sides when you tackle a few of the flaming Islam haters here who post absolutely outrageous lies about Muslims. Until then I think we have a pot and kettle situation here.


I have no issues with Muslims that don't adhere to the Koran and don't want to cut my Christian head off and dont want sharia law. and dont want to degrade women and dont want to fornicate with my livestock and dont want kill people that arent like them.


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> The fact remains no one can "bully" another in an online forum when there is an "ignore" feature, and the ability to NOT read what anyone says unless you choose to do so.



I disagree with your "fact"

Name calling stains the called. 

The pretty little girl in the white dress walks past the bully , he make some mudball and throws them at her. 
She refuses to be drawn into his scheme. 
She still is stained and dirty. 
This happens day after day pretty soon all the kids at school know that she is miss piggy. 
She is marginalized she no longer wants to attend school she , drops out. 

It's the same here and we lose a valuable member of our society.


----------



## kasilofhome

:fussin:


Patchouli said:


> ound: I am not sure which is funnier and more ironic this post or the people who liked it. Trust me honey I don't need to start a thread for Islam or Atheists or any group outside of Judeo-Christianity because there are a whole pile of people here happy to do it as soon as the stories hit the news.
> 
> It is especially ironic that you can actually remember and name the 3 posts I have made on Jews and Christians because there are only 3! Now here's an exercise for you: name me all of the posts started here about Muslim atrocities. And who is most likely to post them. I can come up with 6 posters off the top of my head most likely to go after Muslims. And I can't begin to come up with a mental list of posts because there are too many. My very few posts are a rebuttal to that tide of attacks.
> 
> I'll take you seriously about tackling both sides when you tackle a few of the flaming Islam haters here who post absolutely outrageous lies about Muslims. Until then I think we have a pot and kettle situation here.



pretty sure 9 11, fort hood, the lady getting beheaded at work, school girls kidnapped, the tossing if homosexuals off of buildings, the girl that got acid in her face for not wanting to marry, the Boston bombing, the burning of caged non Islamic, the shoe bomber, England s bombing, France's Charlie, Texas Charlie, chants and cries to kill Obama, death to America, training camps in New York, social media talent scouting for new members, rapes, selling human as sex toys, .... 

You are right not news worthy...


----------



## gapeach

kasilofhome said:


> :fussin:
> 
> 
> pretty sure 9 11, fort hood, the lady getting beheaded at work, school girls kidnapped, the tossing if homosexuals off of buildings, the girl that got acid in her face for not wanting to marry, the Boston bombing, the burning of caged non Islamic, the shoe bomber, England s bombing, France's Charlie, Texas Charlie, chants and cries to kill Obama, death to America, training camps in New York, social media talent scouting for new members, rapes, selling human as sex toys, ....
> 
> You are right not news worthy...


How can you not post atrocities like that on a chat board when it is going on all over the country? We are supposed to stick our heads in the sand?


----------



## wiscto

HDRider said:


> That was mean.


Interesting. For the sake of everyone's self improvement, let's see how you compare that post to the following exchange. I'm going to have to quote some with copy and paste, because the conversation exceeds the system's quote feature limit apparently.



HDRider said:


> Make the infraction score board public.


Thoughtful opinion.



TripleD said:


> I thought about that too. People would try to bait or troll you to get you banned.


Thoughtful opinion.



HDRider said:


> I'd say take your best shot. Some seem to be doing that now.
> 
> I belive in transparency. Let people see how many points I have.
> 
> Why would anyone object to that?
> 
> That said, almost anything said on here, regardless of how innocuous, gets slammed and raises objections.


Thoughtful opinion.



Bearfootfarm said:


> If it were to be made public, it could be used a "proof" the moderators were favoring one group over another.
> 
> It would be a simple matter for someone to purposely get a few points and then start whining because certain others had none.
> 
> (Not that they don't already do that now)


Thoughtful opinion.



> *HDRider post 343:* And in fact it might be proof. If the mods are fair it would be evident.
> 
> If a person is intellectually honest and the least bit self aware they know when they are being an a hole. Otherwise it might aid in their self improvement program.


Thoughtful opinion.



> *Bearfootfarm post 347:* If more were, there wouldn't be the constant turmoil and whining
> 
> The reality is they know exactly what they are doing but think others can't see it.


Thoughtful opinion



> *HDRider post 352:* That would be the self improvement part of the program


Thoughtful opinion



> *Bearfootfarm post 357:* No "program" is needed.
> "Self improvement" doesn't depend on anything other than one's self


Thoughtful opinion



> *HDRider post 381:* Maybe you need to google self improvement.
> 
> Consider that my contribution to your self improvement program.


*ADVERSARIAL.* 

Reads kind of how this looks...










Sawmill Jim liked it. Maybe he can tell me how I should be reading it. If it isn't adversarial, and if it isn't the first shots fired in what was otherwise just a debate, what is it?


----------



## gapeach

Same with all the Black Lives Matter stuff. It is good that somebody is keeping up with all of their agitating and hurting innocent people like some people who plan to run a in Marathon next weekend. Bunch of Occupy dead beats, George Soros funded agitators want to stop their race.


----------



## HDRider

It was just mean.


----------



## wiscto

HDRider said:


> It was just mean.


I agree. I have Agriculture on ignore, and I usually skip any post he/she is quoted in. A lot worse than what you said. But can you honestly say you weren't starting to get a little antagonistic with Bearfoot before Bearfoot just stopped responding?


----------



## wr

gapeach said:


> Same with all the Black Lives Matter stuff. It is good that somebody is keeping up with all of their agitating and hurting innocent people like some people who plan to run a in Marathon next weekend. Bunch of Occupy dead beats, George Soros funded agitators want to stop their race.


How does that topic contribute to sorting out discord in GC?


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> *Context* matters
> 
> This is the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> No one is walking by "day after day" unless they want to.
> 
> No one has to read what anyone posts unless they want to.



Right that's the point !
Stained with mud day after day. 
Marginalized. 
Her posts ignored. 
She no longer wants to be here 
We lose her. 

That's how bullying works. 
We need more nice to keep this a pleasant place to share neighborly advice and opinions.


----------



## wiscto

I really don't care if people like posts. I've noticed a trend. I'm sure I've commented on it before. But I didn't participate in whatever conversation took place in this thread regarding liking posts. I thought ONE incident where ONE person liked a post was relevant to the context of this thread, so I pointed it out. I didn't do it in a nasty way. I didn't call anyone names. I asked for a reason. Because in the context of this thread....it seemed important.

Like whatever posts you all want. I really don't care.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

wr said:


> We're roughly 12 pages into this. Is there some desire to work toward a little harmony or would you rather have mods sort it out?


Is it too early (or too late) to enter a plea of insanity?


----------



## AmericanStand

Bearfootfarm said:


> Is it too early (or too late) to enter a plea of insanity?



Don't worry I think it's in the user agreement somewhere.


----------



## wiscto

Raeven said:


> I will renew the request that GC be placed behind an opt-in wall, same as Politics. Or at least a second GC.
> 
> GC was left to the Public area of the forum on the *pretext* that HT members need a place to discuss general ideas that affect homesteading issues. Thatâs a legitimate point. However, thatâs not how GC is being used these days. Itâs being used as a place to discuss every political hot button issue in the land, again and again and again. Itâs being used to create unnecessary hostility and contempt between members. And I am fairly sure if it wasnât in public view, virtually all of these skirmishes would die out. Having an audience -- even a reluctant one -- while you thrust and parry appears to be the main attraction to starting these topics.
> 
> What place does a discussion of Planned Parenthood or abortion have in a homesteading forum? Religion, or human vaccinations? Sub rosa slamming of politicians? I understand that people may wish to discuss these things, but the entire focus of this forum has been diverted to such discussions. And so far as I can see, instead of appreciating the privilege of being able to speak more freely, many have jumped at the chance to see just how much they can get away with and how nastily they can say things without getting snapped. Iâve seen kids in daycare behave better. Let's face it: Even using the term, "discussion," is an understatement. More like food fights.
> 
> I can appreciate discussions regarding public policy on issues such as eminent domain or GMOs or raw milk having a bearing on homesteading concerns. In reality, there aren't many such stories in the news of late. When there have been, spirited discussions have ensued, and fair enough. Everything else? Bread and circuses, and much to the overall detriment of the forum, in my opinion.
> 
> *Two GCs: One in the open forum, STRICTLY limited to issues relating to homesteading. And one behind an opt-in wall for people who want to endlessly debate non-related issues. Seems to me that would be the easiest on the mods and the members.*
> 
> Agricultureâs post may not have been diplomatic, but much of what he/she said is true. He/she made some fundamental points. (And no, I am not singling out Laura Zone 10. My comments are made purely in a general way.)
> 
> If you donât understand the concept of debate, then youâre already at a disadvantage.
> 
> If you think youâve been insulted when someone calls you ignorant when they clearly have facts on their side and you have produced none, then you donât understand they are merely stating a truth. âStupidâ is an insult. âIgnorantâ is not. That said, in a truly pure debate, I donât recommend employing either term, except to point out what someone may be ignorant *of*, not that they themselves are ignorant.
> 
> If you feel the need to divert the topic to something else so you don't have to answer a question or request for a cite forthrightly, then maybe you don't belong in the discussion. Hijacking a thread is frowned upon and little tolerated in serious debating forums.
> 
> If you think saying something insulting about a public figure is making a good point without linking to something that backs up your insulting comment, then you are sadly mistaken. You donât look like a witty commentator. You look like a jerk.
> 
> If you default to Victim Status when someone has made better points than you, maybe it is best if you stay inside your comfort zone or use the opportunity to learn some new things, instead of shouting, âHelp, help! Iâm being oppressed!â
> 
> Moderators are never going to please 100% of members. I have raised issues for moderators to consider. They donât always agree with me. I donât quarrel with their decisions. Not before, not now. Their circus, their monkeys. We have good mods now who are doing their very best to make as many happy here as they can. But face it â if you donât like the place as you find it, you can always leave and hang somewhere more to your liking. Many have already done so. And more will leave if the Daycare Center keeps up.
> 
> I applaud the moderators and how hard they are trying to walk on the razorâs edge. Iâm appalled to learn ugly PMs have been sent and threats made. To me, that would be grounds for automatic banning, no second chances. It isnât tolerated on any other board I frequent, and I donât believe it should be tolerated here.
> 
> Ok; Iâve said my piece.


Bumping this because it got buried on the previous page.


----------



## wannabfarmer

Lol this is ridiculous. Can I get a prorated portion of my money back?


----------



## wr

Raeven said:


> I will renew the request that GC be placed behind an opt-in wall, same as Politics. Or at least a second GC.
> 
> GC was left to the Public area of the forum on the *pretext* that HT members need a place to discuss general ideas that affect homesteading issues. Thatâs a legitimate point. However, thatâs not how GC is being used these days. Itâs being used as a place to discuss every political hot button issue in the land, again and again and again. Itâs being used to create unnecessary hostility and contempt between members. And I am fairly sure if it wasnât in public view, virtually all of these skirmishes would die out. Having an audience -- even a reluctant one -- while you thrust and parry appears to be the main attraction to starting these topics.
> 
> What place does a discussion of Planned Parenthood or abortion have in a homesteading forum? Religion, or human vaccinations? Sub rosa slamming of politicians? I understand that people may wish to discuss these things, but the entire focus of this forum has been diverted to such discussions. And so far as I can see, instead of appreciating the privilege of being able to speak more freely, many have jumped at the chance to see just how much they can get away with and how nastily they can say things without getting snapped. Iâve seen kids in daycare behave better. Let's face it: Even using the term, "discussion," is an understatement. More like food fights.
> 
> I can appreciate discussions regarding public policy on issues such as eminent domain or GMOs or raw milk having a bearing on homesteading concerns. In reality, there aren't many such stories in the news of late. When there have been, spirited discussions have ensued, and fair enough. Everything else? Bread and circuses, and much to the overall detriment of the forum, in my opinion.
> 
> *Two GCs: One in the open forum, STRICTLY limited to issues relating to homesteading. And one behind an opt-in wall for people who want to endlessly debate non-related issues. Seems to me that would be the easiest on the mods and the members.*
> 
> Agricultureâs post may not have been diplomatic, but much of what he/she said is true. He/she made some fundamental points. (And no, I am not singling out Laura Zone 10. My comments are made purely in a general way.)
> 
> If you donât understand the concept of debate, then youâre already at a disadvantage.
> 
> If you think youâve been insulted when someone calls you ignorant when they clearly have facts on their side and you have produced none, then you donât understand they are merely stating a truth. âStupidâ is an insult. âIgnorantâ is not. That said, in a truly pure debate, I donât recommend employing either term, except to point out what someone may be ignorant *of*, not that they themselves are ignorant.
> 
> If you feel the need to divert the topic to something else so you don't have to answer a question or request for a cite forthrightly, then maybe you don't belong in the discussion. Hijacking a thread is frowned upon and little tolerated in serious debating forums.
> 
> If you think saying something insulting about a public figure is making a good point without linking to something that backs up your insulting comment, then you are sadly mistaken. You donât look like a witty commentator. You look like a jerk.
> 
> If you default to Victim Status when someone has made better points than you, maybe it is best if you stay inside your comfort zone or use the opportunity to learn some new things, instead of shouting, âHelp, help! Iâm being oppressed!â
> 
> Moderators are never going to please 100% of members. I have raised issues for moderators to consider. They donât always agree with me. I donât quarrel with their decisions. Not before, not now. Their circus, their monkeys. We have good mods now who are doing their very best to make as many happy here as they can. But face it â if you donât like the place as you find it, you can always leave and hang somewhere more to your liking. Many have already done so. And more will leave if the Daycare Center keeps up.
> 
> I applaud the moderators and how hard they are trying to walk on the razorâs edge. Iâm appalled to learn ugly PMs have been sent and threats made. To me, that would be grounds for automatic banning, no second chances. It isnât tolerated on any other board I frequent, and I donât believe it should be tolerated here.
> 
> Ok; Iâve said my piece.


Very wise words and it would be prudent if it were taken to heart by many. 

I will discuss your suggestion about an alternate area with other mods.


----------



## Raeven

wiscto said:


> Bumping this because it got buried on the previous page.


Thanks.  I hate when that happens!


----------



## kasilofhome

Almost afraid of liking as.... what will the neighbors think.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> He said, she said, some reported posts, subjective issues that mods wish to discuss, comments that one of us is unsure if it's personal or not. regional terminology and acronyms relating to profanity.


So whenever there is a post reported that has the above critera, that's when 2 or more mods put their heads together to meet out infractions?


----------



## painterswife

Raeven said:


> I will renew the request that GC be placed behind an opt-in wall, same as Politics. Or at least a second GC.
> 
> trimmed for brevity.
> 
> Ok; I&#8217;ve said my piece.


Maybe Countryside families is that location and can be renamed.

I however don't think hiding things makes them better. Just makes more work for the Mods because people start thinking it is a place to run wild. How do I know. I have seen it happen in another forum. I ran a bit wild.


----------



## kasilofhome

And I can't post likes if the posters post are blocked.


----------



## wiscto

There seems to be a "General Homesteading Questions" section already. Maybe just ad the General opt-in function and spare the rest of the forum from these debates. I don't feel like ruining peoples experience. I join political discussions under the assumption that everyone there is a willing participant. If that isn't true....maybe it should be. I've seen people complain about their threads being moved from General to Politics, so...just hide General and make it an opt-in. IMO.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

> Agriculture&#8217;s post may not have been diplomatic, but much of what he/she said is true. He/she made some fundamental points. (And no, I am not singling out Laura Zone 10. My comments are made purely in a general way.)


I'm kinda lost........I can't see any of Agriculture / Naturelovers post, as they are both on ignore........????


----------



## Bearfootfarm

AmericanStand said:


> Right that's the point !
> Stained with mud day after day.
> Marginalized.
> *Her posts ignored. *
> She no longer wants to be here
> We lose her.
> 
> That's how bullying works.
> We need more nice to keep this a pleasant place to share neighborly advice and opinions.


Why would *her* posts be ignored because someone else was calling her names?


----------



## wr

Laura Zone 10 said:


> So whenever there is a post reported that has the above critera, that's when 2 or more mods put their heads together to meet out infractions?


I'm not sure if I'm answering your question correctly because I'm not sure what you're looking for. 

If I see something I feel is iffy, I ask for suggestions. If it's an out there thing, I know the mod team well enough to know that mods would agree, I will handle it and so would Tiempo, Shrek or Kung. 

If something gets reported, it's there for all mods to see and discuss while ultimately, it the decision comes down to GC mods.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Laura Zone 10 said:


> I'm kinda lost........I can't see any of Agriculture / Naturelovers post, as they are both on ignore........????


Naturelover is banned
Are you insinuating Agriculture is a sock-puppet?


----------



## Patchouli

M5farm said:


> I have no issues with Muslims that don't adhere to the Koran and don't want to cut my Christian head off and dont want sharia law. and dont want to degrade women and dont want to fornicate with my livestock and dont want kill people that arent like them.


Not sure if I should even bother pointing out that we have Americans doing all of those things. Or that Christians are rather fond of some of those things. Or that the statement that you have no problem with Muslims who don't adhere to their holy book is utterly absurd.


----------



## gibbsgirl

wr said:


> I'm not sure if I'm answering your question correctly because I'm not sure what you're looking for.
> 
> If I see something I feel is iffy, I ask for suggestions. If it's an out there thing, I know the mod team well enough to know that mods would agree, I will handle it and so would Tiempo, Shrek or Kung.
> 
> If something gets reported, it's there for all mods to see and discuss while ultimately, it the decision comes down to GC mods.


Is there a list somewhere of who the mods are, and their hierarchy, or what forums they oversee? I don't know what the titles y'all use would be. I've seen moderator under some people's names.

But, the actual details of who does what, or even who they all are, I don't know.

As much as I've gathered is just that there are new ones and ones gone in recent months. But, I actually didn't really even know who they were or who did what before whatever was changed.


----------



## Patchouli

kasilofhome said:


> :fussin:
> 
> 
> pretty sure 9 11, fort hood, the lady getting beheaded at work, school girls kidnapped, the tossing if homosexuals off of buildings, the girl that got acid in her face for not wanting to marry, the Boston bombing, the burning of caged non Islamic, the shoe bomber, England s bombing, France's Charlie, Texas Charlie, chants and cries to kill Obama, death to America, training camps in New York, social media talent scouting for new members, rapes, selling human as sex toys, ....
> 
> You are right not news worthy...


Y'all have a singular talent for proving my points.


----------



## gapeach

painterswife said:


> Maybe Countryside families is that location and can be renamed.
> 
> I however don't think hiding things makes them better. Just makes more work for the Mods because people start thinking it is a place to run wild. How do I know. I have seen it happen in another forum. I ran a bit wild.


Maybe I don't know about behind the scenes, but there does not seem to be much discord on the politics board.


----------



## no really

Finally caught up on this thread, read through the whole thing. 

I think my options are learning how to use the block function, something I have never done anywhere.


----------



## Patchouli

> Originally Posted by *gapeach*
> _Same with all the Black Lives Matter stuff. It is good that somebody is keeping up with all of their agitating and hurting innocent people like some people who plan to run a in Marathon next weekend. Bunch of Occupy dead beats, George Soros funded agitators want to stop their race._





wr said:


> How does that topic contribute to sorting out discord in GC?


It would appear that when a certain cohort here can't come up with a good response they just start repeating their anti-black and Islam mantras.....


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> Maybe I don't know about behind the scenes, but there does not seem to be much discord on the politics board.


Duplicate


----------



## painterswife

gapeach said:


> Maybe I don't know about behind the scenes, but there does not seem to be much discord on the politics board.


I disagree. I just think several people are ignoring the Trump love and liberal hate and waiting till we actually know who the candidates are. To early for most sane people to get to invested.

Lets not bring that race into this thread it was just an example.


----------



## Laura Zone 5

wr said:


> I'm not sure if I'm answering your question correctly because I'm not sure what you're looking for.
> 
> If I see something I feel is iffy, I ask for suggestions. If it's an out there thing, I know the mod team well enough to know that mods would agree, I will handle it and so would Tiempo, Shrek or Kung.
> 
> If something gets reported, it's there for all mods to see and discuss while ultimately, it the decision comes down to GC mods.


BOOM
You answered it!
Thank you so much!!


----------



## Bearfootfarm

gapeach said:


> Maybe I don't know about behind the scenes, but there does not seem to be much discord on the politics board.


I suspect that's due to the low number of people who actually read and post there


----------



## gapeach

Patchouli said:


> It would appear that when a certain cohort here can't come up with a good response they just start repeating their anti-black and Islam mantras.....


I was agreeing with KOH as I already stated. I certainly don't need to be told by you that I am anti black. If you see any of their tapes on tv, you will see as many white faces as black. It is the same people who lived in tents during their occupy days. Your hatefulness is a good example of why people here don't get along.


----------



## wr

I will be deleting this thread in one hour.


----------



## no really

wr said:


> I will be deleting this thread in one hour.


Why? It has already gone down in flames, like many others.


----------



## Patchouli

wr said:


> I will be deleting this thread in one hour.


The whole thread? Why? Good grief why bother posting if you are going to delete all that time and effort.


----------



## partndn

Bearfootfarm said:


> People perceive what they want to perceive, whether it's real or not.


I want to ask this with all sincerity. Really. I'm not trying to start anything but a normal conversation, not an argument or bashing anyone. In all honesty, I agreed with HD's post about your being antagonistic most of the time. Not 100% of the time, of course. Just my opinion. 

I don't know why, but I have wondered sometimes about your style of writing posts. I think the human nature in me doesn't want to just dislike all your posts without considering there might be a reason or a misunderstanding. You are very stern and to the point. I cannot recall a post that came across as having any feeling or unique opinion. Your posts are usually in statements facts (although sometimes others have what they believe are facts, but not acceptable to you). And they come off as the writer is stating a truth that has no room for diversity of situation or alternative additions that might also be true. 

It often reads as one who doesn't care about others. Even though you offer some helpful answers at times, posts read kinda coldly, and doesn't look like any independent thought was involved, only blunt statements of your interpretation of fact and knowledge. You've been here a long time, and I certainly have not read ALL your posts. But I've been here quite a while, and read many, so that I have this expected evaluation of your tone, and I might be wrong for doing so.

I admit that I have posted at times in response to you, for no other reason than I did not like something you had said. However, I think if we're honest, you have done the same at times. I'm going to try harder to refrain from that.

Is there any way you might see that sometimes posts seem a bit more like slamming than offering of opinion? I am guessing you might say you are not here to make friends and buddies, and that's okay. Some are, some are not. But even though you don't use the like button, you often choose intentional posts and requote them with either affirmation or rejection, which makes it appear that you do have a side you are supporting. That's kinda the same thing.

I had a similar issue with a former member here who many people thought was the god of his expertise. He was incredibly knowledgeable and liked to offer help to people. However, he was so ugly when his advice was not the only one given or acknowledged as the best, it got just silly rude and discourteous to other members. (I"m not saying that is what you do). Point is, with all his knowledge, I began ignoring his posts because he seemed so rude. I'm sure I was not the only one. Lotta people missed out on what could have been good info. I am sure you have knowledge that helps in plenty areas of the forum. 

I think one of the attractions to this forum is the feeling of sitting around having a discussion with a group. Not necessarily friends, but certainly acquaintances. I have seen people say this is just the internet, and no biggie, nobody should get feelings hurt. But I believe those are in the minority, and most here would like to act like we were having a disagreement in the someone's backyard with a bunch o' neighbors. Some you know well, some hardly at all.. where folks might say "pfftt, get outta here" in a casual way. Disagree and pick up conversation another day.

So there is my effort to try to get some dialogue to correct some of my interpretation if that is what is needed. I hope this is not taken as an opportunity to just have a blasting fest. That won't help anything. And if nothing happens, that's okay too. I'll move on as I would have before posting this.


ETA, shoot, just saw that the thread might go away anyhow.


----------



## wr

Then we can lock it down and go forward with a new perspective. My initial concern was find our internal dirty laundry on Facebook.


----------



## painterswife

I disagree with you WR. The openness and willingness to deal with stuff is what is so good about the last few months. Who cares if it is on FB or whatever. I own what I post and have no fear of others reading it.


----------



## arabian knight

no really said:


> Why? It has already gone down in flames, like many others.


 Wow you got that right brought down in flames is too polite to say. But is has been flaming for DAYS.


----------



## no really

What new perspective? Guess I missed any changes.


----------



## Cornhusker

wiscto said:


> I can honestly say that I don't care what you think... But for the sake of "sorting it out...."
> 
> This is the first time I can recall ever bringing someone into a conversation just because they liked a post. He liked what I considered an obviously adversarial post, even though earlier in the thread he told me that I should look in the mirror. So I wanted to know how he read HD's post. I wanted to know why he and HD both thought HD's post was a good thing in the context of what was pretty much just an honest debate. I didn't attack him. I didn't call him names. I asked for his opinion, because it didn't seem consistent to me that he would "call me out" and then like HD's post.
> 
> That was my reason. And when someone "likes" a post they're basically agreeing with it. It's well within the bounds of debate to ask them why, if that's what you want to do.
> You don't seem to have a problem with HD's unwarranted snark. So since you called me out, I'm going to call you out. Why would you "call" me "out" and not him? Picking sides maybe? Showing a little bias in these efforts to "sort out" the behavior on the General Forums?


I wish we could like a Like.
How fun would that be?
Then when someone liked your post, you could like their Like, then when I liked your post and you didn't like my Like, I could say you were biased.
But you and I both know there's no bias here.


----------



## wr

I'm going to town and you can all go converse nicely.


----------

