A Plea to Long Time, Level-Headed Members Who Still Post Here

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

I invoke the cute photo to bring peace...

[Susita 175]

Calm down people! Amby used to start numerous threads - I remember logging in one morning and every single thread in OT had been started by her. Then I log in this morning and P&V has started practically every thread. It was an observation, that is all!

Amby's threads were usually funny or interesting and rarely (if ever) caused the back and forth nastiness and snide comments that go on in OT now. The threads posted in OT now are provocative and are meant to evoke angry responses from other members.

I see a big difference here.

For example:

A thread by Amby: history magazine "the beaver" changes its name

[Captain Ewok 1,857]

Everyone getting along...

[ValerieA 350]

Amby's threads were usually funny or interesting and rarely (if ever) caused the back and forth nastiness and snide comments that go on in OT now. The threads posted in OT now are provocative and are meant to evoke angry responses from other members.

I see a big difference here.

Exactly. Amby's threads were normally nonpolitical, but fun to participate in. The thread whoring that is going on now seems to be strictly to have the same old arguments over and over again.

And right after this photo was taken, the kitten ate the mouse, the dog chased the kitten, and the bunny was boiled on someone's stove as revenge.

Everyone getting along...

Edited May 28, 2010 by ValerieA

[Susita 175]

Everyone getting along...

:thumbs:

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Amby's threads were usually funny or interesting and rarely (if ever) caused the back and forth nastiness and snide comments that go on in OT now. The threads posted in OT now are provocative and are meant to evoke angry responses from other members.

I see a big difference here.

For example:

A thread by Amby: history magazine "the beaver" changes its name

The comment was about frequency, not content. I rarely even read off topic any more, so I don't even know what button I have inadvertently pushed.

[TBoneTX 43,133]

How am I misquoting you?

Review your own posts for the inaccuracies, then report back.

Seems quite clear taht you are passive aggressively

A bit judgmental, are we, si man?

advocating giving certain people a 30 Day ban despite any infractions. You seem quite driven to weed out those posters whom you personally deem unnecessary. You are either naive, or a neophyte

A bit judgmental, are we, si man?

if you think that people will post without insults, or even snide comments. It's OT, grow thicker skin, or don't post there.

Translation: "Get out of our juvenile sandbox; it's ours, and we'll poop in it when we want to." Hmmm... title of thread: "A Plea to Long-Time, Level-Headed Members Who Still Post Here"... In our exchanges, who has been disrespectful, dismissive, name-calling, presumptive, & baiting; and who has tried to keep things on a higher plane?

Very well, then -- from your keyboard to all: Let's ban the offenders only -- those who have proved to be a "thorn in the site." Immediately and permanently. (Who would fall into that category, prithee, si man?)

And perhaps because most of my months/years here have been spent in the immigration (transl.: relevant) fora, I have a higher expectation for standards of decorum to which posters hold themselves. If that makes me a naive neophyte (and thus worthy of your dismissiveness), then hurrah for naivete -- bartender, give me a double... and a tummy-rub of the Admiral's cute kittens, si man.

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

Oh please. I like cute photos as much as the next girl, but Robin's (Trompe's) point is getting lost and twisted. She was referring to the sheer number of threads and making a comparison between two posters' propensity (at different times) to post high levels of new topics. She never brought content into the mix. I'm sorry if that's too difficult for people to understand. Furthermore, I hardly believe it is Robin who has "followers" that are jumping to her defence just because she got a couple of +1s -- just look how all of a sudden we have people defending poor Amby's honour from mean, mean Robin. Seriously, I think there's a mirror in your bathroom. Go have a look in it and report back on what you see.

[Susita 175]

The comment was about frequency, not content. I rarely even read off topic any more, so I don't even know what button I have inadvertently pushed.

I understand you weren't referring to content. Sorry.

In any case, I just wanted to say that I'd rather look at 100 of Amby's threads than participate in one of P&V's. They're so different.

[Amby 490]

Thanks everyone, but I get what she's saying. She wasn't attacking me at all, just making a comparison. I think Paul is more like AJ as far as threads posted.

eta: content wise

Edited May 28, 2010 by Amby

[The_Dude 1,142]

Very well, then -- from your keyboard to all: Let's ban the offenders only -- those who have proved to be a "thorn in the site." Immediately and permanently. (Who would fall into that category, prithee, si man?)

That is the first logical idea that you have posted in this entire thread. I like this suggestion. As to whom will qualify for suspensions, that is up to Mr. Ewok and his moderating team.

I won't address the rest of your post because to be blunt, it makes no sense. I provided you a response, and you turn around and throw out a red herring and a straw mans argument. No point continuing this with you.

[Peikko 1,575]

Thanks everyone, but I get what she's saying. She wasn't attacking me at all, just making a comparison. I think Paul is more like AJ as far as threads posted.

eta: content wise

Just don't post any more threads in OT, got it?

[The_Dude 1,142]

Thanks everyone, but I get what she's saying. She wasn't attacking me at all, just making a comparison. I think Paul is more like AJ as far as threads posted.

eta: content wise

Paul is far more callous and not nearly as clever.

[TBoneTX 43,133]

That is the first logical idea that you have posted in this entire thread. I like this suggestion. As to whom will qualify for suspensions, that is up to Mr. Ewok and his moderating team.

I won't address the rest of your post because to be blunt, it makes no sense. I provided you a response, and you turn around and throw out a red herring and a straw mans argument. No point continuing this with you.

Hoist on your own petard? Whatever. Find a kitten's tummy to rub, si man, as I will. Edited May 28, 2010 by TBoneTX

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

Hoist on your own petard? Whatever. Find a kitten's tummy to rub, si man, as I will.

TBone, you know you and I have had no beef so far, but I really fail to see where Rob has hoisted himself on his own petard. Example?