Debate vs Bashing
Find a Conversation
| Tue, 10-03-2006 - 2:54pm |
LG wrote in the "Why Women Stay When Men Stray" thread: Hey, I am all for someone not wanting to broach a topic on this board, whether it is too personal, rubs you wrong or would give out TMI, but that is the time, IMO, to ignore the topic, not throw out the arguement, "it's my business" and expect to call it debating.
ITA! I am new here and have been lurking the past few days - doing lots of catch up reading. I realize you all have lots of history with each other, but there is too much bashing and too little debate going on here with many threads going way OT. Example: asking Hope, ad nauseum, about something personal she's obviously reluctant to answer; having a link deleted because it had TIES to a FORMER ku klux klan leader (I admit I was thrown by that for a minute until I actually read the article and learned that he is reformed and now an evangelist); posting the link to begin with when it was obviously a personal attack against a debater.
I'm wondering how many other lurkers out there have an opinion, but are afraid to weigh in because they don't want to get skewered. Don't you all think everyone, be they a BS, WS or AP, deserve to voice their opinions here. This is a debate board after all. (Not talking to everyone here - Jemmie, I think you are an angel.)
Psalms 25:4-5

Pages
Wow, imagine banning someone JUST for that?! On most forums I visit, people usually get two or three warnings before they're banned. What kind of dictatorship would ban someone for one veiled attack?! Ok, I'm not saying it was a nice thing that person said (calling your fellow board members narrow minded - ouch!), but it does seem excessive to ban on those grounds only.
I could understand if comments like those were part of a pattern of posting behaviour, because that would create an unfriendly atmosphere on the board, leaving everyone wondering if the digs are aimed at THEM. If previous posts had made it obvious who the digs were aimed at, then it's just sneaky to use the 'some people' veil instead of naming. If what you say isn't decent or fair enough to say with names attached, then maybe it's best left unsaid? Naming makes that kind of comment a personal attack, veiling makes it easier to get away with. But if you keep doing it, it's board disruption, and that's when warnings and a ban are fair play, in my opinion. But banning outright for ONE underhand comment? It's almost unbelievable!
You you get what I mean?
Kayla xox
Wife~
Now that was funny. You silly old hen..... :-)
Idders
"""I do appreciate Charity's willingness to step in and defend me and Jemmie's recent comments on another thread. If more of you regular posters would say something, maybe this kind of behavior towards new posters would stop. As I said in an earlier post to Wife, sometimes what you don't say speaks as much to your character as what you do say. When you allow bullying to go unchallenged, the bully thinks what they are doing is acceptable."""
I believe that the bully thinks what they are doing is not only acceptable but that the silence of others only encourages them because the silence is interpreted as acknoledgement that they are correct in their way of thinking. This is sad because that leads to the next thing in the progression of some people choosing not to express their view. If they are on the fence or if they are the type of person that just chooses to not put up with someone being (I'm trying be nice by using this word) sharp with them then they are less apt to post much or anything at all. If you are here to learn from others you are missing out on learning from the people that have this type of personality.
BTW my W is one of those people and that is one reason why she doesn't post here. I'm glad that she doesn't. I don't have much time these days so I don't have the time to read very many post much less get into long discussions so I don't say much about what is being posted...Sorry about that!
Well that's this mean old man's 2 cents worth.
Cackle, Cackle...
Gotta get in one good laugh this morning ;-)
<>
take care, thanks for sharing some of your thoughts and time here.
In all fairness the girl in question had done it before. But if you are very clever you can provoke the more naive into making silly comments, which is what had happened.
It just seems unfair to me that her comments were so mild, and think a little gentle reminder would have been enough in this case.
Anyway I take your point about patterns of behaviour and agree.
Dot
Mmmm, that changes everything. Who knows how many gentle reminders people get before forum hosts crack, and issue warnings, one of which might be your final one..?
Rules is rules, forum hosts can't bend them depending on how naive individuals are. We agree to stick to rules of posting, regardless of how upset, angry, etc, we become when we read other people's posts.
I think I'd feel very patronised if I got a reminder for a post for which others would get a warning, because I was naive. If that girl had done it before and had reminders already, then then her naivety and what provoked her is irrelevant, in my opinion. Forum hosts have to balance the pressures involved in reading sensitive forums against the interests of the whole community, and they use rules to help them do that. At some point, someone has to say 'ok, I know you're naive and feeling provoked, but you still broke the rules and made other people feel uncomfortable', and then act on that to protect the interests of others on the forum. It's only fair. Special treatment for some puts others at a disadvantage. Forum hosts see the bigger picture, and if they're doing their jobs properly, that girl should have had fair warning that she was sailing close to the wind.
This discussion is about debating vs. bashing. My point is that there is more than one way to 'bash'. Veiled attacks are bashing too, and forum hosts have a responsibility to act on that regardless of what's making the 'bashers' tick.
Kayla xox
>>>>participate in the chaos, you (I, they) are individually accountable for it.<<<<<
Chaos Label? Gee its a frigin MB for crying out loud.
Every poster is "ENTITLED" to thier ****OWN**** Opinion. Its thier *OWN PERCEPTION". It may or may not agree with others, so be it, the poster should not be made to feel defensive about thier PERCEPTION. I think its ridiculous someone should post and type the same responses over and over again, its redundant (sp)((in other words to lazy to look up on Dictionary.com for the correct spelling))
<>
Sorry you don't like "chaos," Hope. How about "rig-a-ma-roll," "drama," or "hooey?" Take your pick or suggest your own.
<>
This has zip-a-dee-doo-dah to do with the original post, and by the way, NOBODY can MAKE anybody feel ANYTHING. How you PERCEIVE things and therefore CHOOSE to feel about them is your OWN decision. Sometimes perceptions can be wrong, especially if we refuse to see beyond what we WANT to see. If I have my visor down because I don't want the sun in my eyes but it blocks the traffic light, I cannnot then use as my defense, "Well, it was my PERCEPTION that the light was green when I drove through it illegally."
Pages