Don't ignore the 'ignore list'.

Revenant said:
Hilarity doesn't mean one's opinion is correct.... that includes Carlin.

Never said it was correct, did I? The point is that witticisms do have value.

Of course his routines don't mention all aspects of religion, just those that he can make fun of, and those aspects that he can make fun of don't include all within said religion.

So what? Has nothing to do with whether witticisms are acceptable in debates or criticisms of beliefs you feel are wrong. Known quotes that are even witty or take a jab at the purported truth of something are also used in rhetoric and debate. Are you denying that?

Anyway, Revenant, I think we have gone over this in extensive detail in Mitsuo Oda`s thread, "discussing religion: alternative views" and we are going to just repeat ourselves. We shouldn`t pull this thread too far off.

If you want to continue the discussion on witticisms then you might want to move it to that thread or create a new one titled, "Why witticisms are not permissable for debate." Just a suggestion.
 
strongvoicesforward said:
Never said it was correct, did I?
Didn't say you did.
strongvoicesforward said:
Known quotes that are even witty or take a jab at the purported truth of something are also used in rhetoric and debate. Are you denying that?
No, I'm saying if they aren't correct, they aren't terribly useful.
 
Just to hopefully make my position clear, in debate about topics of importance, I hardly see, for example, the debate of present day American politicians terribly useful. Their only objective is to win, and if they ignore or even state views of the opposing side that aren't exactly correct, it goes.

I know my views have been and can be incorrect, and so I attempt to look at everything objectively, setting aside as much as I can my particular feelings on the topic. I also appreciate those that aren't debating 'just to win the other side (or those following the debate) over', but to only add correct info related to the topic being discussed.

The truth doesn't need to poke at the other side, nor make incorrect witticisms, whether that be George Carlin or another. Good logic and reason stand well on their own.
 
I think mine and Revenant`s discussion between us was getting off the main point of this thread, so I answered Revenant`s last post HERE for those who want to keep following it.
 
svf all I am going to do in reply to you is say that you are rather picky in what you choose to reply to. I nearly wrote a dmn essay on the subject and you replied to one little point. I will say this about you, when it is a subject that you are familiar or feeling stongly about you generally reply in a knowledgeable manner.

Yet in this case you obfusacate the issue. You are on weak ground here, I think you should just cut your loses and quit.

Your humorous attempt at sarcasm seemed to have been lost on many, John

It was lost on you as well as evidenced by you reply to his post #63 and your reply #64

I am glad you like the suggestion. Your comments, too (though not sure if you were being serious or sarcastic), are interesting. I will address some of them.

guru-guru pei!
Hiding is banning, that is black and white. Your logic in your reply to me about that is flawed. You are banning a person, not matter what you want to call it, from participating fully in the function of a topic here.

Use the ignore function, that's what its there for, plus YOU have to learn to post nicely.

Quit trying to make this into an issue about the sensitivities of others, when this is about you and people complaining or arguing about your thoughts and opinions, nothing else.

You thought you had a captive audience in support of you, fine, but remember not everyone feels the same as you do. Don't like hearing it? Use the ignore function, I am not going to be so childish as to "hide" you from my commentary about you, even though I think that these comments may hurt your feelings and sensitivities.
 
Hachiro said:
svf all I am going to do in reply to you is say that you are rather picky in what you choose to reply to.

Hachiro, of course I am picky on what I reply to. If I replied to every post on every thread, I would then be accused of flooding. I don`t see you replying to everything. But, hold on...I am going to go out of my way to answer your posts here, lest you think I am avoiding you.

I nearly wrote a damn essay on the subject and you replied to one little point.

Hachiro, I just saw your "essay" posts now when you pointed them out. I went back and saw their date is the 27th. On that day I think I was preparing to enter the hospital for surgery so my posting was far behind and has been. Sorry if you felt like I was slighting or ignoring you. If you had, or could read Japanese, you would have seen that I went into the hospital on that day because I wrote about it in the Japanese forum -- and then perhaps could have cut me some slack with rather just a reminder to please get back to your "essay".

Even now I am recovering and still a little slow at posting. Sorry to inconvenience you.

I will say this about you, when it is a subject that you are familiar or feeling stongly about you generally reply in a knowledgeable manner.

Why would I, or should I, or anyone, reply in a knowledgeable manner when the subject is something they are not familiar with or do not feel strongly about?

Yet in this case you obfusacate the issue. You are on weak ground here, I think you should just cut your loses and quit.

What have I loss? What have I obfuscated? The sub-title o this forum is: "Post your ideas, suggestions or complaints -- which is exactly what I have beenn doing. We are invited to do so. I respect this request so much that I even welcome your negative views on my suggestions. It is a ground for hashing out thoughts, ideas, and suggestions for the forum. I think I am honoring that with my suggestion. Admin can ignore it if they wish -- just as well as you can. Let ideas flow -- they sometimes lead to wonderful changes. Admin can pick and choose that which they feel will benefit the forum. However, I don`t think they want to quash people`s enthusiasm for posting ideas -- so long as they are not based on hatred.

------------------------------------------------
*I can`t help but wonder if you are going to respond to my "essays." Hurry hurry hurry. <snicker snicker> ;)
 
SVF Quote:
Your humorous attempt at sarcasm seemed to have been lost on many, John

Hachiro said:
It was lost on you as well as evidenced by you reply to his post #63 and your reply #64

It sure was, and I admitted it clearly (though I did leave room for the possibility that he was being sarcastic when I first replied to him).

So what? What`s your point?

guru-guru pei!
Hiding is banning, that is black and white. Your logic in your reply to me about that is flawed. You are banning a person, not matter what you want to call it, from participating fully in the function of a topic here.

I`m no guru. [Yes, I know you are being sarcastic.]

I explained a different analogy to it. I preferr mine. You prefer yours. Admin can choose which they like better. It doesn`t bother me in the least if they choose yours over mine.

Besides, my suggestion is a core idea -- it could morph into a better one. Perhaps admin, after noticing someone is too sensitive to a particular topic or person, could go into their control panels and lock in a hide on a particular person. This would be especially helpful for those who are the target of forum stalkers. I had my strange little fat stalking cat following me around the whole place being sensitive about everything and posting on my posts and threads pulling them off topic and targeting me, rather than the message of the posts. The "ignore" function doesn`t prevent that. A hide function would or could.

If a "hide" function were activated against a person by admin decision, I think it should only come from admin and not moderators. I think there would have to be some kind of public guidelines that clearly show the steps leading up to it. And, it should be done and utilized in rare occassions -- and like I said before, there could be a time limit on it.

Use the ignore function, that's what its there for,

The ignore function does not stop people who are overly sensitive from freaking out and becoming forum stalkers. it is good for the person mature enough to not want to see things that bother them, but it does nothing for the person who is the target of stalking.

YOu might say, "well, if someone is stalking you, then you should have admin talk to them," -- and that has been done. The only thing is, some will wait a week or month after they have been "ordered" to not post on or to someone, and then start testing the waters, posting here and there to see how far they can get away with "targeting" a certain persona again. And, if they have a sympathetic mod or two, that can be encouraged when a mod lets a friendship get in the way of a previous order laid down. We have seen that already. A "hide" would effectively take that out of the equation in extreme cases.

...plus YOU have to learn to post nicely.

lol. I do. But, are you being subjective in that suggestion? I don`t use vulgar language or threaten people. My ideas and constructs in debate do however frustrate people, though. I am not responsible for their frustration as a result of their inability to overcome obsticles presented to them in debate. Why should I make it easy for them?

Quit trying to make this into an issue about the sensitivities of others, ...

I don`t have to try -- it clearly is in many cases.

Traditionally, in society, non-religionists, vegetarians, and animal rightists have all been positions held by the minority, and those positions have often been viewed as suspicious. They attract a lot of attention from the majority that sees them as threatening their traditional ways. The forum here is a microcosm of the world, and we see those people upset with me because I fall into each one of those minority groups -- meaning I will bother a larger percentage of people.

when this is about you and people complaining or arguing about your thoughts and opinions, nothing else.

See above paragraph.

You thought you had a captive audience in support of you, fine, but remember not everyone feels the same as you do.

A few support me. But the majority do not because my views are the minority in society on almost every point that I described above. I am quite aware not everyone feels the same as I do. At times, it seems like I have had to fight hard for the right to put forth my ideas and opinions here. I have obeyed the rules of the forum in 99% (I may have brushed against them several times) of all my postings and threads and admin, not being captured by a clique has that that is true -- whether they agree with my views or not is irrelevant -- what is relevant is that they are non-biased and do not take prejudicial action against me based on any personal views. I do have to say they have shown great leadership in withstanding the calls for action against me.

Leadership is about leading and not falling prey to the lynch mob mentality -- even if the lynch mob has your deputies in it. To hold off the mob is admirable and the just leader executes fairness and justice justly -- not based on friendship or connections. Again, the forum is a microcosm of the world and we see this leadership/lynch mob mentality that plays out in the world being played out right here.

Don't like hearing it? Use the ignore function, I am not going to be so childish as to "hide" you from my commentary about you, even though I think that these comments may hurt your feelings and sensitivities.

lol. You would have no need to "hide" me from you, Hachiro -- because I have never stalked you because you upset me.
 
Hachiro said:
With all due respect to all the comments so far regarding the idea of having a "hide" feature I would like to add my comments to this.

They are welcomed.

Firstly I think that the majority of people posting here are adults, and to that should be able to control their thoughts feelings and emotions regarding what they write on an open message board such as this.

Then perhaps you are not aware of my famous stalker. Stalking is anything but mature and rather than waiting for admin to have to put an end to it, mods should have stepped in much sooner to do so when the pattern became quite evident.

Moderators are on hand to "moderate" the discussions and imho are doing an admirable job.

I think KNM is doing a great job. Let`s room for a lot of lattitude. I am usually a democrat in politics, but in referreing forums I like the adage, "Government that governs least, governs best," -- but stalkers should be governed harshly. Attatching to a persona just to drive them from the forum as their stated goal is childish (oh, and I do have the words of that).

Some mods may want to be introspective and ask themselves if they should taker moderator actions or issue admonitions when they have become invested in the debate. This should be done out of intellectual honesty and fairness to the spirit of debate. I am not saying this applies to just JREF, but rather any debate anywhere on any forum site. But, that is just my opinion -- but one I think most would reasonably agree with. I mean, imagine a debate between Bush and Kerry where all of the sudden the moderator jumped in and added their ideas and opinions to the debate. The candidate not holding the opinion of the other two (the mod being amongst them) would be at an unfair disadvantage.

I'm sorry but even with all the comments made so far about this proposal I for one think that it is in effect rather childish. "I don't like that he or she can read what I am writing even though I have them on ignore" "If you can't play my way I am going to take my toys home" kind of response.

Well, we have a different outlook on the issue, then. You seem to be looking at it in an elementary kind of way. Here is the adult analogy. I say it is more akin to, "I know that John gets all worked up and can`t control himself when this topic is broached where he can hear it, so I will lower my voice so that everyone can hear it except for him. We are not talking about him. Just respecting the fact he is sensitive and respecting the fact that others at this gathering don`t want to have their time soiled by his for certain indignation when he hears these topics and comments."

Now, which analogy is the more mature one? your "toy" one, or the one that many people use in gatherings as they circulate and talk with one another, knowing that there are those lose cannons amongst us?

If a poster feels that strongly about having one person or another not reading their posts then they should consider the way they are posting their material that provokes such a response.

Hachiro, I am a vegetarian, animal rightist, and non-theist-- practically the most minority of all as it cuts across socio-cultural traditions. My ideas are bound to upset someone. Are you saying I have to go through mental calculations to judge what is acceptable in topic and MANNER by way of how I post. For some, no matter how much I tip toe around an issue will cause them to take offense. I mean, "How dare I say a dolphin or a whale is as intelligent or more intelligent than humans?!!!" Why that will lead to some people saying I should be slapped around. Go up to the whaling thread if you don`t believe me. Or more directly, look HERE.

This person that was quoted put their opinion in a polite way but look how it was reacted to.

If you have an objection with anything in particular (and that which shows a clear majority of my posts are such) with how I put something across to make a point or debate that egregiously goes against forum rules, then bring it forth. I want you to show me RIGHT NOW!

"You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time" (or something like that) comes to mind.
If one is so overly sensitive to the point that they don't want others reading and responding to their posts, then they should consider if a forum like this is the place for them to be discussing diversive or argumentative issues.

Hachiro, you keep missing the point -- it is not about being senstive to people responding to your posts, it is about people being sensitive to reading certain ideas that are contrary to their cherrished beliefs.

One of the purposes of an open forum such as this is to allow people, within reason, to state their feelings, opinions, thoughts and beliefs about various topics. You defeat the purpose of a board such as this and end up creating cliques of people that view like issues in the same way.

Well said. We agree. You support what I have been saying often. Cliques suck and the guilty parties be it, high school, sports team, work, forums, etc... should know who they are. But, those in the clique will find safety and comfort there. They may not see them as so bad. But woe to the person on the outside -- a lynch mob mentality confronts them at every corner. They are only fortunate if they have a person of power that can administer justice fairly without bias -- that often means holding back the mob. And they are great for as long as they can succeed at that.

You become or create a "cult" of like-minded people and end up being narrow minded and NOT open to others opinions, like them or not.

Yes and no. The clique can become a cult, but are only dangerous when they have power to act against those who are not with them. It is ok for people to have come to a conclusion on an idea or opinion and from there on debate it to champion it in order to move a society on the spectrum of beliefs by convincing them. Nothing wrong with that, so long as coercion is not part of the mix.

I will say this, if and when this proposed feature becomes a "fact", (which I sincerely hope doesnt) it will be the LAST time I EVER post here. I may be a "newbie" to many and thereby my comments will be dismissed out of hand yet I feel that to in effect add a "censorship" type of function to be placed into effect defeats the freedom that one has to post or not post here.

I don`t think you have much to worry about, Hachiro. This idea has been floated around for about a month now and admin has shown no interest in it. It doesn`t bother me. It was just an idea -- a suggestion -- which the forum makes room for for discussion. That is what forums are about. Wouldn`t you agree.

Personally though, I still think it has merit to affect the stalkers amongst us.
 
Hachiro said:
While svf has strong views, some that I may agree with and others that I don't I find fault with his logic in this proposal about a hide function.

Well, I am glad you do agree with some of my strong views. Let us know which ones in particular on the appropriate threads. As you know, I am often in the minority. Would be nice to see a person who agrees with a view of mine to speak out on it if in fact they do agree. Sometimes I would imagine, people are afraid to agree with the "out of clique" person, for fear of being targeted by the clique. You wouldn`t be guilty of holding agreement out in public for fear of that, would you, Hachiro?

SVF saud:This command ["hide" command] would let us list who we don`t want our posts to be viewed by. That way, those who are known to be too sensitive or antagonistic whenever a new post or thread is written on a certain topic, can be kept from becomng insulted or offended because of their sensitivities to a topic by preventing them from viewing it. I guess that would be kind of like empowering members limited powers of banning certain people just from viewing what they have to say on something.


This is a form of censorship wouldn't you agree?

It is a form of control. The forum rules themselves are a form of control.

By advocating a move such as this you would control your audience, no matter how altruistic the motives may be. How does one make a decision on whether or not a person is going to be offended?

Past actions by an individual would be a strong indicator.

If you know that "someone" is going to be offended by your post(s) why make the post in the first place?

Intellectual honesty can be done in one`s own unique style of commenting, provided vulgarities and expletives and threats of violence and overt messages to incite hate are not the tools used.

You are repeating yourself here about being courteous. If that is the case then you as the poster have the responsibility to write your posts in such a manner as not to offend the reader.

I am a minority in the culturural socio world -- hence my views are bound to upset someone when I post them as my conclusions. I do not have to lace them with "In my opinion" or "In my humble opinion." I can boldly claim, "God "A" is fictitious" and that may upset someone. It is the responsibility of those who read the message to respond maturely if the above infractions in vulgarities etc... are not set upon.

You take away a readers opportunity to read what you have written and you also will run the risk of comments being placed in response to your threads that others are hidden from and then having the hidden person respond to those comments. Thereby again running the risks of having a thread shot to heck and pulled off topic in a desire to "protect" a person from being offended from your posts. You would also offend more people when you place them on "hide" because then they would also only be able to participate in a portion of a thread, it would end up being similar to only hearing a part of a conversation and not in its entirety.

That is why a preliminary discussion such as this is valuable to discuss the pitfalls and how those could be avoided. Like I said, controls to limit any or most negative side affects could be put in place. The "hide" could be a request function to admin to bestow to someone who is being persued by someone across the forum. Admin my be reluctant to ban someone and having to referree all the time could be tiring for them and the mods. A "hide" would handle that easily.


Then to take that to the next logical step, to prevent miscommunication, misunderstanding and topics being pulled off thread you would have to limit access to entire threads. Because you dont want people participating in only half of a conversation now would you? The next logical conclusion would be to have to make the obvious request that people be banned or hidden from topics or threads that YOU deemed inapropriate out of concerns for their feelings. Do you follow where this is going to?

Sure. All good points, but not something that rocket scientry would be needed to overcome.

Whether it be one person or 100 to in effect "ban" a person from a topic for whatever reason is censoring that persons rights as a member here.

Do you think a person`s right extends to stalking? or ranting personally at the messenger instead of the message?

From this proposal you end up making this board into a back scratching club where members would end up fighting for "rep" points to hide people that they didn't like.

Well, I did say the "hide" if purchased through rep points should be expensive. I think that would mean someone would be spending an inordinate amount of time to get rep currency to "hide" someone, which may have a time limit. Which would mean, a person "hiding" someone for no valid reason would be wasting a lot of time, and probably tire of it sooner or later. That is why it doesn`t HAVE TO BE a purchase option. It could be a request to admin or done by admin through entering and locking our control panels on a hide of someone.

I think this should be done in only extreme cases, before banning someone from the community. Clearly not an action to take lightly. And, I also think it should be done to the one guilty of egregious behaviour jugded objectively -- not done to both members just because the two are engaged with one another. The point where the guilty party crossed the line is the point that shows guilt and that is to who the "hide" should be enacted on.

I shut off my reputation points because of the fact that I am not posting here for my ego, nor to ask for people to add to my reputation. I am who I am, whether or not you agree with me is your choice, just as I have the choice to agree with you or not.

It`s a personal choice. I sure do not pile on to help others in their quest to bash people down. Others have though. Surf around and you will see who the guilty parties are of that behaviour.

SVF you have strong opinions on topics that bring out a variety of opinions from various members. In this case I have a strong opinion against this proposal and hope that it never takes effect. In any way shape or form. Like I wrote in my previous post if it does take effect that will be the last day that I post here ever.

Well said. Well taken. YOur views are exactly what I was hoping the topic could bring about -- a discussion of the positives and the negatives. Thank you for adding your input on it.
 
Don't ignore the ignore list.

It's good advice.

There's a certain member that I have on my ignore list. For some reason the way he posts things just rub me the wrong way. After putting this member on ignore, I certainly feel better and enjoy Jref more!

After all, I'm not here to feel bad. This is a community, and we should strive to at the very least coexist. Sometimes the ignore list is the best option to that end.
 
Mikawa Ossan said:
Don't ignore the ignore list.
It's good advice.
There's a certain member that I have on my ignore list. For some reason the way he posts things just rub me the wrong way. After putting this member on ignore, I certainly feel better and enjoy Jref more!
After all, I'm not here to feel bad. This is a community, and we should strive to at the very least coexist. Sometimes the ignore list is the best option to that end.

I understand. It is a nice relief for the mind to ignore that which tries to wake one`s self from a sleep. Many would like to keep ignoring the harsh realities of suffering and misery, and objecting to the style in which it is shown to them is often a convenient excuse to keep on ignoring.

Reminds me of The Matrix. Stay hooked up to the status quo and everything looks and feels rosey. But then, some just haven`t developed their voice to win in the arena of ideas. They disengage and bow out using other excuses for doing so rather than admitting that they are defending a defenseless position.

There is no special need or ability to strive and coexist. It is a fact. We do coexist. Perhaps you are meaning "peacefully." No conflict? right? Well, then perhaps JREF should make a rule there is no room for debate here anymore. Let`s just make one big super "Chit Chat"! Does that sound fun?

These forums can be a window to the outside world or to different mind sets that cause understanding how a certain subset of society thinks, views, and understands the world. I think there is the most value. And, in the outside world, man does not "coexist" peacefully with his fellow neighbors in different countries or with his environment or fellow creature beings.

Sorry that it bothers you, or my style does, but I put forth my views on those issues. But, then again, I have a sense you have not read this -- if in fact I the one you are referring to as being on your ignore list. <smile> ;)

and...HAPPY MATRIX!
 
1. What makes you think that I was referring to you? I wasn't.

2. The reason that person is on my ignore list has nothing to do with anything you put in your last post.

SVF, you shouldn't jump to conclusions so quickly.
 
Mikawa Ossan said:
1. What makes you think that I was referring to you? I wasn't.
2. The reason that person is on my ignore list has nothing to do with anything you put in your last post.
SVF, you shouldn't jump to conclusions so quickly.

Yes, Mikawa. Did you see the PM I immediately sent you after that? I was doing a little back peddling in that PM because I thought I had misinterpreted who you were referring to. But, the message can go out generally as a point about not ignoring views different than ours.

Again, sorry I had misinterpreted your "person" on your ignore list.

--SVF
 
SVF, it's no problem, as I told you in my response to your PM.

To be honest, I wanted that post to have room for interpretation. You see, I think of this forum as a place to bounce ideas of one another and share thoughts and opinions, but I don't personally see it as a place to try to change other people's minds about issues.

Being a community, it is important that we get along to a certain degree. Of course we will differing opinions from time to time, and an occasional argument, but that's just natural.
 
I don't put people in an ignore list, I just don't reply or ignore their posts. It's not that in real life you can just put people in your own "ignore list" , is it :? If you are somewhat mature you just don't bother with him. Anyways, that's how I see it :)
 
RockLee said:
It's not that in real life you can just put people in your own "ignore list" , is it :?
True, but this forum is for entertainment purposes, is it not? Entertainment is not exactly real life, would you say?

As far as the maturity thing goes, I agree in principle. But here we have the option of the ignore list, which we don't in real life. I think that part of maturity is self-regulation. I have exercised my self-regulation in the form of the ignore list. If the ignore list is such a bad thing, then why bother keeping it?

EDIT: BTW, if I was an advisor are you are, RockLee, I wouldn't use the ignore list either. But that's because advisor's have more responsibilities than us plebians, and "ignoring" members is a kind of dereliction of duty, don't you think?
 
Mikawa Ossan said:
...but I don't personally see it as a place to try to change other people's minds about issues.

We will agree to disagree on this.

I don`t think we can change a person`s mind overnight here on this forum. But, over time. It is possible. Seeds of change can be planted, and if some are like me, even after signing off of JREF and turning off the computer, you may still be thinking about some of the points made by someone.

It happens to me all the time.


Mikawa Ossan said:
True, but this forum is for entertainment purposes, is it not? Entertainment is not exactly real life, would you say?

Some may view it as "entertainment" but I think that is a little insulting to JREF creators if that is the only box you are going to allow them to exist in. I think any conduit to communication can be a cog in social change.

Wouldn`t you agree to that? I think that is a rather fair statement.
 
This is the first time we've engaged each other like this in a long time, isn't it! :wave:
strongvoicesforward said:
We will agree to disagree on this.
Oh yes, obviously so!
I don`t think we can change a person`s mind overnight here on this forum. But, over time. It is possible. Seeds of change can be planted, and if some are like me, even after signing off of JREF and turning off the computer, you may still be thinking about some of the points made by someone.
It happens to me all the time.
Of course I agree with you. But I don't think that my way of thinking is inherently more "correct" than most other people's. Therefore I do not actively try to bring others to my way of thinking. If someone does start to think about something because of something I posted, of course I am happy about it and welcome their thoughts. But I don't mind particularly if they don't have second thoughts about my posts.

Of course I do from time to time offer advice. I hope the involved parties listen to it, but after all, it IS free advice.

Some may view it as "entertainment" but I think that is a little insulting to JREF creators if that is the only box you are going to allow them to exist in. I think any conduit to communication can be a cog in social change.
Wouldn`t you agree to that? I think that is a rather fair statement.
Well, to make a L-O-N-G response rather short, I guess we can disagree on this, too. But that's mostly because I don't see social change to be nearly so compelling as you seem to. But that's fine with me.
 
All above, fair enough, Mikawa.

Nice engagement. I`m sure we will have more for each other in the future.
 
No more off topic's this time, ok ? Thank you !
 

This thread has been viewed 100490 times.

Back
Top