View Single Post
  #73  
Old 03-16-2010, 01:37 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,223
Default

One thing at a time, please:


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
The most impressive thing right now is that it is possible to have this very conversation without devolving to angry personal insults.
This is fascinating in light of the tirade >snip< you allowed yourself to slip into earlier in this thread which included the embarrassing posts that were conveniently erased.
Indeed. I'm flattered that you find my earlier frustration fascinating. You should know that I have since pulled myself together. I also agree that it is very convenient to be able to erase and/or edit one's posts on this forum, embarrassing or otherwise. Anyone can erase their own posts and anyone can ask a moderator or the owner to erase any other posts for reasons including but not limited to said posts being embarrassing and/or irrelevant.




Quote:
(which spanned websites; how dare others post their opinions on a medium beyond your reach)
I'm not sure what you're talking about re: "spanned websites". I have talked about this on THIS website, and I made two comments (or three, but one was a post-script with a link in it) on Joreth's LJ which were approved by her. Come to think of it, I have not even been back there since I posted the second comment, so for all I know, it wasn't approved, although I suspect it was.

So, if posting two CIVILIZED comments on someone's SCREENED Live Journal counts as a "tirade that spans websites", then... I guess I had a tirade that spanned websites. Joreth had one of those, too.

As far as your sarcastic "how dare others post on a medium beyond your reach", let's dissect the dynamics of that statement:

"how dare others": Indeed, how DARE others? Where in the wonderful world of cyberspace did anyone here say "How DARE" anything? Oh, that's right. Joreth said that in her "squelched" message (we'll discuss my fascination with the word "squelch" later in this post), which could be where you were going with that, so I'm pleased if I inadvertently obliged you. Long story short, there was no "How dare you" from me, here or anywhere else.

"on a medium beyond your reach": I do not consider the Live Journals to be a "medium beyond my reach". Anyone can have a Live Journal and say whatever they want, link to wherever they want. If you meant Joreth's LJ in particular, then you are guilty of making the same kind of assumption(s) that you would describe as "oppressive" if someone said the same thing about yourself. Long story short, I happen to appreciate the fact that someone can vent their frustrations on their personal (public, private, free, $, etc.) blog.



Quote:
You seemed to have something stuck in your craw from the moment I extended my sympathy to Joreth and expressed being heartened by her highlighting issues I have seen.
I had something stuck in my craw before you and Joreth showed up. If you insist on taking credit for that, do so under advisement.

For what it is worth, I have for the most part been in full agreement with Joreth in discussions on this forum, including the one regarding primary/secondary, prescriptive relationships, and "what about the CHYLDRUN". If you can't see that, then you are not really reading my posts very closely. If you are not reading my posts closely, I do not see the value of continuing to respond to you.


Quote:
It was amusing to count how many times you quoted squelch and on how many websites. It seems ImaginaryIllusion wants to join the fun. Someone might suggest a drinking game out of it.
Again, I am flattered. Not only do my posts fascinate you, but they amuse you too. Perhaps you ARE reading them after all. I admit that your posts sometimes fascinate me, they rarely amuse me, they usually confuse me, and they almost always give me eyestrain after a few sentences because of the font and/or color you use.

That, and I do like the word "squelch". I find the sound of it aesthetically pleasing for some reason. And yes, Imaginary Illusion is helping me have fun with that. I think one of us may have already suggested the drinking game, too. But thank you anyway.


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by YGirl View Post
I am growing rather weary of being told that this is a "culture issue not a moderator issue" on one hand, and on the other hand being told (http://www.polyamory.com/forum/showp...7&postcount=19) that it's the moderators who set the tone of the culture and that we play favorites by tacitly agreeing with the passive-aggressive people (no, Raven doesn't say it in those words, but I am fluent enough in English to re-phrase something someone else wrote in my own words).

I grew weary as well. Especially of the argument you seemed to be having with yourself. Accusations and even quotes which you created to argue against.
You must be thinking of someone else. Please show evidence where I did that. If I quoted something and then the person I quoted went back and edited their message, that is not my fault. I don't recall making any "accusations", either. And I'm having an argument with YOU right now, not "myself" so if you really ARE a figment of my imagination, there should be some pharmaceutical cocktail out there that will help me with my problem.

Did someone say something about a drinking game?



Quote:
If your point was that moderators create a forum and do not control the tone, I disagree. The forum, tone and all, is controlled through moderation and moderator opinion. Moderation sanctions and moderation denounces. Moderation may not be the only factor but it is the overriding factor. Denial doesn't make this any less the case.
Affirmation doesn't make this any more the case either. Does not, does too. Lather, rinse, repeat.


Quote:
When it was highlighted that there were issues that members would like addressed, the response was not "let's discuss the issue and see how we can be a better forum together." Suggestions were not even engaged. Instead there were cries of moderator-envy (because some so crave the moderator scepter), attempts of trying to discredit the forum just by expressing these views (any forum discredit has been self-inflicted in the eyes of members and non-members already), as well as 'suggestions' overt or not that members who feel there is a problem leave. There was not the slightest attempt of remedying the issues highlighted.

The level of outrage and defensiveness being expressed at the idea that it is being suggested that the forum is not paradise and could use some work in areas is beyond belief. Importance of forum-image is the order of the day regardless of underlying problems. The surface must look good.

How the forum looks, how many view the forum, how much good the moderators are doing. That has been highlighted. Superficiality is focused on more than once.

I am surprised that it such a shock to you and others that these views exist in light of moderator and member behavior to the above effect. Is it really so unbelievable that this behavior brings others to the conclusion of self-important, self-centered arrogant hypocrites with entitlement issues and god-complexes?

Raven, since you're not satisfied with the services you have been rendered by the staff and management of this forum, I will personally give you a refund. PM me and I will send it to the PayPal account of your choice. I'm sure I'll get reimbursed by the owner of this forum. [/s]


No one ever suggested that this forum is paradise. If paradise is what you are looking for, no wonder you have been disappointed with this site. I don't really know how to address your laundry list of complaints up there but I quoted it anyway because earlier you were telling me that I was making up accusations so I can argue with myself, so here are some of those things you just said again that I must have made up before. Anyone can quote someone and edit it after the fact, so this actually doesn't prove anything.

Personally, I find you exhausting and pedantic.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 03-16-2010 at 02:50 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote