posted on February 4, 2002 09:06:16 AM new
I post where I find interesting content and sympatico posters. I avoid spots where an individual or a few individuals hijack the forum. That happens plenty of places, not just here.
posted on February 4, 2002 09:09:21 AM new
I post here because kids do not, and teens seldom do. Other messageboards are flooded with them and their thoughts: sex, dating, school; sex, dating, school; ad nauseum. That few there little care about the world around them nor do they want the real world to intrude upon them makes for lousy communications from those of us who DO care.
That the auction web sites demand that ADULTS be the sellers and buyers means that pretty much Adults (those of legal age) will be here. Plus, a distinctly mixed breed of sellers and buyers stop by the RT to read our ongoing criticisms of the world today. That Presidents have used eBay may surprise some people, rich folk whose names you know from the news have used it, some of those stop by here at AW to learn more as any sensible person would. And by venturing into the RT, they get to hear what the media will not tell them: exactly what the American people are really thinking -- on both sides! That Gallup Polls and online polls fail to tell any story, let alone accurately portray the public's thoughts, we here in the RT we have been consistently at the very pulse of this nation, IMO. And in the past year, that did not go unnoticed by the media, the powerful interests, nor by those in the government itself. I get laughed at for claiming this, but you'd be surprised if you knew what I know.
I surmise that when AW took it upon themselves to demand that users disclose their identities before posting in here, they through the baby out with the bathwater. While the temperament of current posters is a >>VAST<< improvement over the crop that we used to have, we also have lost many good folks who simply do not want to be identified when they speak their minds here in the RT. And that is a loss for everyone, IMO.
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
posted on February 4, 2002 11:13:42 AM new
Morning Enchanted!
I love the RT. It's my home on the net and always has been for me.BUT since 9-11 I just can't handle quite as much negativity and political discussion as before. It isn't that I have my head hidden in the sand..I do keep abreast of the news and I still follow and read the links provided here...I just cannot handle it 24/7 . I do still think Bush suck and is a liar I just don't want to dwell on it constantly.
Just recently in those caves in Afghanistan they found lots of pictures of Seattle, where I live. Most of the pictures I saw were of things within five or so miles of my home. I try to not think too much about it as there is nothing..NADDA...I can do to stop anyone....terrorist or otherwise.. from wreaking havoc anywhere. Anyway, I don't need the constant reminders in each and every thread. I KNOW THIS STUFF.I'm trying to be happy. That's all. This RT makes me sad and mad and anxious.The old RT made me think as well as laugh.
Also so many people left when the CC thing was started that the diversity was gone. I thought some would trickle back in but that doesn't seem to be happening.
I still like all the posters left here and I do intend to post here more when some things that are happening in my RL settle down. Just can't quite handle it too much right now.
posted on February 4, 2002 11:22:57 AM new
I post here because I like it. There are board friends that I miss seeing because I am here but that would be true today at whatever forum I posted -- most are widely scattered or gone -- and I personally dislike boardhopping. So, whatever.....
Hi Robin I almost missed you there.
See, the best people do still drop by.
[ edited by antiquary on Feb 4, 2002 11:26 AM ]
posted on February 4, 2002 12:42:08 PM new
I keep up with Newt and I've devised a system with OTWA, combining thread scanning and poster searches, which is satisfactory. The golden age of posting is past, I think, but there are still nuggets here and there, and some pretty neat people still panning about.
posted on February 4, 2002 02:24:21 PM new
I used to post here a lot more but haven't been as inspired to lately. I like fluff more than politics and I haven't been doing a whole lot of eBay stuff lately. Gotta poke my head in every now and again, though!
posted on February 4, 2002 03:26:25 PM new
I'm an introvert and not very gabby. As a DC suburbanite I hear plenty about local, state (two of them), federal, and world politics. I'm liberal - present an unemotional argument and you might convince me to reconsider a position but bombast and numbing repetition won't influence me.
I like the RT, but would like to hear more unemotional arguments and topics discussed. I'm not silent because I'm intimidated - I don't always feel the need to add to something I already agree with. Around here (DC area) politics is THE main business in town. Sometimes you just have to discuss cats and deadbeat dads.
posted on February 4, 2002 08:51:41 PM new
Thanks for the pointed stab, Saabsister. I intend on continuing on being as bombastic and caustic and downright emotional as I see fit to express my opinions of the world that we live in. I suggest that you get your news and subject matter filtered through the Vulcan Embassy where my posts fail to get mentioned.
posted on February 4, 2002 11:25:43 PM new
I don't post much anymore because I don't really have anything of substance to add. I'm so happy Borillar, krs, and the others provide links and information. I read them all. Thank you.
I'm so disgusted with the polls and people who think Bush is God. People are following like sheep to a slaughter. What will it take for people to look at all the information that's out there that proves what a rotten bunch of SOB's we have in this administration?
War is the only thing keeping Bush and gang on top. Other countries see what a hateful, and self serving bunch of crude we have in Washington.
It's time Americans quit being so afraid of terrorists, and see that they should be afraid of what goes on right here behind closed doors.
posted on February 5, 2002 07:42:59 AM new
Borillar, you and I would probably agree rather than disagree on most political issues. I object to the "my way or the highway" deliverance. BTW, did you ever write a letter for the Washington Post editorial page objecting to the Post's use of the term "deadbeat dad" or were you satisfied to stifle the discussion here?
posted on February 5, 2002 08:55:03 AM new"BTW, did you ever write a letter for the Washington Post editorial page objecting to the Post's use of the term "deadbeat dad" or were you satisfied to stifle the discussion here?"
Well, well, so you're still grinding that axe and still never understood what it was all about. It was never about "Deadbeat Dads" per se', rather it was about "stifling" and slamming that I received in another post from not only regular posters, but also from moderators who should have known better. That I was innocent of any wrongdoing did not stop them from slamming me and tearing my thread to shreds. I decided that if the opportunity came up - and it did, then I'd give everyone a taste of what I just received. You just happened to make a thread where the title and subject matter was actually politically incorrect and it suited to serve as an example. That you were innocent, however, I *DID* acknowledge that fact -- unlike the less-than-professional moderators and hotheads did for me!
Since it was personally offensive to me (the ground rules), I first politely asked for the same response from the moderators and posters that I had received. Upon being largely ignored by them, I then turned up the heat a bit. Still no response. I turned up the heat some more. Still no response. HEY!! Isn't turnabout fair play? Aren't we all supposed to play by the same rules? So, I finally screamed, shouted, swore, and did everything that I could possibly do to get a reaction from the moderators - the same reaction to my inadvertent politically incorrect remark. Finally, they did respond, but it took a whole lot more effort to get them to abide by the same rules than what they had applied to me!
I mentioned, at least once, that it had nothing to do with the original poster -- that's you, I guess. I said over and over again that it was about the content and that I was demanding that the same silly, arbitrary rules that applied to me also had to apply equally to everyone else.
Now saabsister, if you can't remember what was written and why I said that I was doing it, then imagine that what happened not only happened, but the moderators took the time to come out and post BASH posts at you as well -- but NOT until you had posted the fact that you were totally unaware that you had posted in error. How would you feel then? And since it wasn't me, but the MODERATORS and people creating new accounts to hide their online identity to write BASHING/SLAMMING/SCATHING posts at you for doing ... how would you have handled it?
Me, I don't run away from bullies - I punch them in the nose the first chance that I get. And that was why I got suspended for the unbelievable excuse of "talking about another member while that member was not present." But I got to add my two cents in when the majority of the moderators got laid off, so that's largely over with.
Comprehende'? now, Senora? Si'?
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
posted on February 5, 2002 09:13:04 AM new
"Punching people in the nose"? Political arguments, flaming, and revenge over some previous suspension?
When you talk about someone "shredding your thread", gee it makes me think what you've done to this one.
I like to post here.... generally. That's what this thread was about... for a while.
As much as I feel nostalgic, and comfortable because I've been here for a long time, and like to visit people here that I don't see elsewhere ... I'll take a break and see if the weather improves or not. Right now it's stormy.
posted on February 5, 2002 09:13:26 AM new
Borillar, the original thread I started was locked because of the commotion you caused. In a subsequent thread you articulated well your reasons for objecting to the first thread. You should have done that initially in my opinion. Sometimes making one's point rationally and moving on are the best actions.
Suppose I hadn't read the thread you referred to that caused you to initiate the complaint about my use of the term "deadbeat dad". My first impression on arriving home that afternoon and reading the locked thread was astonishment and then the thought "what a jerk". The term "jerk" came to mind because of the heavyhanded censorial tactics, not the argument. If you had stated your objection with its reason in that thread initially, I would see your point. BTW, did you complain to the Post?
posted on February 5, 2002 09:47:56 AM new
No, I did not complain to the Post because it was not the issue: getting AW moderators to apply their rules equally was.
Unlike the current contract AW supplies that we all have to agree to to be able to post in here, the old one was vague in comparison. You see, the Rules usually go this way: if a person who enforces the Rules discovers something that should be an infraction, but isn't covered, then said perpetrator shold be notified that a new rule has been made and that action is from then on against the Rules.
However, I discovered that AW was employing the old Jonny-on-the-Spot Rules; that is, they could come and create new Rules on the spot when they discovered something not previously covered, but should have been and ALSO tag the perpetrator for it! This happened to me.
After failing an appeal for an informal warning I received, because AW modreators were allowed to use Jonny-on-the-Spot Rules, I said that was fine: so long as I know how things stand - no matter how unfair and unprofessional that they are, I can live with it.
But AW broke the one unbreakable Rule when the moderator penly chastised me after I had pleaded ignorance to the offence: they created a Rule and were not willing to apply it equally to all players. Summed up: no matter how crooked a game it is that you run, you must ALWAYS apply the same rules to all the players equally. The Rule that they had made was: "When anyone is offended at a politically incorect statment, the moderator MUST bash the author of said statement in public, even if author states complete ignorance/innocence PRIOR -- that's no excuse; and also, other board members are encouraged to create new accounts in order to annonymously bash the author as well!"
So, when your little thread came up to me and it was a bit offensive to me, I purposely and politely (at first) yanked their chain and called their play. No response. Oho! Double-Standard in Progress! I then yanked harder and harder until the moderators were forced to apply their own Rules with equal application. I made sure that the Rule that they applied to me that allowed such a farce to happen could not be made ever again on AW.
Now, if that doesn't satisfy you, I guess nothing will.
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
posted on February 5, 2002 09:50:50 AM new"When you talk about someone "shredding your thread", gee it makes me think what you've done to this one."
So, in your educated and experienced opinion, when someone takes the time to purposely point you out in a thread, you have no right to come and make your case?
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
posted on February 5, 2002 10:33:12 AM new
It's my opinion, Enchantress, that instead of asking this question on this board that you would have received more answers from a thread based in your territory, AuctionCrotch. The fact is that you asked this question here and then provided a link to this thread from AuctionCrotch. Isn't that a little strange. Of course I don't know your motive and that makes a big difference.
The people who left because of the credit card requirement can't answer here, for example.
Helen
ed to add "is"
[ edited by hjw on Feb 5, 2002 10:37 AM ]
posted on February 5, 2002 11:57:58 AM new
Coming back to answer Helen because what you said deserved an answer...
actually I was orginally hoping that the posters of the RT would prove some of the critics at AC wrong. Anyone who suspects otherwise should reread my comments at both boards which have not been negative to AW, in fact they were neutral or positive.
Also I specifically said there that that my motive was one of pure curiosity, and that merely asking the question there was completely unfair to those here who do not use that site(AC), since the question pertains to THIS site, and specifically this forum.
Maybe you could explain to me why I shouldn't post a question about this forum in the forum itself but somewhere else? To me that is illogical. However, because of the credit card requirement and suspensions, it made a great deal of sense to post it BOTH places.
I was one of the positive ones about AW and the RT. However, my mind can be changed.
BTW my name is Enchanted, not Enchantress.
A question for you Helen, since you asked me a question. I posed a neutral question giving the current posters a chance to say whatever they pleased about this site and why they posted here. You didn't bother to answer, not even a positive answer, until a good fight got going in this thread, and the fight doesn't even pertain to the topic of my thread. Now why would you bother to say anything to me now, when it wasn't even me who derailed it or made it negative?
Public boards are not territory either. This one doesn't belong to any of us, it belongs to Auction Watch. Maybe I'll stay just to irritate the people who think it belongs to them... ...because I can... and because I don't think my posts are a little strange. I've been posting at multiple boards for several years now and am quite surprised that someone I once thought was friendly to me would think it is "strange". Each poster makes their own decisions, and I myself would not tell another poster their decision is strange or not strange because it's not my decision, it's theirs.
Thanks to all who shared their opinion about posting here, that was actually the point of the thread.
edited to change a "this" to "that" so it made sense and added "AC"
posted on February 5, 2002 12:18:51 PM new
I should correct your name. The spelling is Enchanted. And in AuctionCrotch your name is Tommy, in case anyone wants to read your remarks there.
My question was fair. I asked, "Isn't it strange? After reviewing this thread and the one that preceeded it on AC it's my opinion that the question posted here is strange.
posted on February 5, 2002 12:25:06 PM new"Why Do You Post or Not Post Here?"
Pretty dumb question, really. Donna, how would you come to think that someone who dosn't post here would post here to explain why they don't post here? Does that make sense to you?
You can hear all of the whiny posting of reasons for not posting here anywhere else that you care to go, but not here for then the whiner would be posting here.
There I've said it twice for you.
No run along and join the rest who cry that no one CAN post here without being attacked RUDELY and put "down" by the "clique of three". But don't forget to mention would you that without those three there would hardly be a thread begun here at all for, as you know, starting a thread involves facing up to the fear of rejection and not one of your mealy-mouthed gang at the crotch has that sort of courage.
posted on February 5, 2002 02:35:14 PM new
krs, obviously your reading comprehension has suffered. As I've stated before, I'd been attempting to post in a positive manner about AW and the RT at both Auction Crotch and here. Apparently no good deed shall go unpunished or misinterpreted.
Looking at the responses in this thread, I do believe that Twinsoft, Antiquary and Rawbunzel had no problem comprehending the purpose of this thread, and did respond in a positive manner, proving that my communication skills are not totally lacking. I almost went back to the thread at AC last night and said to Avenger, whoever that is, that totally by chance, I'd met his challenge without even trying to do so! Only to wake up this morning and find out no, this thread had not met the challenge, in fact it was proving the critics right and I was very disappointed by that, leading to my remarks earlier this afternoon.
Regardless of any barbs you might throw at me, I am the only one who knows my motives and they were definitely positive. I too was tired of hearing the critics constantly criticize the RT, I was trying to quietly counteract them both on that thread and here, and see if I could draw out some lurkers here.
I don't have a "mealy mouthed gang at the Crotch" Ken, quite the contrary, I'm in the minority on that thread. Perhaps you've lost the ability to distinguish when someone has quietly and politely disagreed with someone on a thread, because that's what I was doing over there, disagreeing with the same people that you disagree with. It does seem to be difficult for you to comprehend that I'm positive about the RT and that's why I continued to post here. I've never considered you, Ken, or Helen to be part of a "clique" and have never stated that. Don't lump me with other people you don't agree with simply because you feel like it, because it isn't the truth. In fact you're one of the people I enjoyed reading here, and one of the reasons I kept coming back. When I refer to "friends or posters I don't see elsewhere" I was referring to you and others. Are you going to tell me my own statements aren't how I feel?
Now, since you need it saying twice, I'll say it again. The reason I opened a thread here was for two reasons, to give people who were lurking or not posting a chance to open up and talk (that's the reason for the stopping posting remark). Second reason, as stated at AC and clarified above, was that it was unfair to discuss it only at Auction Crotch and I wanted to give the people who don't post at Auction Crotch, like Antiquary, the chance to say something positive. How you could turn that into something negative says a lot, but whatever it says, doesn't say anything negative about me.
I truly have little time for so much unfounded paranoia. Only the fact that your unfounded attacks on me are merely feeding the criticism again, and that is once again disappointing me, draws me back to spend the time to defend myself.
Again, thank you to Antiquary, twinsoft, and Rawbunzel who were able to respond in a mature fashion without attacks and say something positive about this place and about other people using this place.
posted on February 5, 2002 02:49:20 PM new
In that case, your question is doubly dopey. To assume that there are people with CC on file lurking away and not posting is one thing, but to ask anyone why they don't post requires that they post in response in order to answer you which of course would mean that they do post and so could not explain why they don't post.
Oh you might have asked "why post so seldom", or "why not post more", again assuming that there are any who would, but you did not ask either of those things, now did you? Of course not. Was it that such simply clarified and direct questions are beyond the scope of your continually manipulative methods? No, your manner invites bitching which is exactly your intent, and to do as you have only shows your wish to bring the sorts of whining that you so enjoy in other places here.
posted on February 5, 2002 03:04:29 PM new
As I've always said, I'm not the world's best communicator krs. No I didn't plan out the particular phrases starting this thread in minute detail, in anticipation of any kind of spin people would put on it the phrases. I thought short and simple was best. Apparently not to you, and there we have a difference of opinion.
I was genuinely curious and lurkers do occasionally unlurk to post, otherwise why would there ever be threads at any board inviting posters to delurk?
Again, you've misinterpreted my motives and no amount of calling me or my statements dumb or manipulative will make my motives anything other than what I know them to be, which I've already stated twice on this thread.
By the way I'm sure all the people at AC that have been flaming me for months when I've stood up for Helen, or AW, or whatever the topic, will be quite surprised to find that you think I'm on their side or or part of their gang. I'm sure they don't feel that way, I KNOW I don't feel that way, and plenty of times I've felt the sting of their remarks too.
As I said, no good deed shall go unpunished or misinterpreted.
I wish you could realize that attacking me for being positive about the RT, and in fact, having to insist to you that I am, and trying to make me defend it, is just feeding the particular criticism that there are way too many attacks here.
I stayed in the RT all this time because I chose to. Try and make it negative, you can't because it isn't true. I didn't even lose my temper when a party thread was completely derailed I just said good night, have fun, and then got accused of planning it ahead of time which was completely untrue. Good lord.
posted on February 5, 2002 03:09:02 PM new
I always liked you and was genuinely fond of you Ken and often stood up for you and your right to say what you damned well pleased here. I confess to being a bit disappointed and saddened to hear some of your remarks about me. I hope you will reconsider. If not I will understand and chalk it up to a big learning experience.
Later... have to do something now and can't continue this right now.
posted on February 5, 2002 03:31:53 PM new
Don't try to wiggle out with your [inevitable] 'poor me' martyrdom stance. We both know only too well just what th truth is. And as for defending me-hah! You attack continually and I've never said a word all the while continuing to defend YOU from each and every of the many derisive attacks upon you.
posted on February 5, 2002 03:38:47 PM new
I apologize, Enchanted, if I ended up derailing your thread. Due to my fear of becoming a respected poster I often get abrasive or downright nasty or insane to try to provoke a political confrontation. Oh yes, I've been on other political boards too in the past. There, I was well respected. My posts were so well written, my points so lucid, my writing style so succinct that I was constantly being bombarded with offers to go moderate other boards, take over the running of other boards or write for magazines as a columnist. That I already was a columnist then and had my hands full, I learned the hard way about respectability when referenced to Internet messageboards. It got to the point where I could rarely post, because my words were so well respected that they carried the weight of Doomsday; a virtually virtual proclamation with every statement! Quite literally, I ended up writing myself completely out of the forum. I swore never to be too well respected again on any messageboard!
Unfortunately, as a consequence, instead of endearing myself to everyone, as I hate to do, I sometimes end up estranging my most ardent supporters by my pursuit of the lowest common denominator through irrational postings. I often have to kiss and kick the same person in the same thread! I also could be a reason why some folks do not want to post on here.
I do not want to anger anyone with my clumsy attempts of preserving my literary options. Surely, saabsister has every right to be mad at me for using her thread to yank back at the then undisciplined moderators. I do not consider my conversation in this thread - my explanation, as hijacking or derailing your thread, however. The matter was introduced and well responded to. To describe it as a 'fight' makes me wonder how the word is really used on other messageboards. I am not trying to take back my apology to you: I readily concede my own arrogance and improper behavior from time to time in this forum. If others on here really want me to go about with a bit more respectability and sensible postings in order to promote the overall good, I'm willing - queasily- to endure respectability and the self-censorship that comes along with it.
Borillar
"Friends don't let friends vote republican"
This topic is 6 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new
