nugget, right before i read your reply i said to myself, 'i think i just gave that shitty definition of pornography. crap.'
obviously this is just my opinion, but it's rare that there's a comment on here that's on the boarderline. if something is out of line, it's WAAAAAYYYYTHEEEFUUUUCK out of line, KWIM? and in those rare instances, there's usually been a public flogging and an apology. i think the people (specifically dyl) know that what they're saying is unacceptable but just don't give a shit. and i think that's part of what makes things unacceptable.
Got it. That makes sense.
Follow-up question: when AW asked people to stop using the baby Jesus' name in vain, while some people said they would try to tone it down other people were all "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO. AND ALSO JESUS CHRIST." It would have been fairly easy for people to just stop doing it (or at least try). And it pretty obviously upset her and made her uncomfortable in a very personal way. But I think people got irritated with the idea that they should have to censor themselves. Is there a logical cutoff for that here? Like I said, besides the blatant jokes or remarks when is it acceptable to stop doing or saying something because someone or some people ask, and when is it acceptable to say "stop trying to censor me?"
IDK where the exact location of the cutoff is/should be. Somewhere in the light-years of space between saying "Jesus Christ!" in disgust and stating that the gang-rape of a person you don't like would be hilarious IN FRONT OF said person.
nugget, right before i read your reply i said to myself, 'i think i just gave that shitty definition of pornography. crap.'
obviously this is just my opinion, but it's rare that there's a comment on here that's on the boarderline. if something is out of line, it's WAAAAAYYYYTHEEEFUUUUCK out of line, KWIM? and in those rare instances, there's usually been a public flogging and an apology. i think the people (specifically dyl) know that what they're saying is unacceptable but just don't give a shit. and i think that's part of what makes things unacceptable.
Got it. That makes sense.
Follow-up question: when AW asked people to stop using the baby Jesus' name in vain, while some people said they would try to tone it down other people were all "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO. AND ALSO JESUS CHRIST." It would have been fairly easy for people to just stop doing it (or at least try). And it pretty obviously upset her and made her uncomfortable in a very personal way. But I think people got irritated with the idea that they should have to censor themselves. Is there a logical cutoff for that here? Like I said, besides the blatant jokes or remarks when is it acceptable to stop doing or saying something because someone or some people ask, and when is it acceptable to say "stop trying to censor me?"
I hope someone answers this, because I spent the majority of "that" post trying to figure the answer to that question out. No one would ever really gave a good answer.
Follow-up question: when AW asked people to stop using the baby Jesus' name in vain, while some people said they would try to tone it down other people were all "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO. AND ALSO JESUS CHRIST." It would have been fairly easy for people to just stop doing it (or at least try). And it pretty obviously upset her and made her uncomfortable in a very personal way. But I think people got irritated with the idea that they should have to censor themselves. Is there a logical cutoff for that here? Like I said, besides the blatant jokes or remarks when is it acceptable to stop doing or saying something because someone or some people ask, and when is it acceptable to say "stop trying to censor me?"
I hope someone answers this, because I spent the majority of "that" post trying to figure the answer to that question out. No one would ever really gave a good answer.
It's a bit different b/c AW was taking offense to something that wasn't directed at her personally, like Dylanite's was to Arbor. I get where AW is coming from b/c I and I think a lot of us have some hot button issue that we are hypersensitive to. I don't think there is a hard cut-off anywhere. It's a sliding scale of what's offensive to one vs what's offensive to nearly everyone. FTR, I tried to cut back the religious swears after AW's post b/c I don't like when I say them myself, and I don't mind being reminded to keep my posts mature and less offensive. But I definitely get why the majority on this board wouldn't want to b/c it's commonplace.
Didn't a poster get banned for a rape comment so as to "save our board"? What is the difference?
Obvious troll with no other intent than to be as annoying as possible. They had several other posts that had to be deleted from other boards.
Ah, I see. But didn't Ellie say here that his post was bannable vis a vie the ToS? I don't care one way or the other, but I am curious based on her statement.
nugget, right before i read your reply i said to myself, 'i think i just gave that shitty definition of pornography. crap.'
obviously this is just my opinion, but it's rare that there's a comment on here that's on the boarderline. if something is out of line, it's WAAAAAYYYYTHEEEFUUUUCK out of line, KWIM? and in those rare instances, there's usually been a public flogging and an apology. i think the people (specifically dyl) know that what they're saying is unacceptable but just don't give a shit. and i think that's part of what makes things unacceptable.
Got it. That makes sense.
Follow-up question: when AW asked people to stop using the baby Jesus' name in vain, while some people said they would try to tone it down other people were all "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO. AND ALSO JESUS CHRIST." It would have been fairly easy for people to just stop doing it (or at least try). And it pretty obviously upset her and made her uncomfortable in a very personal way. But I think people got irritated with the idea that they should have to censor themselves. Is there a logical cutoff for that here? Like I said, besides the blatant jokes or remarks when is it acceptable to stop doing or saying something because someone or some people ask, and when is it acceptable to say "stop trying to censor me?"
i think there are several main differences between what i'm talking about and what AW has a problem with. first, there is no societal disadvantage to saying the words JESUS CHRIST. no one is physically harmed by the term "jesus christ". it's also part of the vernacular for a major part of the population. saying, "you're an bitch and i hope someone rapes you on your way home" obviously does, as that is at the very least wishing a crime on someone. second, freedom of religious expression (or a lack of religious expression) is a constitutional right.
as that epic fail of a post proved, there's no agreement on exactly where the line is. i just think it's eyeroll-worthy to demand that people not say something that makes you upset on the basis of your religion but then preach your religion to people on secular holidays.
ETA: the "do not cast pearls before swines" didn't bolster that argument, either.
Obvious troll with no other intent than to be as annoying as possible. They had several other posts that had to be deleted from other boards.
Ah, I see. But didn't Ellie say here that his post was bannable vis a vie the ToS? I don't care one way or the other, but I am curious based on her statement.
I think that was me. Ellie also said Dyl could be banned.
Dammit. I work all day on a Friday and miss the good shit.
I am one of the people who from time to time says stuff that I think is perfectly in line with the cutting up on this board and the comment will be called disgusting or just ignored. I know I don't push the limits like Dylanite, but sometimes people don't think or underestimate the impact of their offensiveness. Or they get so used to over-the-top-banter that happens here occasionally that they go too far. I'm not sure it is possible to have a clear line on 'moral' behavior here.
Christian bashing is funny to a lot of the atheists on this board. I ignore it most of the time but sometimes it gets directed at someone (AW is known to have been a target) and that is too far. And yet even Dyl kind of took up for her the other day when the thought someone was making random fun of her when she wasn't even around.
Dylanite has a sick sense of humor. Sometimes it cracks our shit up. Occasionally it goes way too far. He has been on a role lately, that is true. I think we need to ask him to tone down the envelope pushing if he wants to be part of the community.
Insert Edit: I just did a quick read of that post. It was clear that Dylanite made a horrible comment that anyone on the board would find unacceptable. Then there was added horror because of information Arbor has shared here which rubs salt in the wounds. I didn't happen to know that about Arbor before now, so believing that Dyl KNEW and said it anyway is a bit extreme. Doesn't lessen the impact to her, but when Dev told him (clearly when reading it well after the fact) he came on and apologized sincerely. Doesn't wash away the first assault but maybe does wash away the salt.
I think for an offense like that a week of time-out would be appropriate and a "final warning." If he crosses that line so extremely again, he should be banned. I'd be very sad if that happened because much of the time his wit cracks me up. And I'm adding a 4th unacceptable to the bottom of the list below.
end edit.
Things that are clearly unacceptable: 1. Targeting someone's grief in a ridiculing or hurtful way 2. Threatening physical harm to someone, even if followed by a "LOL." 3. Constantly targeting or attacking an individual with little to no provacation (if you don't like someone, just move on witcha business). 4. Implying or outright stating that someone else has any level of accountability for the actions of someone on the board with whom they have an IRL relationship; OR expecting that person to have it out with their IRL friend/spouse/sibling/whatever in front of all of us.
But aside from the blatant shit like "don't joke about rape and possibly dead babies" how are people supposed to know that people are going "Jesus Christ, what the fuck is wrong with you?" when they're on a message board, unless someone actively says "Jesus Christ, what the fuck is wrong with you?" Unlike IRL, there are no facial expressions on here. No non-verbal cues, side-eyes, moments of uncomfortable silence. Unless people call you out on your ish then you'll have no idea that you crossed the line. So should everyone start calling everyone else out on their ish whenever they get offended or whenever they think "Jesus Christ, what the fuck is wrong with you?"
Admittedly we are solely communicating on here via a keyboard and screen... but dammit, if you can't imagine sitting at a coffee table in a Starbucks at a GTG with all of us and uttering something like that, why on earth would you do it on here?
And therein lies my biggest problem with some internet socialization: sometimes that internet anonymity turns people into absolutely fantastical assholes or, slightly worse, crazycakes. And I know I've fallen into that internet-anonymity trap before, and been called out on it, and tried to apply that lesson to my future posts. I try to insert tone, and often edit what I'm typing so as to make sure I'm coming across clearly in spite of lack of body language, tone and expression.
If you ask me, I think Dyl has succumbed to the internet anonymity syndrome. Getting told repeatedly that what he is posting is offensive or over the top or dripping with a tone of the assholio, yet persisting in the same m.o., seems to support that. Time away might help... one hopes. But
And therein lies my biggest problem with some internet socialization: sometimes that internet anonymity turns people into absolutely fantastical assholes or, slightly worse, crazycakes. And I know I've fallen into that internet-anonymity trap before, and been called out on it, and tried to apply that lesson to my future posts. I try to insert tone, and often edit what I'm typing so as to make sure I'm coming across clearly in spite of lack of body language, tone and expression.
And that's all puppies and rainbows for you, but this is a public message board. On the Internet. Not everyone thinks of the board as a virtual gtg with their besties. And that type of expectation shouldn't be the standard for a place like this, no matter how much the X chromosomes out number the Y.
And thatis fine, that some think they can be thundercunts on here, but don't get all butthurt or what's the problem when you get called out for being one (which he was. No one can deny it...at least no one with half a brain).
And therein lies my biggest problem with some internet socialization: sometimes that internet anonymity turns people into absolutely fantastical assholes or, slightly worse, crazycakes. And I know I've fallen into that internet-anonymity trap before, and been called out on it, and tried to apply that lesson to my future posts. I try to insert tone, and often edit what I'm typing so as to make sure I'm coming across clearly in spite of lack of body language, tone and expression.
And that's all puppies and rainbows for you, but this is a public message board. On the Internet. Not everyone thinks of this place as a virtual gtg with their besties. And that type of expectation shouldn't be the standard for a place like this, no matter how much the X chromosomes out number the Y.
I'm not talking about a GTG with besties, nor did I say that. But I think a level of respectful dialogue isn't an outrageous standard to strive for, regardless of gender. I shoot the shit with my CWs, family and friends, and even people I meet at a bar or park - but I don't have to interact with them as if I want to piss in their Cheerios.
But I'm glad you made clear what your vision of our standard should or shouldn't be. I should have just asked you directly to save myself time from opining on the topic.
And that's all puppies and rainbows for you, but this is a public message board. On the Internet. Not everyone thinks of this place as a virtual gtg with their besties. And that type of expectation shouldn't be the standard for a place like this, no matter how much the X chromosomes out number the Y.
I'm not talking about a GTG with besties, nor did I say that. But I think a level of respectful dialogue isn't an outrageous standard to strive for, regardless of gender. I shoot the shit with my CWs, family and friends, and even people I meet at a bar or park - but I don't have to interact with them as if I want to piss in their Cheerios.
But I'm glad you made clear what your vision of our standard should or shouldn't be. I should have just asked you directly to save myself time from opining on the topic.
Well you did say that we should not say anything we wouldn't say at a gtg at Starbucks, tho I didn't quote that part. But regardless:
I dont have a vision of a standard. My personal feeling is that a 'board standard' is a fairly worthless construct. I don't disagree that there should be a certain level of discourse, but that's why the ToS is there. Past that, what's the point? Do we start voting off those that dot fall in line with the lowest common denominator 'standard of conduct'? Again, it's a public message board. We tend to self police and do a decent job of calling out fuckery as it crops up. Putting the board in to a box does not solve the issue of people crossing lines---but it may allow that line to move farther and farther back. And I don't think anyone wants to go down that road.
But in the context of this board, I think bringing up anyone's kids is a no-no, making a threat is not acceptable, and bringing up a personal past hurtful experience in a public setting isn't great either.
I think this is the line. In fact, I am starting ot think that a post Dylanite wrote in response to me in recent days may have included something that was meant to bring up a past hurtful experience. At the time, I figured I was looking into it too much and let it roll off my back, but after his comment to arbor I am rethinking it. I hope I am wrong.
I happen to think that Dylanite logs everything because he is very smart and I wouldn't be surprised if he knew about arbor's situation. This whole thing is unfortunate because I was starting to have a decent online relationship with him despite our past interactions. I was trying to look at him in a different way and give him the benefit of the doubt, but now I'm not so sure. For the past week he has been over-the-top.
When you wrote about bringing up past stuff, it made me think of the various posters who have repeatedly brought up a difficult time for SBP. I think most of us jumped all over that sh!t and it has stopped so maybe we are good at policing this stuff ourselves.
I also fully expect to see Dumpster Baby soon.....just a feeling I have....
But in the context of this board, I think bringing up anyone's kids is a no-no, making a threat is not acceptable, and bringing up a personal past hurtful experience in a public setting isn't great either.
I think this is the line. In fact, I am starting ot think that a post Dylanite wrote in response to me in recent days may have included something that was meant to bring up a past hurtful experience. At the time, I figured I was looking into it too much and let it roll off my back, but after his comment to arbor I am rethinking it. I hope I am wrong.
I happen to think that Dylanite logs everything because he is very smart and I wouldn't be surprised if he knew about arbor's situation. This whole thing is unfortunate because I was starting to have a decent online relationship with him despite our past interactions. I was trying to look at him in a different way and give him the benefit of the doubt, but now I'm not so sure. For the past week he has been over-the-top.
When you wrote about bringing up past stuff, it made me think of the various posters who have repeatedly brought up a difficult time for SBP. I think most of us jumped all over that sh!t and it has stopped so maybe we are good at policing this stuff ourselves.
I also fully expect to see Dumpster Baby soon.....just a feeling I have....
Not a chance. With the ip issue, they'd be exposed and I don't see them ballsing up (maybe on the old board though).
I'm not sure why people can't utilize the same standards and values they use in real life on the internet.
If you are a thundercunt here on the internet, then for me--that actually IS a part of you and probably you are a thundercunt in real life.
If you internet stalked someone--and dug up dirt on them, put it out for everyone to see...I bet you would do that in real life...
I actually DON'T want to meet those people at a starbucks.
So there.
Exactly this. And again, taking that last sentence about Starbucks and correlating it to here, it's not like you can stop any posters from walking up to the table and starting to interact. If they say something douchey, you can respond to it, ignore it, or leave the table for a while and come back.
And now I wish I hadn't used Starbucks - I try to buy local. Sacred Grounds!
I'm not sure why people can't utilize the same standards and values they use in real life on the internet.
If you are a thundercunt here on the internet, then for me--that actually IS a part of you and probably you are a thundercunt in real life.
If you internet stalked someone--and dug up dirt on them, put it out for everyone to see...I bet you would do that in real life...
I actually DON'T want to meet those people at a starbucks.
So there.
Exactly this. And again, taking that last sentence about Starbucks and correlating it to here, it's not like you can stop any posters from walking up to the table and starting to interact. If they say something douchey, you can respond to it, ignore it, or leave the table for a while and come back.
And now I wish I hadn't used Starbucks - I try to buy local. Sacred Grounds!
Lol. Is that place good? I always wanted to go there but never made it!
Also--I have never used the word "Thundercunt.." but have now used it three times. Good day for me..Watch out--I will probably be using it in real life somewhere ;D
Lol. Is that place good? I always wanted to go there but never made it!
Also--I have never used the word "Thundercunt.." but have now used it three times. Good day for me..Watch out--I will probably be using it in real life somewhere ;D
I like it - although I'm hard pressed to not like any local coffee place around these parts. DH prefers DazBog.
Post by foundmylazybum on Jul 14, 2012 11:07:46 GMT -5
Off topic, but I enjoyed Kaladi Brothers Coffee on Evans near DU (But I was always right there) and also Stellas...but sometimes the seating at Stellas was difficult to manage.
Cute idea but seriously people get your coffee, sit for a few minutes--don't lounge around for the entire day (don't ask ME how I knew they were lounging around the entire day :-|)
Off topic, but I enjoyed Kaladi Brothers Coffee on Evans near DU (But I was always right there) and also Stellas...but sometimes the seating at Stellas was difficult to manage.
AHA, that's the name of that place - Kaladi Bros. I've only been there once, but I totally dug the interior and the coffee. Makes me wish I lived a bit nearer to DU so I could jaunt there for a bit.
Post by foundmylazybum on Jul 14, 2012 11:17:18 GMT -5
I didn't really know the name of Kaladi bros the entire time I went to DU haha--I was just like "That coffee place near Illegal Pete's?"
Oh. Oh. Also--if you want a good--like one of the best pastries ever--EVER...try Trompeau Bakery--also on Evans..it is very non-assuming--and you have to get there early in the morning..I went once in the afternoon and they were all sold out. I thought it was junky, but it's just that the best time is in the morning.
I've lived in a few places around Denver: Lakewood as a teen, Aurora for my first apartment, Englewood when I got married, Lakewood now, but we're buying in Englewood south of Swedish. I also attended DU and really like that area for haunts.
Cheesecake Therapy was a major find, but it's all the way in Arvada.
wait, what.? I can't say I disagree, but I am trying to see if this is you or for the resonate part with ar.
I'm sorry, I cannot really decipher this.
Sometimes, people will pop off and be awful, and others say, "Oh, they're just having a really rough time IRL. She got a splinter. Go easy." Other times, it's, "Fuck that bitch. We hate everything she says. Oh, someone shot her mom at point blank range and her house is foreclosed? Well, she shouldn't take it out on us."
It's a shame it happens to many this way. Some people get lots of license, and others don't. No specific examples, it's just something that I've noticed. I'd like for us to try to keep this in check a little more.
I agree, bunny. I was hoping you weren't having a rough time. Sorry, I did not mean to put you on the spot. I 100% agree though I think it is just that some are less vocal for things or are written off (which may be part of what you re saying) when they call out such behavior. I hope it can be checked more in the future.