Shall We Talk Politics?

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 23:07:36 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Not like real rancor and hatred and digging at old wounds and a pathetic need to "own" someone by baiting them into an outburst.

While some may hold real rancor and hatred, if it's for strangers on a message board, those who do so have issues. As to "owning" someone on a message board, it can't be done unless the target allows someone to do so. The same goes for being baited into an outburst. You are responsible for your behavior. Nobody else is. If you have an outburst, it's on you. It can't be blamed on anyone BUT you.

I agree they do have issues, it seems patently clear. I also agree we are responsible for our responses, nobody else can be responsible. We can only control what we ourselves do. However, bullying in the cyber world and in the physical world is reaching epidemic proportions in our society and bullies do need to be looked at and some way must be found to stop people killing each other with words. Don't you think?

[mmhmm]

Oddly enough, while dezi's posts may not be expressed with perfect grammar, punctuation, and spelling, I can always understand what he's saying. Come to think of it, the same thing applies to several posters here, and on most message boards. Perhaps, a modicum of effort put towards trying to understand, instead of towards denigration might serve better.

[mmhmm]

May 10, 2011 23:11:34 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

May 10, 2011 23:07:36 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

While some may hold real rancor and hatred, if it's for strangers on a message board, those who do so have issues. As to "owning" someone on a message board, it can't be done unless the target allows someone to do so. The same goes for being baited into an outburst. You are responsible for your behavior. Nobody else is. If you have an outburst, it's on you. It can't be blamed on anyone BUT you.

I agree they do have issues, it seems patently clear. I also agree we are responsible for our responses, nobody else can be responsible. We can only control what we ourselves do. However, bullying in the cyber world and in the physical world is reaching epidemic proportions in our society and bullies do need to be looked at and some way must be found to stop people killing each other with words. Don't you think?

No, I don't. People cannot kill one another with words. Killing has to take place in the real world. If one is hurt by words, one has several options on a message board. One can skip the posts of those one finds disturbing, or one can click on the little red X in the right-hand corner of one's screen. Either will serve very nicely to remove the source of disturbance.

Do I like the nastiness? No, I don't. However, it can't wound me, and it certainly can't kill me. I'm much stronger than that, as most adults should be. Children are another issue, as on sites like Facebook where what goes on in the cyber world is often taken back to the school yards and classes.

[deziloooooo]

Damn I made a mistake , till Crockett mentioned it I thought this was moons thread, my apology to Marsha and her, BUT I think moon did jump in and in a post or two more or less set the tone for it and backed up Marsha's initial post as to what we should be discussing.

My post was misspelled? I hit the damn spell check, needs some editing I think , haven't had time, let me look.

[mmhmm]

Dezi, spellcheck won't catch all spelling errors because so many words in the English language have several spellings ... like two, to and too. They're all spelled differently, but each has a different meaning. That sort of error won't be caught, as things like their and they're won't be caught. It's not all that important in the broad scheme of things. I read for meaning, not as a school teacher might read. If I understand it, it's all good! ;D

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 23:12:07 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Oddly enough, while dezi's posts may not be expressed with perfect grammar, punctuation, and spelling, I can always understand what he's saying. Come to think of it, the same thing applies to several posters here, and on most message boards. Perhaps, a modicum of effort put towards trying to understand, instead of towards denigration might serve better.

I just tried to figure out Dezi's long post and couldn't do it. When I want to understand what Sarah Palin is talking about I have to deconstruct the entire thing and rewrite it without all the meanderings and extra words. It is a real effort which I rarely take the time to do unless I have a real need to know what she is talking about. In Dezi's case the incomplete run-on sentences leave me completely baffled. I say this in all sincerity.

I just end up picking up on the insults since they seem quite direct. I don't detect any rancor at all though and in fact have karmalized Dezi many times because of the humor, even when he seems to be insulting me. I'm not personally very sensitive to insults from people who don't know me and who hate my politics. These are rather wholesale in nature although they are directed personally.


A forum devoid of all gets boring. I guess humor is the key. It is quite apparent when the humor is lacking.

[mmhmm]

I'm sorry you have difficulty decoding Dezi's posts. He often has very pertinent thoughts to offer and it's worth the effort to make the effort, in my opinion. Near as I can figure, if one can read far enough to pick out an insult amongst the run-on sentences, one should be able to pick out the laughter, the interest, and the kindness, as well. I've not had a problem doing so.

As long as one makes it fairly clear when one is endeavoring to be humorous with one's comments, I think it's great. The problem with message boards, as I see it, is the lack of body language to help us define meaning with more surety. That's where the "smilies" come in, and can be very useful. As you say, there's room for all and without varied input a forum would become quite stale.

*Edit: Must install new keyboard. My "y" key is trying to give up the ghost.*

[deziloooooo]

going back to what i was trying to get across..I will use ME as the example..

There are some posters here that I feel are, the correct word now dezi, think..ok. Kinda off the wall in their posting, to say the least so, I will smiley them to death, zing them when able, and in most cases I find them very zingable.

The question is, is that acceptable behavior and condoned , or is that something that should not be done,

Now to clarify, I have , many times tried to debate, interact constructively and it does not seem to compute.{I am being kind here, they're who they are and nothing is going to change. I know a suggestion may come to just ignore them. I don't want to , it's a forum, and I feel you post here, you are open for a reply if one wants to give one . feel my responses are good ones , to the point, sometimes indicating disdain, try to keep it to the topic, most times, thus not getting mods involved, yet getting my feeling toward the post that is being responded to , possible the poster to in a round about zing.

Any thoughts?

Ps : I guess there could be a sign somewhere near the box we type in, a warning say, "Don't post stupid ', but some of these posts , in my eyes, and some of mine to you too, in your eyes, are STUPID.

If I am called out on my post, not my opinions, that is different, but just off the wall stupidity in the readers and responders eyes, I have to slink away in embarrassment, possible posting a "me bad , if in retrospect my post was STUPID, or defend it as to why it's not stupid.

[Tennesseer]

May 10, 2011 22:37:00 GMT -5 @marshabar1 said:

I guess it is. Gosh, shall I report this?

Edit: No. I perceive an element of humor in Dezilou's insult. He may have been trying to make a point about how people perceive thing's differently and people have differing degrees of sensitivity to these matters.

Not like real rancor and hatred and digging at old wounds and a pathetic need to "own" someone by baiting them into an outburst.

Was that supposed to crush me marsharbar?

[mmhmm]

As long as you're in control of your own feelings, Dezi, and don't go into meltdown mode because of something someone here has said, I see no problem with delivering the occasional "zinger". If, however, one is going to do that, one must expect "zingers" back again. It's how you deliver and how you take incoming that is your measure as a poster. Pure nastiness for the sake of nastiness is always unnecessary, in my opinion. It adds nothing to ongoing conversations.

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 23:32:22 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

going back to what i was trying to get across..I will use ME as the example..

There are some posters here that I feel are, the correct word now dezi, think..ok. Kinda off the wall in their posting, to say the least so, I will smiley them to death, zing them when able, and in most cases I find them very zingable.

The question is, is that acceptable behavior and condoned , or is that something that should not be done,

Now to clarify, I have , many times tried to debate, interact constructively and it does not seem to compute.{I am being kind here, they're who they are and nothing is going to change. I know a suggestion may come to just ignore them. I don't want to , it's a forum, and I feel you post here, you are open for a reply if one wants to give one . feel my responses are good ones , to the point, sometimes indicating disdain, try to keep it to the topic, most times, thus not getting mods involved, yet getting my feeling toward the post that is being responded to , possible the poster to in a round about zing.

Any thoughts?

I find that really humorous when you do that. There used to be a member of the old MSN board named Cedaredge. I loved his humor. You remind me of him very much. I've only scanned your posts so far because I find the syntax difficult. It sounds to me as if some here like you so much that they have made an effort to find your meaning. I may end up doing the same.

[Deleted]

Personal attacks in obama/cheney, by the way, Tenn moderator.

[Tennesseer]

Where is it krickitt poster?

[Deleted]

You really can't miss it if you go to the thread. I even copied it for you.

[Tennesseer]

May 10, 2011 23:51:35 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

You really can't miss it if you go to the thread. I even copied it for you.

There are a lot of threads to moderate here krickitt. You have to help sometime you know?

[deziloooooo]

May 10, 2011 23:39:00 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

As long as you're in control of your own feelings, Dezi, and don't go into meltdown mode because of something someone here has said, I see no problem with delivering the occasional "zinger". If, however, one is going to do that, one must expect "zingers" back again. It's how you deliver and how you take incoming that is your measure as a poster. Pure nastiness for the sake of nastiness is always unnecessary, in my opinion. It adds nothing to ongoing conversations.

I don't think you will ever find me getting up set with what comes to me, in fact in cases like it especially from those well, nough said..feel I can hold my own, have no problem with a "me bad, sorry, " and at times I know I get carried away, and never stalk anyone, though it might seem that way, but usually those are the ones who are posting a lot and so many in my eyes I admit are , STUPID, thus the retort, but possible over done after a while.

I do know some here do stalk and the zings really have sharp barbs to them, purposely and to many times they are not aimed at the message , idea posted, but really directly at the poster posting the message, idea.

Krickett is correct, attack the message or if not attack, wrong word, post against the message , not the poster, HOWEVER, the poster has to realize, a attack/response against their post, while it might hurt, being disagreed with , it's not always and shouldn't be , a attack against the poster , just the dumb things the poster is putting up, dumb in the eyes of the resoponder.though the thought and idea can also be dumb too.

[marshabar1]

May 10, 2011 23:55:54 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

May 10, 2011 23:39:00 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

As long as you're in control of your own feelings, Dezi, and don't go into meltdown mode because of something someone here has said, I see no problem with delivering the occasional "zinger". If, however, one is going to do that, one must expect "zingers" back again. It's how you deliver and how you take incoming that is your measure as a poster. Pure nastiness for the sake of nastiness is always unnecessary, in my opinion. It adds nothing to ongoing conversations.

I don't think you will ever find me getting up set with what comes to me, in fact in cases like it especially from those well, nough said..feel I can hold my own, have no problem with a "me bad, sorry, " and at times I know I get carried away, and never stalk anyone, though it might seem that way, but usually those are the ones who are posting a lot and so many in my eyes I admit are , STUPID, thus the retort, but possible over done after a while.

I do know some here do stalk and the zings really have sharp barbs to them, purposely and to many times they are not aimed at the message , idea posted, but really directly at the poster posting the message, idea.

Krickett is correct, attack the message or if not attack, wrong word, post against the message , not the poster, HOWEVER, the poster has to realize, a attack/response against their post, while it might hurt, being disagreed with , it's not always and shouldn't be , a attack against the poster , just the dumb things the poster is putting up, dumb in the eyes of the resoponder.though the thought and idea can also be dumb too.

Good Lord! I understood the whole thing!

[hello fromWarsaw]

Play the ball, not the man! ;D Everyone should be trying to show their opponents are misled.

[Deleted]

I knew you'd get it, Marsha!! I've been reading Dez clearly for a long time. It's easy!!! You just go with the flow of it, like music...

[marshabar1]

May 11, 2011 0:07:36 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

I knew you'd get it, Marsha!! I've been reading Dez clearly for a long time. It's easy!!! You just go with the flow of it, like music...

I think that's it exactly!

[hello fromWarsaw]

Unfortunately, so many pub misled just want to be on the side that's strong and WRONG... ;D And against the victims...

[Deleted]

You are THE most anti Republican person I EVER saw, war, but I don't see you doing personal attacks that I remember.

[deziloooooo]

May 11, 2011 0:09:11 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

You are THE most anti Republican person I EVER saw, war, but I don't see you doing personal attacks that I remember.

Have to agree with Krickett..how the hell did the Pubs get into this one..

[Deleted]

Where's there's a war post, there's a pub post. Right, war? That's what he does.

[Deleted]

May 11, 2011 0:25:38 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

Where's there's a war post, there's a pub post. Right, war? That's what he does.

Test

[Deleted]

LOL, I finally did a quote. I'm always getting people on me because I answer someone without quoting, and someone else thinks blahblahblah. sigh.. guess I will start quoting....
;D

[hello fromWarsaw]

May 11, 2011 0:25:38 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

Where's there's a war post, there's a pub post. Right, war? That's what he does.

And where there's a Pub post, there's a mistake...

Actually I don't get this...but thanks for the compliment...if we could just see the same facts...

[Deleted]

How long have we known each other, war?? Come to the light...

[mmhmm]

Warsaw sees Pubs everywhere. At least, he's stopped seeing Pub Dupes! Now, those are scary! ;D

[Politically_Incorrect12]

May 11, 2011 0:09:11 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

You are THE most anti Republican person I EVER saw, war, but I don't see you doing personal attacks that I remember.

I really need to figure out where that "Don't Feed the Troll" icon is at...