why can moderators say what they like, but everyone else can't?
- Thread starter lucifers angel
- Start date
- Status
You said it yourself. The current focus of the administration seems to be to 'protect' both the 'sensitive' souls and the vapid from the politically incorrect, but smart people. Read, uh, "Malakas's" post in its entirety.
1. Don't look through a soda straw.
2. Don't forget to examine your own behavior for 'willful provocateurism'.
3. Look harder. Knee-jerk reactionism is just hysteria and we get plenty of that already from the bored housewives.
2. Don't forget to examine your own behavior for 'willful provocateurism'.
3. Look harder. Knee-jerk reactionism is just hysteria and we get plenty of that already from the bored housewives.
Bored housewives, eh nexus? Takes one to know one.
Remove all that is below the belt and watch the trolls disappear overnight. Of course, so then will most of your current posters; but isn't that what you want; what you really, really want? The advertisers probably wouldn't like it would they though?
I might also suggest excommunicating 'religion' as this is more than adequately covered by philosophy but that might cause some upset and we don't want that do we?
Remove all that is below the belt and watch the trolls disappear overnight. Of course, so then will most of your current posters; but isn't that what you want; what you really, really want? The advertisers probably wouldn't like it would they though?
I might also suggest excommunicating 'religion' as this is more than adequately covered by philosophy but that might cause some upset and we don't want that do we?
As I see it, the only problematic item of Gendanken's behavior was that she, in open forums, dicussed the actions of another moderator.
Otherwise, whatever "insulting" or "offensive" thing she said to posters was no more offensive than the passive aggressiveness, the political correctness, the evasionism of so many other posters who get away with it on a daily basis.
But unlike those other posters, Gendanken also had more and of quality to say.
Agreed! By my right Lucifer and Shorty should have been banned, not Gendanken removed from modship.
This PC braindeadness is seriously pissing me off!
explain to me why?
i have been banned and i took the banning like i should've....on the fucking chin! what i did was bang out of order and i have publicly apoligised aswell.
if haveing gend here abusing members like she was, is appealing to you, then more fool you!
On a general note, I don't think these issues can be resolved, though.
People on a forum like this are on different levels of cognitive and moral development; it is inherent to this difference that they cannot adequately understand eachother's arguments about why something is wrong and another thing right. Reasoning with one another, however rational and well-supported it might be, cannot undo this difference in a foreseeable time.
People on a forum like this are on different levels of cognitive and moral development; it is inherent to this difference that they cannot adequately understand eachother's arguments about why something is wrong and another thing right. Reasoning with one another, however rational and well-supported it might be, cannot undo this difference in a foreseeable time.
Notes on the disaster
It's not unheard of, though, to do so.
I don't necessarily disagree. I mean, Gendanken has a perverse sense of subtlety that is more about achieving some internal gratification than making the point, but the propriety of that is in the eye of the beholder.
However, to track the point: Malakas proposed that, "When little girls, or trolls, are allowed to post inanities but any rational position that does not adhere to modern western social dogma is banished then, that sir, is mediocrity." I invited a demonstration of that process. 2inquisitive asserted that the process was demonstrated in Gendanken's dismissal. In pursuing that point, 2i raises an interesting issue, but what makes it interesting is actually a tangent at best; I need to look into a couple of things and get back to it. Now, I don't disagree with the underlying theme of 2i's assessment, but I don't think it connects the Gendanken dot to the Western social dogma dot, and it certainly doesn't establish her approach as rational.
As a general point, though, pertaining to Gendanken's quantity and quality, I would only note that avant garde must, at some point, bow to a modicum of communicative convention, else it will forever remain in that disconsolate region known as gibberish. Having done battle with Gendanken over the years, I have acquired a slight appreciation for her tacky, purple-naugahyde ... um ... sensibilities. Nonetheless, they do present a number of challenges. Much like Chihuahua races, we read for the spectacle, and there's spectacle aplenty.
Greenberg said:
It's not unheard of, though, to do so.
I don't necessarily disagree. I mean, Gendanken has a perverse sense of subtlety that is more about achieving some internal gratification than making the point, but the propriety of that is in the eye of the beholder.
However, to track the point: Malakas proposed that, "When little girls, or trolls, are allowed to post inanities but any rational position that does not adhere to modern western social dogma is banished then, that sir, is mediocrity." I invited a demonstration of that process. 2inquisitive asserted that the process was demonstrated in Gendanken's dismissal. In pursuing that point, 2i raises an interesting issue, but what makes it interesting is actually a tangent at best; I need to look into a couple of things and get back to it. Now, I don't disagree with the underlying theme of 2i's assessment, but I don't think it connects the Gendanken dot to the Western social dogma dot, and it certainly doesn't establish her approach as rational.
As a general point, though, pertaining to Gendanken's quantity and quality, I would only note that avant garde must, at some point, bow to a modicum of communicative convention, else it will forever remain in that disconsolate region known as gibberish. Having done battle with Gendanken over the years, I have acquired a slight appreciation for her tacky, purple-naugahyde ... um ... sensibilities. Nonetheless, they do present a number of challenges. Much like Chihuahua races, we read for the spectacle, and there's spectacle aplenty.
Amen.
Don't be a tease
Challenge is supposed to be fun.
However, communicating with some people can be a pain in the ass. And if my ass is going to hurt, somebody better be fucking it.
Gendanken can make the challenge a fun pain in the ass. Which is probably a good thing.
Because limp little bitches are just a headache.
Practice, practice, practice.
Avatar said:
Challenge is supposed to be fun.
However, communicating with some people can be a pain in the ass. And if my ass is going to hurt, somebody better be fucking it.
Gendanken can make the challenge a fun pain in the ass. Which is probably a good thing.
Because limp little bitches are just a headache.
• • •
Roman said:
Practice, practice, practice.
Um ... Good try, Roman! Oh, wait. No it wasn't.
Do better than half a half-wit.
Actually, hang on. Maybe you can help me understand a certain phenomenon. What is it that makes people like you so goddamn bitter that you're willing to portray yourself as the biggest moron in six counties in order to upsize what might otherwise be a semi-effective pretense of insult?
Seriously, I never have understood that. You take a perfectly useful insult and absolutely blow it out your ass like a Buick. And for what? Are you trying to scale back the insult? Cover your bases and set up an "I'm a retard" defense?
I mean, I would laugh and say, "That's super, Roman! Good job!" Except it's not.
Roman said:
Do better than half a half-wit.
Actually, hang on. Maybe you can help me understand a certain phenomenon. What is it that makes people like you so goddamn bitter that you're willing to portray yourself as the biggest moron in six counties in order to upsize what might otherwise be a semi-effective pretense of insult?
Seriously, I never have understood that. You take a perfectly useful insult and absolutely blow it out your ass like a Buick. And for what? Are you trying to scale back the insult? Cover your bases and set up an "I'm a retard" defense?
I mean, I would laugh and say, "That's super, Roman! Good job!" Except it's not.
- Status