Thread: P&R Rules

Originally Posted by aberdien

Is it okay to wish death upon Kim Jong-Un? Or to say that we should brutally torture rapists and child molesters and what not? How far will we be taking this? Seems very arbitrary.

I think everything's fine considering the circumstances. No need to get the vapors because Buff stated what was already obvious - that he feels life would be better if Trump keeled over. Death threats upon members of the forum should certainly be not allowed, but beyond that I don't care, and I think a mountain is being made out of a molehill.

It has always been my understanding on this board that public figures were free game but to personally attack or wish death on people here on the forum was off limits. Whether or not Buff was serious is irrelevant as i dont think he was out of line going by the guidelines of this messageboard. And i think that is what MO was trying to get at with his example of people blasting Buff for his comment but then letting Tned's comments slide when its in the same vein. I wont pretend to know if Tned was addressing MO or not personally but the general gist of his comment was the modding or "concerns" are not consistent. Personally i think public figures should remain free game since they become the topics of our conversations, etc. The only outlier to the President thing is if Buff was actually threatening the President himself which he was not doing. But i think anyone taking offense to his comments while ignoring other comments is a tad hypocritical here. And trust me, i have zero love for the media.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Lmao tned really said journalists should be shot?

And only Buff is shamed?

Context matters. Did you click on the link to look at the posts.

That was clearly said tongue in cheek with "???" as a response to Joe posting, "Dread's rule," which is nothing like Buff, who I think double and tripled down on how he wishes Trump was dead.

Originally Posted by Northman

It has always been my understanding on this board that public figures were free game but to personally attack or wish death on people here on the forum was off limits. Whether or not Buff was serious is irrelevant as i dont think he was out of line going by the guidelines of this messageboard. And i think that is what MO was trying to get at with his example of people blasting Buff for his comment but then letting Tned's comments slide when its in the same vein. I wont pretend to know if Tned was addressing MO or not personally but the general gist of his comment was the modding or "concerns" are not consistent. Personally i think public figures should remain free game since they become the topics of our conversations, etc. The only outlier to the President thing is if Buff was actually threatening the President himself which he was not doing. But i think anyone taking offense to his comments while ignoring other comments is a tad hypocritical here. And trust me, i have zero love for the media.

All anyone has to do is click on the link MO provided and see the context, which he conveniently left out. There is no same vein. Go look at Buff's comments and then go look at the context of mine. I'm not saying Buff should be punished for his. I think they are disgusting, but not really surprising, but the two are no different.

First, what I posted was tongue in cheek, clearly.

Second, what I was responding to was a report that the riot in MN was started by a right winger, and somehow that was responsible (the right winger) for a month of violent protests around the country. I equated that to the Obama administration using the press as useful idiots to spread the propaganda (read lies, as we later learned) about how Benghazi was the result of some youtube video. Now, unless MO wrote that article about the white supremacist that supposedly started the MN riot, and ultimately all riots around the country (if you buy that line of thinking/reporting), or was part of the press pool that was given background information by Susan Rice and the press secretary about how the riots were related to the video (several liberal members of the media came out later, angry, about how they were used by the administration), then there is no way that my posts could have been aimed at "MO."

As the great, and not yet late, Kevin Costner once said, "stay with me here on planet earth."

Originally Posted by Tned

Context matters. Did you click on the link to look at the posts.

That was clearly said tongue in cheek with "???" as a response to Joe posting, "Dread's rule," which is nothing like Buff, who I think double and tripled down on how he wishes Trump was dead.

Fair point.

Everyone is getting too damned serious, making it more serious doesn't help.

I do think you were aiming at MO, or at least that was my gut reaction back when. A playful/mean jab. Only you really know. Heaven knows y'all have bad blood and neither seems ready to be the better man about it.

There's at least a close relation between the situations, but you are right about context being important.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Fair point.

Everyone is getting too damned serious, making it more serious doesn't help.

I do think you were aiming at MO, or at least that was my gut reaction back when. A playful/mean jab. Only you really know. Heaven knows y'all have bad blood and neither seems ready to be the better man about it.

There's at least a close relation between the situations, but you are right about context being important.

Let me ask again, did you click on the link and see the context? I'm gonna go with no, with your "I do think you were aiming at MO" as it's an uninformed position.

This is approaching theater of the absurd level, and you guys have let MO turn this into a thread about me.

Do we really want to go down this road???

Originally Posted by Northman

It has always been my understanding on this board that public figures were free game but to personally attack or wish death on people here on the forum was off limits. Whether or not Buff was serious is irrelevant as i dont think he was out of line going by the guidelines of this messageboard. And i think that is what MO was trying to get at with his example of people blasting Buff for his comment but then letting Tned's comments slide when its in the same vein. I wont pretend to know if Tned was addressing MO or not personally but the general gist of his comment was the modding or "concerns" are not consistent. Personally i think public figures should remain free game since they become the topics of our conversations, etc. The only outlier to the President thing is if Buff was actually threatening the President himself which he was not doing. But i think anyone taking offense to his comments while ignoring other comments is a tad hypocritical here. And trust me, i have zero love for the media.

Two posts below my tongue in cheek "kill all reporters, let God sort em out???" in reponse to Joe's "Dread's rule."

North posted:

Originally Posted by Northman

Democrats are scum, i wish death on them all.

Mine was clearly a joke regarding what Dread's rule was. Was yours a joke, North?

Was he threatening, or wishing death upon, TJR, Abe, MS, etc.?

Rather than looking at others as an excuse for our own behavior, maybe we can honor the process that Davii is letting us participate in and discuss what the rules and moderation should be going forward.

T, you are turning the thread into one about you all by yourself.

You made your point, and it's not apples to apples. Let your argument and the context speak for itself now.

Originally Posted by Tned

Let me ask again, did you click on the link and see the context? I'm gonna go with no, with your "I do think you were aiming at MO" as it's an uninformed position.

I remember it. I was there. I am sharing my perception from your post. Only you know, and you state it was pure jest, and I will take you at your word.

Unlike Buff, who--despite it appearing to be a mean jab--was serious. (?)

The only difference is that RBG died and her passing deserves respect. Buff was graceless to ignore this. That I understand, and is the real reason for the reproach.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

The only difference is that RBG died and her passing deserves respect. Buff was graceless to ignore this. That I understand, and is the real reason for the reproach.

I don't disagree, but who gets to decide who deserves respect and who doesn't? It can't be subjective, so it has to be universal, no?

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

I remember it. I was there. I am sharing my perception from your post. Only you know, and you state it was pure jest, and I will take you at your word.

Unlike Buff, who--despite it appearing to be a mean jab--was serious. (?)

The only difference is that RBG died and her passing deserves respect. Buff was graceless to ignore this. That I understand, and is the real reason for the reproach.

Obviously, you don't remember it, because the post preceding Joe's clearly indicates "who" I was referring to.

I'll take Ninja's advice and let what I posted stand on this topic, but maybe you should click on the link and refresh your memory on the chain of events, before chiming in with your opinion on who my post was aimed at, not to mention if it was anything more than a joke about what "dread's rule" is.

It's pretty insulting that you would not even take the time to see the post in context, rather than how MO posted it, but still go as far as to say you "believe" it was aimed at MO. Among all of us, you are the guy that hyperfocuses on facts, data, context, etc., which is something I greatly respect as we are the two that often look at source data, underlying studies, etc., and for you to make that statement/assumption, without even taking the 15 seconds it takes to click on the link and verify MO's claim/insinuation, by seeing it in the context of the series of posts....

Anyway, I'll go watch some movies now.

If we want to get into the whole glass house thing, I'm sure we can have lot's of "fun" quotes, like North's above, that we can litter this thread with, but really all it does is reiterate why Davii started this thread, which is that it's turned into a cesspool, and as I understand it, for the 6+ months I left the forum, after the disgust about how things went down in the '16 election, it was even worse when I wasn't in P&R (or anywhere on the forum), so if we aren't going to all take responsibility for our own actions, then there is never going to be a change. I'm part of the problem, but those that like to make me the sole cause of it are simply in denial about their own actions.

I dont think anyone has made you the sole cause of it so im not sure where you are grasping that from. I think everyone is aware that everyone has their moments of stepping out of "line" when engaging in discussions. But i will reiterate that back when the discussion of whether or not P&R was over modded most of the people wanted it more lax and thus here we are. I think at the time some people said along the lines of "suck it up buttercup and dont be so thin skinned". Welp, i guess people are more thin skinned than we had initially thought since this is where we are once again.

Originally Posted by Tned

Obviously, you don't remember it, because the post preceding Joe's clearly indicates "who" I was referring to.

I'll take Ninja's advice and let what I posted stand on this topic, but maybe you should click on the link and refresh your memory on the chain of events, before chiming in with your opinion on who my post was aimed at, not to mention if it was anything more than a joke about what "dread's rule" is.

It's pretty insulting that you would not even take the time to see the post in context, rather than how MO posted it, but still go as far as to say you "believe" it was aimed at MO. Among all of us, you are the guy that hyperfocuses on facts, data, context, etc., which is something I greatly respect as we are the two that often look at source data, underlying studies, etc., and for you to make that statement/assumption, without even taking the 15 seconds it takes to click on the link and verify MO's claim/insinuation, by seeing it in the context of the series of posts....

Anyway, I'll go watch some movies now.

If we want to get into the whole glass house thing, I'm sure we can have lot's of "fun" quotes, like North's above, that we can litter this thread with, but really all it does is reiterate why Davii started this thread, which is that it's turned into a cesspool, and as I understand it, for the 6+ months I left the forum, after the disgust about how things went down in the '16 election, it was even worse when I wasn't in P&R (or anywhere on the forum), so if we aren't going to all take responsibility for our own actions, then there is never going to be a change. I'm part of the problem, but those that like to make me the sole cause of it are simply in denial about their own actions.

Dude.

MO has the most posts on this board.

He's going you read your posts.

You post 'kill jounalists??? lolol'

It is a normal thought to have--my immediate thought was 'oh MO won't like that'.

If you are swearing in your heart it wasn't like that at all, we have to take you at your word.

But can't you see how it could be seen as aimed at MO?

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Dude.

MO has the most posts on this board.

He's going you read your posts.

You post 'kill jounalists??? lolol'

It is a normal thought to have--my immediate thought was 'oh MO won't like that'.

If you are swearing in your heart it wasn't like that at all, we have to take you at your word.

But can't you see how it could be seen as aimed at MO?

I’m not claiming it was aimed at me. That said, I know it was a “joke.” I know the context. But it’s not funny. Joking about shooting all reporters is not funny, I find shit like that to be quite serious. Which is why, as big of an ******* as I can be, I don’t make jokes like that. So while we’ve got TJR and Buff on blast, we need to be fair here. The decorum of this board only ever gets brought up when the right gets pissed off at the left, never the other way around. And posts like Tned’s post there, not just specifically his (but he is a large part of the problem) are why there is no decorum or respect around here.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Dude.

MO has the most posts on this board.

He's going you read your posts.

You post 'kill jounalists??? lolol'

It is a normal thought to have--my immediate thought was 'oh MO won't like that'.

If you are swearing in your heart it wasn't like that at all, we have to take you at your word.

But can't you see how it could be seen as aimed at MO?

No, because I assume people have the ability to read and rationalize. I see you STILL haven't clicked on MOs link.

Only responded back on this MO post topic as it was a direct question to me.

Originally Posted by Tned

No, because I assume people have the ability to read and rationalize. I see you STILL haven't clicked on MOs link.

Only responded back on this MO post topic as it was a direct question to me.

You get a FISA warrant for your surveillance?