Double Standards

[Spafranco]

I would like to understand from everyone that is interested from around the globe what they perceive as a double standard. Is it something that people view more liberally in other parts of the world than the US? Is it the same all over.
To me, it means that you forgive the transgressions of one while the same identical issue is condoned when others do the same.

[schmenke]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/


:rolleyes:

[Spafranco]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/


:rolleyes:

Good god, even a simple question posed is already meted with you and your sarcasm. If you don't like the thread don't post. Then off you go and whine to moderators and others that I am causing trouble.

[Storm]

so were you looking for a culture by culture thesis on what is and what isn't a double standard?
Unfortunately I think they are all too common whereever you go.

[henners88]

I would like to understand from everyone that is interested from around the globe what they perceive as a double standard. Is it something that people view more liberally in other parts of the world than the US? Is it the same all over.
To me, it means that you forgive the transgressions of one while the same identical issue is condoned when others do the same.
Did you start this thread because I asked you to lighten up in the frustration thread? I think the reason people are less patient with you is because you are consistently serious and appear to seek heated conversations. The people you debate against and feel are treated with double standards by the rest also show a more human side IMO. We may disagree on one topic but we have a laugh on another. Hence why I said lighten up, because we don't see the more fun side of your virtual character. Don't take everything so seriously and enjoy the forum, but give something positive back :)

[Spafranco]

I would like to understand from everyone that is interested from around the globe what they perceive as a double standard. Is it something that people view more liberally in other parts of the world than the US? Is it the same all over.
To me, it means that you forgive the transgressions of one while the same identical issue is condoned when others do the same.
Did you start this thread because I asked you to lighten up in the frustration thread? I think the reason people are less patient with you is because you are consistently serious and appear to seek heated conversations. The people you debate against and feel are treated with double standards by the rest also show a more human side IMO. We may disagree on one topic but we have a laugh on another. Hence why I said lighten up, because we don't see the more fun side of your virtual character. Don't take everything so seriously and enjoy the forum, but give something positive back :)

Yes Henner, I get serious when someone suggests that I commit suicide. As a person that has had to deal with four family suicides in the past few years as recently as last year, I am offended that the poster 555-???? gets away with it and then uses the f bomb at the end and gets away with that too. You then ask me to lighten up. I had more respect for you.
The double standards I see are quite obvious and your (to my surprise) calling out me by name without mentioning 555-???? was so blatant. Look to see who and why people in the past were banned. Look at what the rules on Chit Chat say(family forum) and I can tell you right off the bat where the double standards apply. I see two posts on another thread with the f bomb spelled out in it's entirety. Why don't I see a ban? Four digit posts allow for this?

[henners88]

There are ways to make your feelings known to the mods so they can judge the situation impartially. Starting threads asking for members to be banned is a little childish and usually draws the wrong type of attention. Just lighten up I say again. 555 is a decent bloke, just move on from that debate and I'm sure you'll encounter one another elsewhere and share similar views. Life is too short to be harbouring frustration, although there is a thread for that! :)

[Starter]

There are ways to make your feelings known to the mods so they can judge the situation impartially. Starting threads asking for members to be banned is a little childish and usually draws the wrong type of attention. Just lighten up I say again. 555 is a decent bloke, just move on from that debate and I'm sure you'll encounter one another elsewhere and share similar views. Life is too short to be harbouring frustration, although there is a thread for that! :)
A total lack of a sense of humor, as well as continued insults in nearly every post, is the reason I have someone on my ignore list. It's a short list though. I have no problem with differing opinions then mine, it makes the debate more interesting. Every once in a while someone brings something up I hadn't considered fully and maybe causes me to chance my stance a bit. That's always a good thing. However, this person we're talking about refuses to grant anyone on the other side any credit for having thought things through and just come to a different conclusion then he (I assume he anyway). The end result is insults and assaults on one's character. If this person can't learn to play nice, maybe better if they just go away.

[steveaki13]

Wow. This all seems Incredible.

I have a difference of opinion on occasion with others but on the whole I think I get on well with everyone here and don't have anyone on my ignore list yet.

[Jag_Warrior]

Excellent topic!

In a course on logic that I took in college, the professor had us play what he called "The Substitution Game." He suggested that we pick topics or incidents that we felt strongly about, that had broader social implications. Most topics, from what I can recall, touched on crime & punishment. Drug cases and convictions were a popular topic. This was back in the "Just Say No" 80's. And more than a few students highlighted the fact that gender, race and wealth seemed to play dominant roles in sentencing. To bring it into today's news, we've seen wealthy, White, female celebrities, like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, receive slaps on the wrist for drug and drunk driving convictions, while people in "lower" demographic groups typically receive jail time for similar offenses.

What I find even more fascinating than a discussion on double standards are the rationalizations that people often come up with to justify their support for double standards. Once gender, race, religion or wealth (the social hot buttons) are shown to be correlating factors relating to how people feel about given incidents (substitute in a kid from the ghetto for Lohan or a man for a woman in a case of domestic violence or a father in something like the Casey Anthony baby murder case), people can dream up some real doozies.

That was a great class. And the Substitution Game is something I still often play in my mind 30+ years on when I hear a news story or see something on TV. It makes you keep yourself in check.

[schmenke]

... Then off you go and whine to moderators and others that I am causing trouble.

I did? :confused:

Spa, this thread, like many of your posts, is a blatant, and embarrassing, attempt at yet another troll to solicit a reaction by other posters to which you then enjoy arguing, at times spitefully, all the while dismissing their opinions.

I have only ever had one person on my ignore list, and you’ve just become the second :mark: .

[Spafranco]

There are ways to make your feelings known to the mods so they can judge the situation impartially. Starting threads asking for members to be banned is a little childish and usually draws the wrong type of attention. Just lighten up I say again. 555 is a decent bloke, just move on from that debate and I'm sure you'll encounter one another elsewhere and share similar views. Life is too short to be harbouring frustration, although there is a thread for that! :)

Maybe I should have started a thread about assumption.

I am not asking nor had I any intention of even directing moderators to a single individual in order to have them banned. That is your opinion which I must say once again that you really surprise me. Based upon what you have now stated once gain taking sides, you choose to deflect, redirect and obfuscate what the title and intent of this thread is.
If in your opinion the 15 guy is a "decent bloke" go ahead and think so. In my opinion he is someone that I will refrain from giving a title.
So, keep your idea of childishness when it comes to the topic and start a thread about banning people for profanity if you wish. I would believe those that have actually been banned for faux profanity would like to see the reaction if "moderators" were directed by you to such posts.
When you travel in my shoes and that of my family, how dare you suggest that I "lighten up" when suicide is concerned. Show me a post where you tell the South African to watch his words as there may be people who have been victims of crime of unfortunate deaths in their families. A modicum of dignity would suffice of you were seen to do just that.
At this point I don't expect or believe I will ever see that from you. That is in accordance to your recent posts aimed directly at me.

[Spafranco]

There are ways to make your feelings known to the mods so they can judge the situation impartially. Starting threads asking for members to be banned is a little childish and usually draws the wrong type of attention. Just lighten up I say again. 555 is a decent bloke, just move on from that debate and I'm sure you'll encounter one another elsewhere and share similar views. Life is too short to be harbouring frustration, although there is a thread for that! :)
A total lack of a sense of humor, as well as continued insults in nearly every post, is the reason I have someone on my ignore list. It's a short list though. I have no problem with differing opinions then mine, it makes the debate more interesting. Every once in a while someone brings something up I hadn't considered fully and maybe causes me to chance my stance a bit. That's always a good thing. However, this person we're talking about refuses to grant anyone on the other side any credit for having thought things through and just come to a different conclusion then he (I assume he anyway). The end result is insults and assaults on one's character. If this person can't learn to play nice, maybe better if they just go away.
Maybe better if you actually ignore said member since you obviously do not. You are such a pleasurable guy/gal to read. Always hail and hearty and above it all. :rolleyes:

[Spafranco]

Excellent topic!

In a course on logic that I took in college, the professor had us play what he called "The Substitution Game." He suggested that we pick topics or incidents that we felt strongly about, that had broader social implications. Most topics, from what I can recall, touched on crime & punishment. Drug cases and convictions were a popular topic. This was back in the "Just Say No" 80's. And more than a few students highlighted the fact that gender, race and wealth seemed to play dominant roles in sentencing. To bring it into today's news, we've seen wealthy, White, female celebrities, like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, receive slaps on the wrist for drug and drunk driving convictions, while people in "lower" demographic groups typically receive jail time for similar offenses.

What I find even more fascinating than a discussion on double standards are the rationalizations that people often come up with to justify their support for double standards. Once gender, race, religion or wealth (the social hot buttons) are shown to be correlating factors relating to how people feel about given incidents (substitute in a kid from the ghetto for Lohan or a man for a woman in a case of domestic violence or a father in something like the Casey Anthony baby murder case), people can dream up some real doozies.

That was a great class. And the Substitution Game is something I still often play in my mind 30+ years on when I hear a news story or see something on TV. It makes you keep yourself in check.

Thank you for that post Jag as you seem to be the only one with the insight to realize what was being asked.
I do not know your political beliefs or care but as someone who is actually a thinker I would love to direct you to a John Stewart piece where he takes Fox News apart from the morning crowd to the nightly rantings of Hannity and O'Reilly. The piece is about how Fox and it's hosts change and alter the Constitution to suit their political bent. Almost every Amendment was altered during that day to fit into a right wing pigeon hole. At end of the day, only one item was left untouched and was glaring to everyone.
I will post the link if I can find it.

[Spafranco]

... Then off you go and whine to moderators and others that I am causing trouble.

I did? :confused:

Spa, this thread, like many of your posts, is a blatant, and embarrassing, attempt at yet another troll to solicit a reaction by other posters to which you then enjoy arguing, at times spitefully, all the while dismissing their opinions.

I have only ever had one person on my ignore list, and you’ve just become the second :mark: .

The embarrassed should be yours and not mine. Jag Warrior is the only one to have posted exactly on the topic as I had intended that it should be.
You and the rest of the posters have become both aggressive towards me for the post and completely evaded or did not understand the simple question posed. You went straight on the attack. Suggesting that I deliberately started it for the purpose you put forth is incorrect but, not surprisingly in line with other posters. I would have more respect for many if they would think as individuals and not as a group. Be like Jag Warrior and read the thread as it was intended and stop following the lead of others.

Oh, silly me. I am on your ignore list.

[henners88]

I take issue with it being suggested I have given an aggressive response. I didn't post aggressively towards you. I posted my own individual observation and tried to give friendly advice as I felt you are going down the path of self destruction on here. I was polite, I thought I had made the correct call and that's all there is to it. I suppose naively I wanted to offer advice to help you avoid a ban. I think I'm going to deal with this how you should have dealt with your issues originally!

[Spafranco]

I presume you are directing this towards me. I do not want or need your instructions. The standards that you apply to posts is alien to me. You make an assumption about me trying to get someone banned which I have stated is not true...and then in your own post you talk about self destruction on this forum. Why Henner? Is it because I pointed out the fact that I have had many tragic incidents in ,my life recently and that another member of the forum should choose how they comment about a person since it is quite possible to be stepping over the line? You are very quick to bash me and not once in all your posts with respect to the South African all you do is defend him/her.
Now you are trying to have me banned. Way to go. You and your chums should be happy that you have initiated the attempt at such. What you can't do is hide the comments from others that should in fact cause a ban. They are now open and easily read by anyone. Credibility for the actual forum would be lost. In fact I believe that the standard you apply is in fact a double standard. Just do a Google search and you will easily find where some members on this forum are banned for no apparent reason while others skate along without even a reproach.
Thanks to a poster here I was able to do just that. Did not know that the actual posts made were actually available on Google. That is too much , but, it does keep one honest.
Well, off you go now in a huff.

[henners88]

I presume you are directing this towards me. I do not want or need your instructions. The standards that you apply to posts is alien to me. You make an assumption about me trying to get someone banned which I have stated is not true...and then in your own post you talk about self destruction on this forum. Why Henner? Is it because I pointed out the fact that I have had many tragic incidents in ,my life recently and that another member of the forum should choose how they comment about a person since it is quite possible to be stepping over the line? You are very quick to bash me and not once in all your posts with respect to the South African all you do is defend him/her.
Now you are trying to have me banned. Way to go. You and your chums should be happy that you have initiated the attempt at such. What you can't do is hide the comments from others that should in fact cause a ban. They are now open and easily read by anyone. Credibility for the actual forum would be lost. In fact I believe that the standard you apply is in fact a double standard. Just do a Google search and you will easily find where some members on this forum are banned for no apparent reason while others skate along without even a reproach.
Thanks to a poster here I was able to do just that. Did not know that the actual posts made were actually available on Google. That is too much , but, it does keep one honest.
Well, off you go now in a huff.
I'm not in a huff, quite the opposite to be frank.
What started out as me attempting to calm down a volatile situation I assume had spilled out from another thread, has resulted in receiving some of the most bizarre irrational responses in my time here. I've read back to make sure what I wrote initially was not open to some of the interpretations you have suggested, and am satisfied I remained friendly, and positive. Where you got the opinion I am trying to get you banned from is beyond me? I've reached the conclusion you post with a very negative agenda indeed and its obviously not just me who has experienced this. I will make my opinions known and will be staying well out of your way pal from now on. :)

[henners88]

Asking you to 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity' is hardly as dramatic as you play it. You bring in the word 'suicide' to make that statement sound far worse than it was intended and relate it to your own family tragedies which I think is disrespectful in the extreme. Having found where all this has come from, I am glad I defended 555 and this is nothing more than over dramatic drivel. I can see why it relates to the thread now as it is a perfect example of double standards! :laugh: :crazy:

Absolutely bonkers. :)

[Jag_Warrior]

Excellent topic!

In a course on logic that I took in college, the professor had us play what he called "The Substitution Game." He suggested that we pick topics or incidents that we felt strongly about, that had broader social implications. Most topics, from what I can recall, touched on crime & punishment. Drug cases and convictions were a popular topic. This was back in the "Just Say No" 80's. And more than a few students highlighted the fact that gender, race and wealth seemed to play dominant roles in sentencing. To bring it into today's news, we've seen wealthy, White, female celebrities, like Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, receive slaps on the wrist for drug and drunk driving convictions, while people in "lower" demographic groups typically receive jail time for similar offenses.

What I find even more fascinating than a discussion on double standards are the rationalizations that people often come up with to justify their support for double standards. Once gender, race, religion or wealth (the social hot buttons) are shown to be correlating factors relating to how people feel about given incidents (substitute in a kid from the ghetto for Lohan or a man for a woman in a case of domestic violence or a father in something like the Casey Anthony baby murder case), people can dream up some real doozies.

That was a great class. And the Substitution Game is something I still often play in my mind 30+ years on when I hear a news story or see something on TV. It makes you keep yourself in check.

Thank you for that post Jag as you seem to be the only one with the insight to realize what was being asked.
I do not know your political beliefs or care but as someone who is actually a thinker I would love to direct you to a John Stewart piece where he takes Fox News apart from the morning crowd to the nightly rantings of Hannity and O'Reilly. The piece is about how Fox and it's hosts change and alter the Constitution to suit their political bent. Almost every Amendment was altered during that day to fit into a right wing pigeon hole. At end of the day, only one item was left untouched and was glaring to everyone.
I will post the link if I can find it.

I'm not here as much as I used to be, so I'm completely unaware of what most of the other replies are all about.

Yes, I would be interested in any links you can provide that touch on the topic of double standards. I was just reading a piece the other day about a show that I had been a fan of up until this last season: Game of Thrones. IMO, one of the driving forces behind many double standards is political correctness. Now, many people assume that when that term is used that it's strictly speaking about the 1980's left wing variety. But there has always been some form of political correctness, whether speaking about the modern western world or ancient Rome. Sometimes it's left wing PC and sometimes it's right wing PC. But going back to Game of Thrones, the piece that I was reading was written by a woman who must have used the word "misogyny" at least twenty times in her article. Any instance of a female character not coming out on top or suffering from some violent act provoked an angry, accusatory reaction from her. With modern (or post-modern) feminists, both males and females, I've found this to be quite common. The reason I offer this example up as a double standard is because we are talking about a show which is incredibly violent by its very nature. And male characters are often subjected to all manner of violence and perverse sexual tortures... even more so than the female characters, I would say. But the word "misandry" (in fact, it appears that "misandry" is not even pre-loaded into my browser's spell check, yet "misogyny" is... quite interesting ;)) is one that I have never seen used in criticizing this or any other show. The reason that I have decided to stop watching this show is because the producers seem to have acknowledged and decided to address these politically correct complaints. While the first season was quite an amazing bit of quality story telling, which I greatly enjoyed, the last season struck me as nothing more than an attempt to shock and titillate the audience with (politically correct) acts of perversion, depravity and a severe lack of movement in the storyline or character development. They only have two or three more seasons to complete this story (based on a series of books which has not yet been completed), so if they're going to waste time trying to appeal to the least common denominators among us, while enforcing double standards in order not to upset the apple cart of political correctness, I will no longer waste my time watching it.

In short, as one looks around at a society (any society) examples of double standards can be found. And again, what's most interesting to me are the rationalizations that people often use to justify those double standards.

[Spafranco]

Asking you to 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity' is hardly as dramatic as you play it. You bring in the word 'suicide' to make that statement sound far worse than it was intended and relate it to your own family tragedies which I think is disrespectful in the extreme. Having found where all this has come from, I am glad I defended 555 and this is nothing more than over dramatic drivel. I can see why it relates to the thread now as it is a perfect example of double standards! :laugh: :crazy:

Absolutely bonkers. :)

I should not bother responding to you after reading this but I will.
How dare you, sir madam!! How dare you minimize the deaths of relatives of other members because you disagree with them and because they are taking YOU to task.

Those people, and the DRIVEL you talk about are dead. Want to know the names and addresses if you like so that you can have some type of happy glad handing with 555.... You say that it was innocent. I reacted to his post as a result of his vehement attempt at degrading me and my posts on other topics. Now you come along with your high and mighty moral abyss.
Now you cast yourself as a knowing the thoughts of others and in doing so you again bring up my family, this time to defend someone else and then to completely denigrate me because you perceive and read this other persons thoughts.
For my nephew Chase 26 died in the back yard shed by hanging himself.

My niece Sharon 23 who jumped from a four story building a year after her brother Sean 22 had died thinking he was a failure at number 4 in his class in Med school. He slit his writs. They were twins.
My sister-in-law, mother of Chase was found by my wife dead in a closet dead as a result of hanging.

I will supply you with the addresses Henner, if you wish. Then you can take the above^ happy faces and smiles and then attack me once more. It will be in keeping with your narrow spectrum of life just as the other pal of yours from South Africa seem to share. Then I saw your ages. Real or imagined they confirmed for me the juvenile rantings I have seen.Some day you may lose someone and unless you are psychotic you will feel remorse. Then you may understand. However, I doubt it.

[henners88]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)

[SGWilko]

Strewth

How can any poster on here possibly know the ins-and-outs of another posters' family circumstance?

Only with prior knowledge, and I am pretty sure this is not the case.

[Spafranco]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)

Before I read anymore of your post, tell me exactly what my agenda is.

[Spafranco]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)
I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.

[Spafranco]

Strewth

How can any poster on here possibly know the ins-and-outs of another posters' family circumstance?

Only with prior knowledge, and I am pretty sure this is not the case.

No one expects anyone to know. However, when you walk into a room of strangers you won't know the circumstances of one's life.

That is why you employ a degree of cautious deliberate restraint when you enter conversations.

[SGWilko]

I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.

You lost me - who's the 'South African'? :confused:

[SGWilko]

Strewth

How can any poster on here possibly know the ins-and-outs of another posters' family circumstance?

Only with prior knowledge, and I am pretty sure this is not the case.

No one expects anyone to know. However, when you walk into a room of strangers you won't know the circumstances of one's life.

That is why you employ a degree of cautious deliberate restraint when you enter conversations.

So, If I were to say to a stranger 'good morning', and it turns out their partner was killed in a car accident in the early hours of the day 10 years ago, would I expect them to throw a wobbly in my face for saying morning?

[henners88]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)

Before I read anymore of your post, tell me exactly what my agenda is.

I touched on it a couple of times in this thread already.

'Seeking a reaction by over dramatising your own reaction to others posts'. If you read on in regard to my previous post, it explains things within context as to my impressions. Your introduction of outrage over a member apparently not being sympathetic to the tragedies in your family were quickly put into context when I read the thread in question to see how it all came about. You over dramatised it as much as possible to paint the poster in a bad light, when in reality you had used it against him when he didn't share your view. I thought that was utterly appalling and a very underhand card to play indeed. The consistent reigniting of gun threads to antagonise American posters here also backs up my impression you seek negative reactions rather than a willing to discuss objectively. My observation of your agenda. Feel free to read on, or not, I'm not bothered. At least those reading this can see how this all escalated. :)

[henners88]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)
I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.
Hmmm so you are saying we should be careful about what to say rather than to offend on issues we don't know about, yet you are free to make a judgement on my social skills associated to my age? Do me a favour. The fact again you are suggesting I am 'bashing your family' is pathetic. Not once have I bashed a member of your family, not once you absolute liar. I was sympathetic even when I suggested you used these issues as a form of emotional blackmail. You should really be ashamed of yourself.

[SGWilko]

I wasn't trying to 'minimise' the deaths of your family members, as of course that is all very sad. You've got quite a knack of twisting peoples words to suit your agenda I have to say. I didn't say the deaths in your family were 'drivel'. I said your rant in general was drivel because I felt you have created an argument out of nothing. I also said I thought it was disrespectful to your dead relatives that you've used their deaths to have an underhand dig at 555. During a heated debate he suggested you 'drown yourself in a bucket of pity'. Nowhere else during that debate had you brought all these dead relatives of yours, so I can not see how 555 could have known about this. I think you have responded to him by being about as dramatic as a person can get in order to gain maximum effect. Bringing your family tragedies into the discussion was your choice and appears to be something of an after thought. At least that is the way it appears.

I'm not interested in having the names and addresses of your family and quite why you'd want to give something like that away to someone you don't know on the internet is quite absurd IMO. My age doesn't really come into this either. I'm probably a lot younger than yourself, but I feel I have acted at a very mature level during this conversation. The smiley faces in my last post were a natural reaction to dealing with somebody who is going to very desperate lengths to over dramatise a discussion and seek attention from what I can tell. I originally offered a piece of friendly advice and you've turned on me as a result and have now twisted it around to suggest I've attacked you. Quite the manipulator and a simply bonkers turn of events. I don't have a great deal of experience with debating with you on here until now and I guess you live and learn.

I truly am sorry for the losses in your family. We've all been there and I was there last year when I lost a step parent and later in the year we lost a baby. I just don't feel it is appropriate to drag it into discussions on here and use it against people I don't know or who wouldn't know unless I told them. I wish you well Spafranco, but this has all got a little surreal for me. :)
I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.
Hmmm so you are saying we should be careful about what to say rather than to offend on issues we don't know about, yet you are free to make a judgement on my social skills associated to my age? Do me a favour. The fact again you are suggesting I am 'bashing your family' is pathetic. Not once have I bashed a member of your family, not once you absolute liar. I was sympathetic even when I suggested you used these issues as a form of emotional blackmail. You should really be ashamed of yourself.

Henners - can you shed any light on who the 'South African' is? Either someone's lost the plot or I'm missing something!

[henners88]

I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.

You lost me - who's the 'South African'? :confused:
555-04Q2 (the SA) told him to 'drown himself in a bucket of pity' during another debate and Spafranco brought up a previously unknown series of events concerning members of his family committing suicide. He was outraged by this turn of phrase used and here we have the melt down in this very thread. A melt down I attempted carefully to defuse at the start and has since been turned around on me. I keep reading back through my own posts to see if these accusations have any standing and all I can conclude is my words have been completely manipulated by an attention seeker of the worse type.

[henners88]

On that note, I shall exit.

A little wiser than when I entered lol.

Take care all
:)

[SGWilko]

I have read a little more of your post. You ignore all that is blatantly obvious and that is the fact that you should at least have told the South African to be a little careful about what they say. Your age is indicative of that. You have not lived long enough to be obviously to understand social politeness. Yet, all I can see is YOU continuing to bash me and my family. Not seeing that is sad for you.

You lost me - who's the 'South African'? :confused:
555-04Q2 (the SA) told him to 'drown himself in a bucket of pity' during another debate and Spafranco brought up a previously unknown series of events concerning members of his family committing suicide. He was outraged by this turn of phrase used and here we have the melt down in this very thread. A melt down I attempted carefully to defuse at the start and has since been turned around on me. I keep reading back through my own posts to see if these accusations have any standing and all I can conclude is my words have been completely manipulated by an attention seeker of the worse type.

Ah - I see. Are we hailing posters by their nationality now? (Posted by the Englishman with Scottish blood from my Mother's side of the family)

[Spafranco]

Strewth

How can any poster on here possibly know the ins-and-outs of another posters' family circumstance?

Only with prior knowledge, and I am pretty sure this is not the case.

No one expects anyone to know. However, when you walk into a room of strangers you won't know the circumstances of one's life.

That is why you employ a degree of cautious deliberate restraint when you enter conversations.

So, If I were to say to a stranger 'good morning', and it turns out their partner was killed in a car accident in the early hours of the day 10 years ago, would I expect them to throw a wobbly in my face for saying morning?

Wilko, that does not deserve a response.

[Spafranco]

On that note, I shall exit.

A little wiser than when I entered lol.

Take care all
:)

I'm glad you are going. It will be better for all because of your twisted logic and pompous attitude displayed and lack of regard for anyone else or their feelings.
For a little clarity and something that you might dwell on and before you start your finger pointing again and blaming at others let me show you the exchange that initiated all of this nastiness which you have helped move along.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Two mass shootings in less than a week

Postby 555-04Q2 » 24 Sep 2013 02:59

Spafranco wrote:

555-04Q2 wrote:

Starter wrote:Then you have the criminals. Please explain just exactly how you are going to take their guns away - they've already amply demonstrated just exactly what they think of following the law.



Very well put :)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spafranco
Well put?. The predominant number of guns in the hands of criminals is due to the lax laws on the books. With all the murders in this United States how many innocents are murdered by a convicted criminal? How many lives were saved by concealed carry John Wayne wannabe's?


And here we have the start of it. The South African

Postby 555-04Q2
It must be great being ignorant like you. Criminals will use guns whether by way of legal processing or on the black market. Thats why we call them criminals.

[steveaki13]

I have not read all posts here and am on no ones side, but this all seems a bit sick.

Is it not an idea to close this thread for everyones sake. Otherwise I'll have no one left to talk to.

[Bagwan]

I have not read all posts here and am on no ones side, but this all seems a bit sick.

Is it not an idea to close this thread for everyones sake. Otherwise I'll have no one left to talk to.

If I may , Steve , calling for a discussion to close isn't the way to promote positive discussion .

I've watched a thread here that has gone a bit sideways , and it's time to say something .

Spafranco , if I'm reading you correctly , you object to being called "ignorant" .
I must say , if I've gotten that right , I fully understand how you would find that distasteful .

I've been here a long time and have seen less cause wars here on the forum .

Sometimes it comes from cultural differences , but more often , merely from different personalities .
We all seem to have our different tolerances for the "banter" that goes on here .


When I post on the forum , knowing how things can go wrong , I sometimes labour for a long time on a post so there's little doubt as to the intent and reasoning behind it .
And , that's principally because I've not been clear , and upset people as a result .
I once had someone angry at me for unknowingly using a wrong letter in a name .
I've been the "lone wolf" on a topic a number of times , and I find that ignoring the jibe and addressing the point was the only way to keep a thread on topic(especially if I was the thread starter) .

I've seen many of your posts make great points , but too often reactions to differing opinions take you away from the point , and into where it all gets lost .
You were very positive when a poster got it right , and that's a good way to get others on board .

I'm certainly not trying to tell you what to do , but rather , offering an example of how you might deal with all the agro you seem to be getting .
I guess it's a little thicker skin , to a certain degree , but more than that , perhaps , it's an "I'll prove to you I'm certainly not ignorant" .

It's advice for everyone , Spafranco , not just you .
I want to debate stuff with all of you .


Now , wasn't this about double standards ?
It is an interesting topic , indeed .

[Spafranco]

I have not read all posts here and am on no ones side, but this all seems a bit sick.

Is it not an idea to close this thread for everyones sake. Otherwise I'll have no one left to talk to.

If I may , Steve , calling for a discussion to close isn't the way to promote positive discussion .

I've watched a thread here that has gone a bit sideways , and it's time to say something .

Spafranco , if I'm reading you correctly , you object to being called "ignorant" .
I must say , if I've gotten that right , I fully understand how you would find that distasteful .

I've been here a long time and have seen less cause wars here on the forum .

Sometimes it comes from cultural differences , but more often , merely from different personalities .
We all seem to have our different tolerances for the "banter" that goes on here .


When I post on the forum , knowing how things can go wrong , I sometimes labour for a long time on a post so there's little doubt as to the intent and reasoning behind it .
And , that's principally because I've not been clear , and upset people as a result .
I once had someone angry at me for unknowingly using a wrong letter in a name .
I've been the "lone wolf" on a topic a number of times , and I find that ignoring the jibe and addressing the point was the only way to keep a thread on topic(especially if I was the thread starter) .

I've seen many of your posts make great points , but too often reactions to differing opinions take you away from the point , and into where it all gets lost .
You were very positive when a poster got it right , and that's a good way to get others on board .

I'm certainly not trying to tell you what to do , but rather , offering an example of how you might deal with all the agro you seem to be getting .
I guess it's a little thicker skin , to a certain degree , but more than that , perhaps , it's an "I'll prove to you I'm certainly not ignorant" .

It's advice for everyone , Spafranco , not just you .
I want to debate stuff with all of you .


Now , wasn't this about double standards ?
It is an interesting topic , indeed .

Bagwan, it is an interesting topic and in fact you have nailed it. The insults started right there, escalated to even more personal attacks and then was told hidden in another language,Afrikaans to f---- off. When this did not even garner a moderator suggesting it stop and this other poster continued to insult and made it too personal (albeit he/she would not know) and made a comment about me being better off drowning myself I had enough.
The other people who obviously, with their longer history posting began to offer unsolicited advise to me....just me. They become offended that I should point out their favorable position towards this person and in doing so with smiley faces etcetera. That in itself is goading. But, I see that they are doing exactly what the thread was started on and that was Double Standard.
You and Jag see this. The rest do not.
Bagwan, I do not take exception to you pointing out the error of my ways if I stray off point. God knows I am apt to do so. I go off usually as a result of a reply to my post but, it does not excuse me from not staying on point. Thank you for seeing the thread as it was intended. The Double Standards to me are obvious without me pointing out the posters.
Although like you and I'm sure everyone else stating someone is ignorant and I forget the word, an english term, I am going to respond and I would bet everyone else here would if they are termed as ignorant and waffling.
Again, I take no offense but rather the opposite with your comment.

[Bagwan]

I have not read all posts here and am on no ones side, but this all seems a bit sick.

Is it not an idea to close this thread for everyones sake. Otherwise I'll have no one left to talk to.

If I may , Steve , calling for a discussion to close isn't the way to promote positive discussion .

I've watched a thread here that has gone a bit sideways , and it's time to say something .

Spafranco , if I'm reading you correctly , you object to being called "ignorant" .
I must say , if I've gotten that right , I fully understand how you would find that distasteful .

I've been here a long time and have seen less cause wars here on the forum .

Sometimes it comes from cultural differences , but more often , merely from different personalities .
We all seem to have our different tolerances for the "banter" that goes on here .


When I post on the forum , knowing how things can go wrong , I sometimes labour for a long time on a post so there's little doubt as to the intent and reasoning behind it .
And , that's principally because I've not been clear , and upset people as a result .
I once had someone angry at me for unknowingly using a wrong letter in a name .
I've been the "lone wolf" on a topic a number of times , and I find that ignoring the jibe and addressing the point was the only way to keep a thread on topic(especially if I was the thread starter) .

I've seen many of your posts make great points , but too often reactions to differing opinions take you away from the point , and into where it all gets lost .
You were very positive when a poster got it right , and that's a good way to get others on board .

I'm certainly not trying to tell you what to do , but rather , offering an example of how you might deal with all the agro you seem to be getting .
I guess it's a little thicker skin , to a certain degree , but more than that , perhaps , it's an "I'll prove to you I'm certainly not ignorant" .

It's advice for everyone , Spafranco , not just you .
I want to debate stuff with all of you .


Now , wasn't this about double standards ?
It is an interesting topic , indeed .

Bagwan, it is an interesting topic and in fact you have nailed it. The insults started right there, escalated to even more personal attacks and then was told hidden in another language,Afrikaans to f---- off. When this did not even garner a moderator suggesting it stop and this other poster continued to insult and made it too personal (albeit he/she would not know) and made a comment about me being better off drowning myself I had enough.
The other people who obviously, with their longer history posting began to offer unsolicited advise to me....just me. They become offended that I should point out their favorable position towards this person and in doing so with smiley faces etcetera. That in itself is goading. But, I see that they are doing exactly what the thread was started on and that was Double Standard.
You and Jag see this. The rest do not.
Bagwan, I do not take exception to you pointing out the error of my ways if I stray off point. God knows I am apt to do so. I go off usually as a result of a reply to my post but, it does not excuse me from not staying on point. Thank you for seeing the thread as it was intended. The Double Standards to me are obvious without me pointing out the posters.
Although like you and I'm sure everyone else stating someone is ignorant and I forget the word, an english term, I am going to respond and I would bet everyone else here would if they are termed as ignorant and waffling.
Again, I take no offense but rather the opposite with your comment.

If you wish debate , rather than argument and stone throwing , you must , though , keep both yourself and your opponent on point .
It simply does not work any other way .
And , it's not easy .

I've been called all sorts on here , and saw any response in kind as pointless .
You can only win a debate if you have an opponent .

And , pardon me for being frank , but your style of debate is , as has been noted by several others I've read , very abrasive .
There are certainly others who can be very abrasive as well , so please don't feel singled out .


Incidentally , I'd like to point to one thing that you got a little wrong in your own interpretation of my last post .
I wondered if you would .
Rather than being a direct reference to the double standards of which you speak , it was more a reference to the fact that this thread was straying a little .

And , I think double standards can be different for people in different seats .
We may not agree , but we all need to try to see through what influences other people's decision making .

[SGWilko]

Wilko, that does not deserve a response.

I think you ought to make an effort, because this is the very thing that Henners has been trying to explain to you, but you've decided already that he is directly attacking you, and you now are suffering from the old chestnut of not seeing the wood for the trees.

[SGWilko]

Yes Henner, I get serious when someone suggests that I commit suicide.

In a bucket of pity? I think you will have to come up with a 'how to' guide on that one. It was a metaphore - a bit like when a mate starts maudlin so you suggest he goes and 'drowns his sorrows'.

[Bagwan]

Wilko, that does not deserve a response.

I think you ought to make an effort, because this is the very thing that Henners has been trying to explain to you, but you've decided already that he is directly attacking you, and you now are suffering from the old chestnut of not seeing the wood for the trees.

To be fair , Wilko , I think Spafranco was feeling a bit "piled upon" , even before this thread started .
It was , I think , a bit responsive in itself .

The "bucket of pity" comment comes in either under the heading , "cultural differences" , and/or "contextual differences" .

Personally , I understood the comment , and was initially surprised that there was such offence taken to it .
But , it was immediately clear Spafranco was offended .

And , at that point , it only takes a single stone thrown , almost no matter how small , to start a war .
I guess you could call these peace talks .

We're learning about each other , and the boundaries we see .

I know you're right about henners trying to diffuse the situation .
And , this brings me to another of those "cultural differences" of which I earlier spoke .

I find that you cats across the pond have a bit of a habit of giving honest advice , and then discounting it at the end with a flip comment .
I find that in your next post , where you inform Spafranco that it was a metaphor .
You started out the post with a laugh at his expense , because he had missed it .

Cluing him in was a good thing you were trying to do , but can you see it as aggressive from his point of view ?


Certainly , Spafranco needs to learn about the culture on here , but we all need to learn a little about how we read each other's posts .

[SGWilko]

As ever, Bagwan, you are reason personnified.

I'll chalk this one up to understood a little, learned a lot.

BTW - I do try to be quite 'light hearted' in many responses where the debate is often moist around the collar, that way folk have an inkling I'm a little tongue in cheek and not up my own whatnot. :)

[Spafranco]

Wilko, that does not deserve a response.

I think you ought to make an effort, because this is the very thing that Henners has been trying to explain to you, but you've decided already that he is directly attacking you, and you now are suffering from the old chestnut of not seeing the wood for the trees.
Henners is not attacking me?!! I find it laughable. The point is that he IS attacking me.

If a person and I am hopefully not coming across as abrasive as I seem and incidentally I respect your response and contribution continues to demonize me and ignores the other poster then yes I will be angry and yes it is Double Standard being applied by him and with respect, you. I am not here to make friends but I am not here to marginalize myself either.
What prompted me to become angry with Henner is that he decided that if he were going to become involved as some type of mediator that he would just use me. Not the South African. Me. Not that fact that I was the one being called ignorant but that he allowed his admonishment to or advise to be seen by everyone without exception. He should have done exactly as Pino did recently and gave a warning to two people at the same time. This probably would not have happened if Henner had just done as I reminded him over and over and so many others have gone on the attack on me. Why am I the only person warned when the insult was directed at me?
I feel that many are in the same position as you state regarding the chestnut. Albeit, the forest is the Amazon Rainforest.

[Spafranco]

As ever, Bagwan, you are reason personnified.

I'll chalk this one up to understood a little, learned a lot.

BTW - I do try to be quite 'light hearted' in many responses where the debate is often moist around the collar, that way folk have an inkling I'm a little tongue in cheek and not up my own whatnot. :)
I had the post above written before I saw this. So please don't be offended.

[Bagwan]

As ever, Bagwan, you are reason personnified.

I'll chalk this one up to understood a little, learned a lot.

Naw , I've just learned over the years that , if I'm going to make a point , there's little point if nobody listens .

Sometimes I get a little more than long-winded because I'm trying to be as clear as I can be , but I get more satisfaction from countering an argument when my opponent sticks around to counter mine .

So , sometimes I spend a little time thinking about how I can keep all you guys civil so I can debate with all these ideas from all over the world .
So , you see , it's just me being horribly selfish .

[Starter]

Bagwan, a couple of comments below.



Personally , I understood the comment , and was initially surprised that there was such offence taken to it .
But , it was immediately clear Spafranco was offended .

And , at that point , it only takes a single stone thrown , almost no matter how small , to start a war .
I guess you could call these peace talks .

We're learning about each other , and the boundaries we see .

I know you're right about henners trying to diffuse the situation .
And , this brings me to another of those "cultural differences" of which I earlier spoke.

Cluing him in was a good thing you were trying to do , but can you see it as aggressive from his point of view ?
This is an international board and there obviously are going to be cultural differences between posters in both points of view and idioms used to express opinions. That's a given and should be obvious to any who spend more than a short time here. Spafranco has been around under this, and possibly other, names long enough to know this. Your suggestion for not throwing the smallest stone is, IMO, political correctness in the extreme. Differences between people and cultures are a normal consequence of each persons background. Those who chose to post on this board should realize that and make allowances when they see something which might otherwise offend them.


Certainly , Spafranco needs to learn about the culture on here , but we all need to learn a little about how we read each other's posts .
This individual has made a habit of starting hostile exchanges with a number of posters here. Everything seems to offend him, unless it agrees with his views in entirety. He considers many things as insults which are far from that and responds with a barrage of insults of his own. Claiming of course that he did no such thing. Spend a few minutes and take a look at his posting history.

I have no idea whether a) he just enjoys getting people jacked up and watching the resulting furor; b) is a very unhappy person; or c) goes off his meds from time to time. I've only got two posters on my ignore list, he is one of them. I also wish others would quit quoting him. :p

[Bagwan]

As ever, Bagwan, you are reason personnified.

I'll chalk this one up to understood a little, learned a lot.

BTW - I do try to be quite 'light hearted' in many responses where the debate is often moist around the collar, that way folk have an inkling I'm a little tongue in cheek and not up my own whatnot. :)

I know that well , but it takes the utmost care at that point to not be a part of the "piling on" .
Brit humour doesn't read the same everywhere .

Hated Benny Hill ; loved Monty Python .

[SGWilko]

Hated Benny Hill ; loved Monty Python .

Aha, do you then like 'The League of Gentlemen'?

[Bagwan]

Bagwan, a couple of comments below.

[quote]
Personally , I understood the comment , and was initially surprised that there was such offence taken to it .
But , it was immediately clear Spafranco was offended .

And , at that point , it only takes a single stone thrown , almost no matter how small , to start a war .
I guess you could call these peace talks .

We're learning about each other , and the boundaries we see .

I know you're right about henners trying to diffuse the situation .
And , this brings me to another of those "cultural differences" of which I earlier spoke.

Cluing him in was a good thing you were trying to do , but can you see it as aggressive from his point of view ?
This is an international board and there obviously are going to be cultural differences between posters in both points of view and idioms used to express opinions. That's a given and should be obvious to any who spend more than a short time here. Spafranco has been around under this, and possibly other, names long enough to know this. Your suggestion for not throwing the smallest stone is, IMO, political correctness in the extreme. Differences between people and cultures are a normal consequence of each persons background. Those who chose to post on this board should realize that and make allowances when they see something which might otherwise offend them.


Certainly , Spafranco needs to learn about the culture on here , but we all need to learn a little about how we read each other's posts .
This individual has made a habit of starting hostile exchanges with a number of posters here. Everything seems to offend him, unless it agrees with his views in entirety. He considers many things as insults which are far from that and responds with a barrage of insults of his own. Claiming of course that he did no such thing. Spend a few minutes and take a look at his posting history.

I have no idea whether a) he ; b) is a very unhappy person; or c) goes off his meds from time to time. I've only got two posters on my ignore list, he is one of them. I also wish others would quit quoting him. :p[/quote:1x84zp3a]

I know what you think of him , Starter .
It rather clear from the last paragraph .

Let's deal with today and stop the war .

[Bagwan]

Hated Benny Hill ; loved Monty Python .

Aha, do you then like 'The League of Gentlemen'?

I'm not familiar with that one .

[airshifter]

"Always the victim, never the victor."

The above came to mind quickly, and is my view of the entire thread. If a person seeks to be offended and expects standards of others that they don't apply to themselves, they will always become the victim in their own mind.

There are quite a few members here that I often don't agree with, but we can always do so in a civil manner and at some point simply accept that we don't agree on those issues. But neither myself nor said members I engage with go on a campaign of whining, insults, stereotypes, or assumptions of the other.

I very rarely ignore a person on a forum by using the forum features. I simply ignore their posts on a case by case basis if I find them to not have any valid content. Quite often people simply trolling fall into this category, and it's not shock to me that they often have issues with the majority of posters on a forum.


What I find most comical is such people will at some point almost always claim that what others feel doesn't bother them in the slightest. But then they spend pages and pages railing against the statements of said people. To me it's simply a matter of people on the internet not living up to the standards they expect be granted to them, and failing to understand that they live in a world without mirrors. I actually find it rather entertaining myself. :)

[steveaki13]

Im British and I hate league of Gentleman. Go figure.

[Starter]

I know what you think of him , Starter .
It rather clear from the last paragraph .

Let's deal with today and stop the war .
I'd be most pleased to do that, if I could. I tried just not responding to his posts. However, he kept bringing me up in threads with no connection to others; misquoting things I'd said; attributing statements to me that were not in evidence; and attacking me in posts where he was responding to other people. That's when he went on ignore. A while back I had even agreed with a post of his and he responded to the effect that he didn't want my approval. Kind of difficult to deal in an open way with a person like that.

There's a lot of differing opinions on this board and that's a good thing. But, if you want your own opinion honored, then you had best honor the opinions of others. Even when they differ from your own. That's a good way to go through life too, not just for this board.

[SGWilko]

Im British and I hate league of Gentleman. Go figure.

It is, without doubt, an acquired taste.

[Spafranco]

I know what you think of him , Starter .
It rather clear from the last paragraph .

Let's deal with today and stop the war .
I'd be most pleased to do that, if I could. I tried just not responding to his posts. However, he kept bringing me up in threads with no connection to others; misquoting things I'd said; attributing statements to me that were not in evidence; and attacking me in posts where he was responding to other people. That's when he went on ignore. A while back I had even agreed with a post of his and he responded to the effect that he didn't want my approval. Kind of difficult to deal in an open way with a person like that.

There's a lot of differing opinions on this board and that's a good thing. But, if you want your own opinion honored, then you had best honor the opinions of others. Even when they differ from your own. That's a good way to go through life too, not just for this board.

For a person that purports to have me on ignore you really have great interest in what I say although "you don't know what that is" :rolleyes:
Now that sarcastic eye roll is completely intended.
An individual that in a couple of posts has stated he has me on ignore, is posting on a topic of Double Standards and here he/she is whining (which he accuses me of doing) and, playing victim which he accuses me of doing.
Starter, either ignore me or don't which is what you are doing. Face up to it. The obvious is that you DO NOT have me on ignore. You hate me and you make it clear. You, in my case are not hated by me. I actually find you amusing since you have stated that I am someone else on so many occasions. I have seen that game played out before where you are concerned. I have observed this actual part (Chit Chat) for a long time when I was directed to it. You Starter would involve yourself in heated discussions as a moderator and ban people for any reason that did not suit YOUR point of view. Akin to a referee playing for the opposition. Your buddies of course defended you.
I have stated before that you have banned people for non words yet you would never explain why you did this. Now, since I'm being ignored by you I can send some of those non words to someone else that favors you and maybe then you can explain to me why then # was deemed a real letter so you banned the poster.But, on careful reflection when I went through the posts from other members the same identical use of the # in a word was never used to ban those in favor. Henner, Starter, Airshifter and all of those as well as the South African who actually does post the words in a different language which is childish as the words are blatantly obvious since Afrikaans is a merely a pigeon English. No ban, threat of one or ignore. I believe that ! was also used recently to disguise a word. No ban. The f bomb was used in two posts one after the other and no warning given or a ban. So , it's obvious that there are standards that you apply to yourself and others for me and maybe one or two other people.
Your statement of reaching out in some way is claptrap. Just as Henner, while one moment stating he was sorry for the family loss continued when he should have shut his mouth to bash me for speaking of my family. Context is lost on him. He wants to get at me through my posts , and has that audacity to tell me what I should or should not feel and then what the other person was thinking. At a given time he a seer and an apologist. Never will he apologize. As pointed out by Bagwan, he may use the words but he will follow up with a sarcastic and vitriolic comment thus negating everything expressed.

[schmenke]

...What I find most comical is such people will at some point almost always claim that what others feel doesn't bother them in the slightest. But then they spend pages and pages railing against the statements of said people. To me it's simply a matter of people on the internet not living up to the standards they expect be granted to them, and failing to understand that they live in a world without mirrors. I actually find it rather entertaining myself. :)

Yes, well said, although I don't find it entertaining. Quite the opposite really, I find it often tiring to read, ruining what may have been a good discussion, then giving up and moving onto a different thread :mark: .

[henners88]

I started a thread recently about firearms in the US. It was closed by the moderator I believes controls the forum.
I must admit that it was valid to close as there was no sense in continuing because of the lack of civility. I will be a man and state that I was sucked into the base ignorance often exhibited on this particular forum. For that and the other posters who show a decorum that should be present in these debates I apologize. However, I have seen the and easily identified how and why these threads fall apart. I have been coming to this forum for years and pay a subscription fee to the main site.

It is only recently that I have been posting as I have read many threads and did not bother to participate for one reason or another.
There are problems that I would hope the "owner" or the person designated as such would take into account.
I have seen threads started and fall apart, people expressing an opinion banned and people that have been confrontational and always vocal in their opinion still staying around.
I have seen moderators expressing opinions on threads and editing posts to suit their point of view and ignoring more egregious posts always it seems initiated by the same member.
On the guns thread, there is an easily identified poster and moderator that have been constantly instigating a form of politicization of threads and causing issues and bickering. Always, the same poster is at the very heart of these confrontations and the same moderator chooses to ignore him, but, will edit, sanitize posts, or, will ban completely a poster who is responding in kind.
why is one person banned for using the easily identified # as a form of camouflaging words that are inappropriate for the forum and accepted by the moderator for the vast number of posters as being fine to use but once again, the moderator chooses to ban or edit others that use the exact same identical sign or substitute for a letter.
Where I am live and through life experience I see that the divide is pretty easily identified.
Those of us with a liberal viewpoint or should I be forced to use the word progressive as a substitute, are the one's that are banned or will have their opinion edited by one moderator while a consecrative point of view is allowed.
Europeans are more open minded in my opinion and to identify one as being liberal or conservative is often harder to identify. Not everything in Europe is black and white. People have open minds and the politics of people is harder to identify.
On this particular forum I have found it much easier to see that in the US there is a clear divide and there is a starkly defined and vitriolic hatred exhibited by certain confrontational groups and in the case of these forums one or two that I will not name but will conclude that it is obvious to most of the members.
Threads should not be forced to close and an even hand in the moderating should be used. Moderators who choose to insert their opinion into a thread should automatically loose their right to moderate the thread. They are expressing an opinion and will edit or ban when they choose. Always someone they disagree with.

Ahhh I wondered where I had seen this rant before. Welcome back :)


viewtopic.php?f=93&t=151023 (http://www.motorsportforums.com/viewtopic.php?f=93&t=151023)

[donKey jote]

be nice everyone, listen to uncle bags :)

Live and let live, we're all here together.

I recall Mark once mentioning that sometimes people are given second or indeed a few more chances. At that point I also saw the light and stopped pointing out the obvious.
I think by now we all know each other here, in a forum sense, and all our present and past names.
We also all know by now what might "trigger" an overreaction in the others, but that doesn't mean we should use it to constantly goad each other.

Peace Dammit !(c) Race

[steveaki13]

I think by now we all know each other here,

Peace Dammit !(c) Race

Sorry. And you are? :p

[donKey jote]

I think by now we all know each other here,

Peace Dammit !(c) Race

Sorry. And you are? :p

carlonso :dork: :laugh:

[airshifter]

...What I find most comical is such people will at some point almost always claim that what others feel doesn't bother them in the slightest. But then they spend pages and pages railing against the statements of said people. To me it's simply a matter of people on the internet not living up to the standards they expect be granted to them, and failing to understand that they live in a world without mirrors. I actually find it rather entertaining myself. :)

Yes, well said, although I don't find it entertaining. Quite the opposite really, I find it often tiring to read, ruining what may have been a good discussion, then giving up and moving onto a different thread :mark: .

I don't find ruined threads entertaining, so I simply don't allow people to ruin threads for me. It's easier IMO to simply not worry about the people that will do anything to disagree with everyone, and engage only with the people using common courtesy to discuss or debate the topic in a civil manner.

It probably just angers the trolls even more to see that people don't go for the bait. :D

[airshifter]

be nice everyone, listen to uncle bags :)

Live and let live, we're all here together.

I recall Mark once mentioning that sometimes people are given second or indeed a few more chances. At that point I also saw the light and stopped pointing out the obvious.
I think by now we all know each other here, in a forum sense, and all our present and past names.
We also all know by now what might "trigger" an overreaction in the others, but that doesn't mean we should use it to constantly goad each other.

Peace Dammit !(c) Race

Personally I've never had an issue with how many time outs or new attempts are allowed. It's Mark's forum and as such his rules.

But it does amaze me that some get banned and never learn from it. For most of us a simple mention or warning keeps us in line and within the forum rules. Often the people who come back with new names are the types of people I don't find worth engaging in the forum in the first place, so many times I don't notice that they are a returning banned poster.

Really in that sense, if the person had changed their ways and acted civil, none of us should readily notice that they are a returning banned or previously banned poster. If they have certain "triggers" that are well within forum regulations, and can't tolerate actions allowed by the forum rules, they should just move on of their own doing. It would save everyone a lot of wasted time.

[donKey jote]

It would save everyone a lot of wasted time.
it's only our time to waste if we choose to waste it :)

There's a fine line and it's different for each of us. This difference leads to perceived double standards by some, which might be perfectly reasonable for others.

Still, just because somebody is acting like a donkey shouldn't be an excuse to behave like an ass.
(and I have been both in the past, I admit)

[henners88]

I think its great we have been able to discuss this and almost reach a conclusion without getting too heated. It seems this thread was created off the back of the 'Frustration Thread', and the fact I told Spa to lighten up. However I know my friendly advice was not welcomed because I didn't give the same advice to 555-04Q2. However he had already taken the appropriate action and taken himself out of the argument, so I felt there was no advice to give in his case. This thread was born more out of frustration than anything else. I also think some people are a little more easy going than others and its clear what is a joke to one person, is taken very seriously and often out of context by another. The metaphor 555 used appears to have caused the most offence, however I still feel more was made out of that than needed to be.

Spafranco/Gluaistean/Monadvspec whatever his name is obviously has a long history here and I don't have a problem with that. If people want to return and as airshifter said, learn from the past, it shouldn't be a problem. I know the mods are happy to give the benefit of the doubt in many cases. Spafranco has fallen out with a number of people here, so many it could possibly be a forum record, but I feel this thread contains some valuable advice. I think its time to take a deep breath, realise not everybody is being attacked, dead or alive, and at least try to have a bit of respect for those we are discussing with. It makes for a much happier place. Peace out muther fungers :)

[Spafranco]

I think its great we have been able to discuss this and almost reach a conclusion without getting too heated. It seems this thread was created off the back of the 'Frustration Thread', and the fact I told Spa to lighten up. However I know my friendly advice was not welcomed because I didn't give the same advice to 555-04Q2. However he had already taken the appropriate action and taken himself out of the argument, so I felt there was no advice to give in his case. This thread was born more out of frustration than anything else. I also think some people are a little more easy going than others and its clear what is a joke to one person, is taken very seriously and often out of context by another. The metaphor 555 used appears to have caused the most offence, however I still feel more was made out of that than needed to be.

Spafranco/Gluaistean/Monadvspec whatever his name is obviously has a long history here and I don't have a problem with that. If people want to return and as airshifter said, learn from the past, it shouldn't be a problem. I know the mods are happy to give the benefit of the doubt in many cases. Spafranco has fallen out with a number of people here, so many it could possibly be a forum record, but I feel this thread contains some valuable advice. I think its time to take a deep breath, realise not everybody is being attacked, dead or alive, and at least try to have a bit of respect for those we are discussing with. It makes for a much happier place. Peace out muther fungers :)

[Bagwan]

OK , you buncha wieners , have we got this all straightened out ?

In a thread about double standards , I think it's right to point out that we question exactly that just about every day here on the forum , when talking about these racing drivers .
Take for example the debate about ethics when looking at Mark and Seb at the Bull team .
One get's called for not following team orders , and quickly , an opposing view chimes in that the other was no better , exposing a double standard .

Often times , the debate continues without anyone's opinion changing , but rather moves to a question of degree of guilt in the situations being compared .
I can't count the number of times folks have suggested we "agree to disagree" to me .
I'm pretty opinionated , and will hold my ground until the end .

And , a lot of things may affect the double standards we allow .
Someone from Oz may be much more forgiving of Mark's foibles , while a German might do the same for Seb .
That's about the most obvious one , especially with the flags flying .


I try to hold myself accountable for the way people respond to me .
It's my words that illicit a response , and if it isn't the answer I was expecting , then I clearly have not explained myself well on whatever point I am attempting to make .
If the opposing debater is frustrated with my answer , I will try to explain further .
Defusing the situation that way , instead of reacting to a name sent my way , is the only way to continue the debate .

We're all capable of learning here .
Let's give up some of the grudges , and start afresh .
Let's stop dredging , and start reacting to today .

[airshifter]

Well reasoned as usual Bagwan, and the comparison to the F1 forums is all too important as an example. All of us should be able to settle differences in opinion and move on at some point. The flaw seems to be that some just never move on. I find it comical that in the F1 forums I've been accused of being a fanboy of sorts of several different drivers all due to not finding them in the wrong. In reality I call out my favorite drivers as often if not more when they do something boneheaded.



I try to hold myself accountable for the way people respond to me .


As for this I'd say you do a great job and are more tolerant than many if not most. Accountability is key as with any aspect of life, and people will often get what they give.

[Spafranco]

With me adding my two cents and the starter of this thread, I too would like to move on. We can have heated debates that sometimes get out of hand. To allow yourself to engage you are responsible for your comments.
I got a really nice PM from one of the posters here. Without his permission I won't reveal his name. The contents of his PM were sincere and it took a man to say what he did.
This has gone on too long and I am guilty and hope you all accept my apology for allowing myself to get dragged into the childishness.
My apology is extended to Starter and 555 for my behavior and I hope that a new beginning with some good debate will draw some of those mentioned that are missing to post again.

[Spafranco]

I forgot to mention that I got a call from the UN asking if I knew of a good mediator or potential one and I suggested Bagwan. :)

[gadjo_dilo]

I got a really nice PM from one of the posters here. Without his permission I won't reveal his name. The contents of his PM were sincere and it took a man to say what he did.

And the apotheosis of this intense thread would be that this person is the ''South African''.....:p

[steveaki13]

Wow. This is great to see. Glad everyone has cooled down and said what needed saying.

Nice one.

On with the debates.

[Spafranco]

I got a really nice PM from one of the posters here. Without his permission I won't reveal his name. The contents of his PM were sincere and it took a man to say what he did.

And the apotheosis of this intense thread would be that this person is the ''South African''.....:p
No :D

[airshifter]

I got a really nice PM from one of the posters here. Without his permission I won't reveal his name. The contents of his PM were sincere and it took a man to say what he did.

And the apotheosis of this intense thread would be that this person is the ''South African''.....:p

it seems not, but the UN position Bagwan is suitable for is in South Africa. :D

[Bagwan]

With me adding my two cents and the starter of this thread, I too would like to move on. We can have heated debates that sometimes get out of hand. To allow yourself to engage you are responsible for your comments.
I got a really nice PM from one of the posters here. Without his permission I won't reveal his name. The contents of his PM were sincere and it took a man to say what he did.
This has gone on too long and I am guilty and hope you all accept my apology for allowing myself to get dragged into the childishness.
My apology is extended to Starter and 555 for my behavior and I hope that a new beginning with some good debate will draw some of those mentioned that are missing to post again.

I'd like to say a big thank-you to you specifically , and to everyone else here as well , for listening .

The UN called me , but I told them I'm too busy here to deal with their trivial stuff .
They were very impressed that nobody had taken me to task for calling them a "buncha wieners" .

On with the debate !

[donKey jote]

They were very impressed that nobody had taken me to task for calling them a "buncha wieners" .


the only wiener I know here is ioan, but gadjo has him locked up in her cellar :sailor:

[gadjo_dilo]

They were very impressed that nobody had taken me to task for calling them a "buncha wieners" .


the only wiener I know here is ioan, but gadjo has him locked up in her cellar :sailor:
That's a shameless lie cos all the windows of my cellar are broken. :evil:

[donKey jote]

[quote=Bagwan]
They were very impressed that nobody had taken me to task for calling them a "buncha wieners" .


the only wiener I know here is ioan, but gadjo has him locked up in her cellar :sailor:
That's a shameless lie cos all the windows of my cellar are broken. :evil:[/quote:ibd7ub6j]

does that mean he's escaped back to Vienna ? :eek:

[gadjo_dilo]

does that mean he's escaped back to Vienna ? :eek:
Who knows where he's hiding now? I miss him on the forum....... :uhoh:

[webberf1]

What a funny thread. Maybe the author can answer this one:
When both Bush/Republicans and Obama/Democrats have proven themselves equally excellent at f***ing America's future into oblivion, is it a double standard that only one side seems to get the credit?

[henners88]

I do hope that after all the discussion to get things sorted and back on friendly terms, that question is meant in a light hearted manner?