I'm done

[woot]

You and I are not noble. Our past is too checkered to ever expect any kind of peerage. But, there are others among the noble and great ones who I expected to decry the callousness of attacking someone over something so deeply personal.

I would agree. There are a great many folks on the board that don't do much in the way of taking hard stances on things or of continuing discussion after disagreements are identified. That's a fine way to do things, but I do wish those types would wield their influence a bit more when things get out of hand. CJ has been completely out of line lately, and it's caused me rethink the amount of information I've divulged, even though I've been pretty reticent.

[Tone Loc]

That was preemptively included in case you came back alleging to have been serious. I haven't read many of your posts, so I don't know how much sarcasm you naturally incorporate therein. Without a emoticon, what was I supposed to think? My point remains: your joke wasn't funny.

If you dont think its funny, then I am convinced, its hell-a-funny.

[smokymountainrain]

If you dont think its funny, then I am convinced, its hell-a-funny.

Wait, so that was an attempt at humor? I'm sorry.

[Tone Loc]

Wait, so that was an attempt at humor? I'm sorry.

No, it wasn't.

[TripletDaddy]

athiestcoug has been a persistent asshole ever since he came here with a caustic smugness that I've found extremely offputting. With that said, cougjunkie says vicious things designed to actually hurt people. His comment today was so far beyond the pale that I am disappointed that some of the board's more noble posters didn't publicly call out his misanthropy as patently inappropriate.

Who are the noble ones that disappoint you so?

One thing that is always interesting when these sorts of dustups occur is that both sides of the drama get a reality check about how they are perceived on the board. I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing, actually.

[cougjunkie]

Who are the noble ones that disappoint you so?

One thing that is always interesting when these sorts of dustups occur is that both sides of the drama get a reality check about how they are perceived on the board. I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing, actually.

The ban CJ meme is tired.

[wuapinmon]

Who are the noble ones that disappoint you so?

Interpellation.

[OhioBlue]

You and I are not noble. Our past is too checkered to ever expect any kind of peerage. But, there are others among the noble and great ones who I expected to decry the callousness of attacking someone over something so deeply personal.

From a non-noble, non-great, infrequent poster whose opinion on this matter is largely worthless and probably will be ignored anyway, I thought that cougjunkie's attack was way below the belt.

I also think a simple 'hey I took it too far, my bad' from cj would help, but I don't know if that's his thing.

[jay santos]

I'm a noble and great one, and I weighed in.

[byu71]

I am glad to have atheistcoug here. I am glad to have Junkie here. The end.

[TripletDaddy]

Interpellation.

Look, it is a simple question. You expressed disappointment in people here while you simultaneously assail the very board member that you presume to help...all in one post. There is nothing more philanthropic than lending a hand to someone in need while calling them a caustic, off-putting a-hole.

You want other board members to step into this mess. The moderation policy here has always been one of self-moderation except in extreme circumstances. So my guess is that the inaction you lament is simply the market forces prompting you, me, and everyone else to self-moderate. And the best form of self-moderation is to simply walk away. Does that advice ring any bells?

Let's all get along, shall we? Frankly, one easy thing we can all do to avoid these sorts of conflicts is to stop analyzing the Church's eleemosynary efforts or lack thereof. Seems to be a touchy subject for many people on both sides of the discussion. Which is probably why UtahDan likes to talk about it so much!

[Indy Coug]

8 pounds 12 ounces

[TripletDaddy]

From a non-noble, non-great, infrequent poster whose opinion on this matter is largely worthless and probably will be ignored anyway, I thought that cougjunkie's attack was way below the belt.

I also think a simple 'hey I took it too far, my bad' from cj would help, but I don't know if that's his thing.

OhioBlue, you are being too hard on yourself.

You are not an infrequent poster!

[Devildog]

At some point in his life, CJ decided that Jesus needed an asshole in His corner. If you accept that CJ really believes in Mormonism, and doesn't just profess belief because he enjoys the structure that Mormonism brings to his sadism, then CJ is a kind of Christ-figure who has traded salvation for the privilege of exercising damnable cruelty on behalf of Jesus Christ.

I have got to think that CJ is actually the biggest unbeliever among us, because he clearly has no respect for the Mormon church, of which he makes a continual mockery with his 'asshole-for-Christ' schtick.

Stick around.

This is great.

One of the best things about this place in my opinion. I don't have very much in common with Robin from what I can gather from around here. However, I respect the way he articulates his point of view... and I find myself in agreement with him about 50% of the time.

He nailed Junkie's board persona in my view. Makes me wonder if Junkie even realizes how he appears to some others (Asshole-for-Jesus) .

Not a bad way to demonstrate how to deal with him on a message board either.

AtheistCougar should suck it up and follow the example laid out here. Thicken your skin and give it back.

Nice job on this one Robin. It's easy to respect someone who "walks the talk".

[wuapinmon]

Look, it is a simple question. You expressed disappointment in people here while you simultaneously assail the very board member that you presume to help...all in one post. There is nothing more philanthropic than lending a hand to someone in need while calling them a caustic, off-putting a-hole.

You want other board members to step into this mess. The moderation policy here has always been one of self-moderation except in extreme circumstances. So my guess is that the inaction you lament is simply the market forces prompting you, me, and everyone else to self-moderate. And the best form of self-moderation is to simply walk away. Does that advice ring any bells?

Let's all get along, shall we? Frankly, one easy thing we can all do to avoid these sorts of conflicts is to stop analyzing the Church's eleemosynary efforts or lack thereof. Seems to be a touchy subject for many people on both sides of the discussion. Which is probably why UtahDan likes to talk about it so much!

I gave you a very solid answer to your question, in spite of the "so" in it. Go read about interpellation and you'll see the point. I, for one, find it fascinating when you advocate for cougjunkie by deflecting the argument away from what he did. You take issue with other people's methodology of calling out of what he said as wrong more than the really awful things that he says and does. Fascinating again that you ask us to all get along but you never say word one against the most caustic and mean-spirited voice on the board.