Rule clarification

[tooblue]

Yes, you've made your opinions about feelings vs. facts clear. The point is that you are generalizing my style of interaction based only on how I deal with you. I make no apology that I don't respect opinions that are refuted by evidence. I also don't respect the opinion that evidence doesn't matter when formulating opinions. The point is that the majority of posters on this forum do respect facts, so I don't interact with them in the same way that I interact with you.

This perspective of yours makes it extremely hard to interact with you in any intelligent way. How should I respond to your posts? You say something that is not in accordance with the facts, so my only option is just tell you how much I respect it? How should the discussion proceed? I can't use facts in the debate, since they hold no sway with you, and it's well known that one cannot be reasoned out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, so what then? This is largely why you've built up a reputation here that it's pointless to engage you in discussion, since you don't change your opinions in accordance with evidence or argument. Why then have the discussion in the first place?

Again with the attack on intelligence? Seriously woot --

[UtahDan]

The SE could continue to exist exactly as it is, serving the needs of those who feel it is valuable, and a more egalitarian version of the SE would also exist, allowing some of us the benefit of having a slightly less public forum to present slightly-less-public appropriate posts.

After your anti-drip thread and comments about getting covered in fecal matter in a dark public bathroom, I'm not sure any of us are ready for, or can truly wrap our minds around, things you you would share that are even more private still. Do you really want a smaller audience for your shock and awe campaign?

[byu71]

Again with the attack on intelligence? Seriously woot --

Just a thought. Attack back. Tell him you can't communicate with him on any spiritual level.

[TripletDaddy]

tooblue, just so you understand, my approach was not "my way or the highway." I have no power or authority to enforce such a policy. There is no "my way" as this is not my board nor am I part of any group that makes or enforces rules.

I was simply voicing my own opinion. I was participating fully. You are doing the same here. That we might go about it differently doesn't change the nature of what we are doing.

Believe me, if I had it my way, a few posters here would have been given the axe a long time ago. It would definitely be "my way or the highway" with a few (very few) posters.

I wish I had that power!

[TripletDaddy]

Again with the attack on intelligence? Seriously woot --

yes, woot. stop your douchebaggery. I normally find you amiable and easy going. what's the matter with you?

[RobinFinderson]

Again with the attack on intelligence? Seriously woot --

Your intuitive approach to life isn't serving you well here. That wasn't an attack on YOUR intelligence. It was a confession about woot's views of what constitute intelligent approaches to discussion. It is about woot's notions of intelligence, not your own personal IQ.

[woot]

Is this really about the Speakeasy? I actually think you have a pretty good idea there. One way to resolve the feelings that excluded folks have about the SE would be to have a second SE-like forum that admitted all members of the board who remain active participants for a minimum of three months. Then members of the SE, who would also be members of the new forum, could choose which place to present their top-secret posts, and many of the SE threads that might benefit from the participation of the excluded would then be presented in the new forum. The SE could continue to exist exactly as it is, serving the needs of those who feel it is valuable, and a more egalitarian version of the SE would also exist, allowing some of us the benefit of having a slightly less public forum to present slightly-less-public appropriate posts.

Good idea Tooblue.

This would be a more egalitarian approach, but I'm afraid it would also suck the life out of the forum proper, and significantly reduce the value for new arrivals. The SE already does this to some degree, inasmuch as it reduces the number of posts available to everybody else. If every post in the SE would simply not have been posted otherwise due to privacy concerns or whatnot, then my point is invalidated, but this seems unlikely.

[byu71]

Is this really about the Speakeasy? I actually think you have a pretty good idea there. One way to resolve the feelings that excluded folks have about the SE would be to have a second SE-like forum that admitted all members of the board who remain active participants for a minimum of three months. Then members of the SE, who would also be members of the new forum, could choose which place to present their top-secret posts, and many of the SE threads that might benefit from the participation of the excluded would then be presented in the new forum. The SE could continue to exist exactly as it is, serving the needs of those who feel it is valuable, and a more egalitarian version of the SE would also exist, allowing some of us the benefit of having a slightly less public forum to present slightly-less-public appropriate posts.

Good idea Tooblue.

Just a thought. Should a secret place actually exist and should a person be seeking validation for their opinions, a secret place would not be a good place to get that reassurance.

My guess is that in a secret place people will feel freer to tell other other people they were full of crap.

[woot]

Again with the attack on intelligence? Seriously woot --

Please reread. I was talking about my part, not yours. My point is that I can't respond intelligently to your opinions when I know you don't care about facts.

[woot]

yes, woot. stop your douchebaggery. I normally find you amiable and easy going. what's the matter with you?

Yes, haha. You should have saved that up for a time when I was actually being a douchebag though.

[tooblue]

yes, woot. stop your douchebaggery. I normally find you amiable and easy going. what's the matter with you?

And in comes the moderation of the board and discussion goes out the window

[byu71]

I wish I had that power!

I call BS. If you had the power to just throw them out there would be no sport in it.

[tooblue]

Please reread. I was talking about my part, not yours. My point is that I can't respond intelligently to your opinions when I know you don't care about facts.

Then you misunderstand me -- I care deeply about facts.

[TripletDaddy]

I call BS. If you had the power to just throw them out there would be no sport in it.

It would be very limited. There are only a couple of posters on this site that I believe add zero value and sap resources.

tooblue is not on that list, btw. I consider tooblue to be an old school compatriot who happens to be amped up on testosterone from all his nude drawing freakery this past week.

[RobinFinderson]

Then you misunderstand me -- I care deeply about facts.

Of course you do, because your feelings and opinions are 'facts.'