flopstock wrote: Ya know, folks can have a different take on things and not be a sh*t stirrer. You and everyone else is allowed to have a different take on things and not be called a sh*t stirrer, why can't she? Is her only other option to sit quietly when she disagrees?
I don't think that's good for anyone, myself.
I dont know if shes a **** stirrer but she did say an awfully stupid thing. Thats just my take though.
Nomad wrote: Oh my God ! I know your not stupid. So why do you keep saying stupid things ?
SnoozeControl wrote: Gee, cuz maybe she's a ... SH*T STIRRER!?!:rolleyes:
Personally, I think these two comments are **** stirring.
Not what Koan said.
Why this constant need to pick? I thought you were both better than this?
flopstock wrote: And you're certainly entitled to your 'take'. I didn't read what she said as stupid, however. Nor did I read it as shitstirring. I read it as an attempt to clarify something.
Personally I would have preferred you respond intelligently to her post, argue the facts or merits of it... but like I said sweetie, you are entitled to your 'take'.
I wish I were able to just numbly agree with those of you I like alot, everytime you say something. I can't. And I think that is one of the reasons I like and respect about you, so much. You don't expect or want me too.
You know foop Ive tried very hard since Ive been here to (aside from my Nomad antics) be positive and loving and just all around decent ya know ? But sometimes ya just gotta say f*u*c*k it.
Wow, I go away for a few days & come back to this mess! What the hell is going on now! Val don't you dare not come back to the Garden, ya hear, or else!!! There is "no one" (especially nubies & or trolls, or you know who) in here that is worth you leaving for because they were out of line. You're better than that, so take a step back, & take some time for yourself to be refreshed. You're not a "quitter", now don't make a liar out of me, come back when you're ready! (So are you ready yet? )
AussiePam wrote: G'day Fisher!! Nice to meet you. Lemme get you a cold tinnie (beer in Oz!) - put some colour in those green Canadian cheeks. Felinessa - its a bit after 10pm here and Friday. Why am I in here and not out on the town???? Hey, that's a good question... the night is yet young!!!!! If I sneak out quietly, Chris won't see me and worry that I'll be up to no good. :sneaky:
Nice to meet you as well Pam. I'd love a cold beer, I had a few this weekend.We had our annual labor day camping weekend. Now I must recover.
A witch will get a better grip on the broom if she is without panties!
Clancy wrote: You have to be totally impartial, and be seen to be impartial, Chris, if it's a friend, foe, buddy, acquaintance, spouse , whatever. You have to remain impartial.
What about the idea that someone - I think it was Flops - had, to use anonymous moderators, limited in their power and length of service, rotating among a group of people? The board owner(s?) would set the criteria for being in the moderating pool. Nobody on the boards would know who has the hammer this week; impartiality would therefore be much easier to attain. The "and be seen to be impartial" caveat would not obtain, because the moderators would not be seen as such at all.
Perhaps another addition to that set of rules would be that if a moderator bragged of his or her status, the resulting consequence would be removal of that person from the pool of potential moderators.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
I swear by my life - and my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine. ~Ayn Rand
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.