ForumGarden

(Pinky quoted):Hey, hang on! Everyone has a right to their opinion.

Goliah, I know what the thread is about - I was just giving a response to something I felt strongly about.



Even if I don't happen to agree with Dinah, she still has a right to express what she feels and thinks, and shouldn't have to apologise for it.



Don't try and make other people feel small just because they happen to digress from what you want to stick to. That's what discussion forums are for aren't they? Discussions?



I didn't ask for an apology! That "sorry" is quite out of the context of what went before it. Nobody, least of all me, has asked Dinah to suppress an opinion.



Discussion forums have "New Thread" buttons to allow threads to stay focused on their title. This thread is on a specific document entitled "Final Freedoms", and Dinah perhaps thought it was discussing something broader. I did PM before I brought the suggestion of a new thread into a public message. I haven't used the words "hijacking" or "meta-discussion" yet either, but I'm not happy at disrupting this conversation yet again with an off-topic post. Responding here seems the only place possible though. By all means start a "Spot's Bullying" thread if that helps keep this space cleaner. I would claim that I'm not. Actually, I can't post this into "Final Freedoms", it's just going to stretch the distraction, I'm going to have to make the new thread myself. I'm not sure I like even doing that,

I think the term "thread" should be replaced with something more indicative of what actually happens in a discussion. It should be called a "tree" or something similar. A thread gives the impression of a straight line, with no deviation allowed. A tree has branches that take conversations off into other, unexpected directions, sometimes to the benefit, and sometimes to the detriment of the original thought.

Either way, things can be learned from the deviations of threads, and a couple of posts about something barely related is hardly going to throw a thread into an unrecoverable tail-spin. Perhaps the new member was not sure how to begin a new thread. Maybe someone could have explained in a NICE way what to do. I have no idea what was said in PM, but I did see what was said in public, and to be honest spot, the way you said "you're still posting here" gave me the impression that she had no right to posting in that thread at all, in your opinion.

As it stands, she will probably not be back to share anything further with us. What a shame.

BabyRider wrote: Maybe someone could have explained in a NICE way what to do. I have no idea what was said in PM, but I did see what was said in public, and to be honest spot, the way you said "you're still posting here" gave me the impression that she had no right to posting in that thread at all, in your opinion.

As it stands, she will probably not be back to share anything further with us. What a shame.Here's the PM, to which I have so far received no reply:spot wrote: Perhaps you could at least be persuaded to start your own thread rather than disrupt the Final Freedoms one? Nobody can really talk to you in there without being impolite to the existing posters who have been discussing their existing concerns for the last five days, none of which relates to your own particular form of Christian-apocalyptic millenial insanity.

By all means quote this in your first post of a new thread if you wish. It's not intended to be private, merely to be elsewhere.It's scarcely my place to say whether that gives "the impression that she had no right to posting in that thread at all, in your opinion."

spot wrote: Here's the PM, to which I have so far received no reply:
Well geeze, no wonder she split. That wasn't exactly a welcoming, helpful pointer. You probably intimidated her to no end with that.







spot wrote: It's scarcely my place to say whether that gives "the impression that she had no right to posting in that thread at all, in your opinion."
It gives exactly that impression, spot. Couldn't you have found a nicer way to go about things?? Calling what she had to say "insanity"??? Like I said, she probably won't be back now either way.

Pinky wrote: I respect your opinion just as much anyone else's on here, and ok, I disagree with Dinah on this particular point - that doesn't mean you have to be short towards them.Not only was I aware of the shortness of my tone, I had actually asked elsewhere on ForumGarden for general assistance in an attempt to deal with it, before the reason for this current thread arose. I could, I suppose, voluntarily not address anyone with fewer than a hundred posts.

BabyRider wrote: Well geeze, no wonder she split. That wasn't exactly a welcoming, helpful pointer. You probably intimidated her to no end with that. It was so! I wrote it twice to get a helpful tone into it at all.

BabyRider wrote: It gives exactly that impression, spot. Couldn't you have found a nicer way to go about things?? Calling what she had to say "insanity"??? Like I said, she probably won't be back now either way.I called it a "particular form of Christian-apocalyptic millenial insanity" which seems so precisely accurate that I might have sent it to Websters' for their next edition had it not been mis-spelled. I do hope the underlying idea wasn't inaccurate, or I've a long time in hell coming to me.

Pinky wrote: Ok, well I'm sorry if I brought up something that you're aware of and attempting to sort out - I honestly hadn't seen you post about this.

For anyone to know themselves in this way is good thing. Not mant people can look at themselves in this way.

BTW - if it was you I thought was being put down, I'd stand up for you too, but I cannot just stand by and keep my mouth shut. Too many people in this world do that.It isn't a raw nerve and my word "bullying" is a fair condensation of "make other people feel small", I thought. I may well call on your assistance later in this thread, I expect my "being put down" will arrive in a while.

spot wrote: It was so! I wrote it twice to get a helpful tone into it at all.
*picture of BR standing up and yelling loudly:



BULLSH!T!!!!!!!!!!!!*

BR, have you had that shower yet? It's time to go!

Pinky wrote: As for othersputting you down, don't be so sure! Why should they? A lot of people on here think highly of you, and like me, they'll only say something if they feel it's unwarrented.We'll watch and see, shall we. I can be as paranoid as the best of them.

Pinky wrote: BTW- hell is christian idea formed from the belief in the domain of the Norse godess Helle - the domain of the underworld, where people regenerate.Not, surely, if the underlying idea of that "particular form of Christian-apocalyptic millenial insanity" wasn't inaccurate.

Snooze, I'll see you behind the bike-sheds during break and we can discuss that then.

spot wrote: BR, have you had that shower yet? It's time to go!
Wassa matter spot? You don't like people pointing out when you're wrong? You started the thread, and titled it quite aptly, I might add. Your grasp of the english language is impressive, no one here will refute that. But when you use it to shoot down other people, and attempt to make them feel inferior, it's just nastiness. Come on down here with us mortals for a while, try it on, see how it fits.

SnoozeControl wrote: Apparently my attempt at hilarity didn't work. I don't understand why no one thinks that hyena line is funny.
The hyena line was good, Snooze!! Actually, when Iread it, I thought it said "Hinnie", like rear end, fanny, tush, butt....you get the drift. I was wondering why you'd want to marry a body part....:yh_rotfl

I thought your hyena line was funny, Snooze. I can never work out what people are on about in threads like this when I've missed the original post which caused the bother.

I've seen this sort of thing on other forums. I'm rather disappointed to see it happening here.

Tigerlily wrote: I've seen this sort of thing on other forums. I'm rather disappointed to see it happening here.What's "it", Tigerlily? If it's discussion of hijacking, I did bring it out into a thread of its own. If it's the problem of my tone, at least I'm trying to address it. What's disappointing about either?

The original post is hyperlinked at the start of this thread.

Tigerlily wrote: I thought your hyena line was funny, Snooze. I can never work out what people are on about in threads like this when I've missed the original post which caused the bother.



I've seen this sort of thing on other forums. I'm rather disappointed to see it happening here.
Tiger, this is actually pretty mild. It will blow over, just like any other spat does. Spot will see the error of his ways, or he won't, and it will have only caused a minor ripple in the Garden.

BabyRider wrote: Tiger, this is actually pretty mild. It will blow over, just like any other spat does. Spot will see the error of his ways, or he won't, and it will have only caused a minor ripple in the Garden.The reason I feel moderately remote from any sense of loss is that Dinah was so utterly unconcerned about the "Final Freedoms" thread itself - a discussion of a particular Internet document - and so clearly interested only in her own evangelizing mission which had battened on ForumGarden for the day. Your idea that she might have been tameable or somehow diverted from her Personal Jesus Mission is optimistic.

spot wrote: The reason I feel moderately remote from any sense of loss is that Dinah was so utterly unconcerned about the "Final Freedoms" thread itself - a discussion of a particular Internet document - and so clearly interested only in her own evangelizing mission which had battened on ForumGarden for the day. Your idea that she might have been tameable or somehow diverted from her Personal Jesus Mission is optimistic.
She had a total of 5 posts!!! She was new to this place, and maybe to forums in general!! Just because you didn't like where she put what she had to say does NOT give you the call to be an ass to her!! What, did we get moderators back and I missed the announcement?

I had no ideas of "diverting" her from anything, all I wanted was to see a new member enjoying themselves, and thanks to you and your freakishly huge vocabulary and total disregard for another person's feelings, we probably won't see her back!! You were a jerk, plain and simple.

BabyRider wrote: She had a total of 5 posts!!! She was new to this place, and maybe to forums in general!! Just because you didn't like where she put what she had to say does NOT give you the call to be an ass to her!!So my regarding her as a human leech spreading pain, heartbreak and misery around the globe may have been a misjudgement? I knew I needed advice. I still can't see that it was a misdiagnosis. You're telling me that leeches have their needs too. I can try hard to relate to that, I suppose. It might work.

Pinky wrote: Like I said, I SOOO agree with you on that point! As do many others, I reckon. But trust me, you're not doing yourself any favours by inferring that she should butt out.I gave no hint of any such inference - I hadn't made one either. I asked her to start a new thread on her fetish and allow people to discuss what was obviously of interest to a number of us without her heckling.

spot wrote: So my regarding her as a human leech spreading pain, heartbreak and misery around the globe may have been a misjudgement? I knew I needed advice. I still can't see that it was a misdiagnosis. You're telling me that leeches have their needs too. I can try hard to relate to that, I suppose. It might work.
You managed to figure all that out about her in 5 posts? So you're telling me that on top of being a walking, blabbering dictionary, you're psychic, too? You didn't give her a fair shot, Spot. You're being judgemental, rude, and unreasonable.

BabyRider wrote: You managed to figure all that out about her in 5 posts? So you're telling me that on top of being a walking, blabbering dictionary, you're psychic, too? You didn't give her a fair shot, Spot. You're being judgemental, rude, and unreasonable.
Here's her first post in full, BR. I'm completely right in everything I've said about her.

Dinah rae wrote: My first post. I don't know if this is the place for this. I may be off topic. Final Freedoms caught my interest because we are certainly experiencing them. It is quite obvious to those of us who have been given the truth of "who they are in the Whitehouse and the Congress of the United States and the rest of the governments of the world" what the DaVinci Code is. some more of the False Prophet.

Some one mentioned "aliens" . The one thing Washington doesn't. From the beginning, in the garden and the apple, the conspiracy has been present on this earth from those who have fallen, "not to this earth" but from their habitat in heaven. Mystery Babylon is no mystery when the name of GOD can be removed from government, by the government itself.

The mystery to Babylon is no mystery when a President can lie and a Christian America can re-elect him. Like I say this may not be the proper place for my thread, but quite obvious to me and those like me...the DaVinci Code is the final thrust for the "Minions of those who have fallen from their habitat" to impose upon mankind the Global Government needed to "wage war" against the GOD of Creation".

Like John of Patamos says in his revelations and the " and the dragon gave him his power and his seat and great authority. Sept 11th 2001. The day Washington made official " we the people " do indeed NO LONGER have anything to say about our freedoms. Dinah rae"Final Freedoms caught my interest because we are certainly experiencing them"? That has nothing at all to do with the Internet document, she's seen the title, not read a single message in the thread itself and started straight in on evangelizing her script. She's a write-only troll, BR. She arrived with an agenda, she did no reading, she made no effort at contact, she blitzed her junk. And all I did in response was to ask her to step into a more appropriate thread to do it in. Just read that drekk, BR, that first post you're standing up for. You really think that's someone interested in talking with us rather than talking at us?

Pinky wrote: Sorry, But you did infer that she should butt out. Look back to your original post.

It's all there in black and white.Maybe I misunderstand "butt out"? I thought you meant "leave ForumGarden never to return". If "butt out" means "please discuss relevant issues in this thread, it's an interesting one that we don't want to lose the focus in" then yes, guilty. That's not the same as saying leave the board.

Pinky wrote: But surely, she hasn't posted anything else elsewhere, so why would she be trolling? Lets face it, most people don't bother to read the bits that they don't want to face...ok, I personally won't have any truck with that kind of person, but please, don't lower yourself to that kind of standard...to make yourself look as small minded is degrading.I think you misunderstand the word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll is worth reading in full.

I am not "standing up for" her post, her beliefs, or even her. I am standing up for a person, ANY person, who clearly ("My first post. I don't know if this is the place for this. I may be off topic.") did not know for sure what she was doing, to be treated with the slightest bit of human kindness. Which you failed to do and in essence, ran off a person who may have had something to contribute, not the least of which could have been someone else for YOU to mangle!!

Boy I miss all the fun..!!

Clearly did not know for sure what she was doing? "I don't know if this is the place for this. I may be off topic" shouts to the rooftops that she knew exactly what she was doing and that it was a breach of etiquette.

I do hope she wanders by and responds in here. I promise not to say a word if she does, and she can talk to the rest of you unmolested.

SnoozeControl wrote: ...the troll may post ridiculous comments seemingly out of the blue. "I want to marry a hyena." I do hope you knew that I knew that was in there before I posted the link!

Pinky wrote: And, just to add to that, aren't we perfectly capabale of shooting down trolls?

She's obviously a Xtian fundy who feels the need to get her point across - Ok, I don't like it, or agree with it, but I can shoot it down in flames anytime, as can you.

Please don't diminish the respect people have for you by attacking others - it just makes you look like you can't back yourself up, which we all know is not the case.I wanted the thread kept clean, it's that simple. Nothing about "stop spouting your drivel", just "can we have this thread for the topic in the title". I have no desire to shoot down anyone, troll or angel.

Have you any alternative strategy that might keep a thread clean enough to continue to use for the purpose originally intended, if that purpose is still actively being followed? Or is it a free-for-all with no structure and with no reasonable way of asking for a bit of consideration?

These are serious questions. I'd not have started this thread without an interest in the outcome.

Maybe when the subject becomes off topic, you can ask for it to be put into the Debate Format. If that is not amendable, then maybe other avenues of keeping a thread on topic can be used. If they remain off topic or are in a baiting or trolling manner, then totally ignore those posts, skip them for consideration of your response, and continue your discussion. Yes, I know it is disruptive, but maybe they will learn that particular thread is for serious discussion.