Maybe it's you who should try some objectivity in your behaviour. The fact that I appreciated you once does not mean that I will always agree with you (especially about your last replies). As a matter of fact you don't seem slightly bothered by my opinions as I am not up to your standards to discuss. Well, then it's me who has to say: "whatever you say, Scotspine, whatever you say"
-
-
ScotsPine, please explain
ScotsPine, I agree that a line should be drawn on certain issues. However, the posts in question are harmless and hardly the cause for concern. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence can see that they are simply empty posturing; childish but pretty innocent. Having a serious discussion about raping girls or equally twisted perversions is worrying; but do posts along the lines of, ‘corr, what lovely knockers’ really warrant removal in order to save the integrity of this board? As a moderator, you need to consider the intention behind the message.i know that ws, but there is a line to be drawn, and you lot are frequently stepping over it of late.
ScotsPine, I have said on several occasions that the members of this community are intelligent, well educated and generally possessed of good sense. Surely such a group of adults are able to engage in a little dumb but harmless discussion about large breasts? I notice that the insulting and bully-boy behaviour that frequently takes place on this forum is tolerated.
It’s all about context. I freely admit that I post more than my fair share of inane drivel on this board, but there is a reason for that. Being serious on this board doesn’t pay; sooner or later threads degenerate into insults, mickey taking and general silliness. I also post my share of serious messages; when a serious question is asked I respond in kind. After a while one tends to adopt the philosophy, ‘if you can’t beat them you might as well join them’. So why single out specific posters who generally do absolutely no harm?Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
"the posts in question are harmless and hardly the cause for concern" - the bestial abuse of dogs goes beyond that in my world.
"do posts along the lines of, ‘corr, what lovely knockers’ really warrant removal in order to save the integrity of this board" - they do in the sense that at some point, the slide to unmitigated pornography needs to be checked. having seen what some of you people feel comfortable with, i have no qualms about having a reasonably low threshhold. if you really feel the need to constantly refer to male and female genitalia, there is that other board i mentioned.
"As a moderator, you need to consider the intention behind the message" - no. i am not privvy to that information. i go on what i see before me.
"I have said on several occasions that the members of this community are intelligent, well educated and generally possessed of good sense. Surely such a group of adults are able to engage in a little dumb but harmless discussion about large breasts" - we all take that as read don't we? but is it really the case? i for one don't actually know that. indeed there are several posters who it might be said with certainty fall well outside that camp [sic].
"if you can’t beat them you might as well join them" - it's not so long in european history since that was a commonly held excuse. indefensible in my view, in any context.
"why single out specific posters who generally do absolutely no harm" - example?Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
WageSlave,
If I remember correctly you we're on about how lovely that BB irish bint is and now you mention large knockers. ORLA (sp?)
has fake t1ts and they are not that large. I think that's the reason why the post was deleted. Had you been talking about Saskia and large knockers in the same sentence then you would have made a lot more sense.
It's a shame that she's up for eviction, yet has not given us a single glimpse of them. That would sure have boosted her ratings! :bComment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
Pinto said Knockers. burn him Scots, burn him.
We'll have no knockers here.Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
“the bestial abuse of dogs goes beyond that in my world.”
Yes, I would agree with you 100%, however, the context of that statement should be considered. It was a joke, and I don’t think anyone could have mistaken it for anything else. It was a crude joke and not in the best taste, but it was pure fantasy and hardly offensive. Should all jokes about sex with sheep be banned as well? What about Woody Allen; one of his films contained a sketch about sex with a sheep –should that be deleted? It’s about context.
"they do in the sense that at some point, the slide to unmitigated pornography needs to be checked. having seen what some of you people feel comfortable with, i have no qualms about having a reasonably low threshhold.”
Again, I agree, but I don’t think we have reached that point. Are we swapping pictures of girlfriends and wives? No, what we have is a pub discussion, or something akin to watching girls walk past. It’s not clever and it’s not serious, but it’s harmless.
”i am not privvy to that information. i go on what i see before me.”So do I, and I can’t see any seriously disturbed people on this board likely to go out and attack a woman, rape a dog or download child porn. What I see is a group of geeks who, in real life are probably really nice, sensible and serious people, but who on this board take the opportunity to act like randy, unchecked teenagers. I honestly believe there are very few people on this board who would push the limit given the chance. I think there is a level of decency that the posters on this board wouldn’t exceed.
”we all take that as read don't we? but is it really the case? i for one don't actually know that. indeed there are several posters who it might be said with certainty fall well outside that camp [sic].”I don’t know that for sure either. But I see no real reason for believing the worst about the members of this board.
”it's not so long in european history since that was a commonly held excuse. indefensible in my view, in any context.”Oh come on ScotsPine, are you serious? You’re an intelligent chap, surely you aren’t comparing a group of geeks posting silly messages on a board about big breasts with Nazi atrocities? Going along with the flow of inane messages is one thing, tacitly agreeing to the genocide of millions is entirely different. There is no comparison and I don’t believe for a minute that you seriously believe that either.
"why single out specific posters who generally do absolutely no harm" - example?
Yes, you deleted one of my posts in response to Xoggoth. It was harmless.Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
There's no point arguing with moderators.
Can we talk about tits in the Light Relief section?Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
"It was a joke" - i truly found it distasteful. and of course, on the back of it comes a plethora of posts just that little bit further down the track. etc etc
"What about Woody Allen; one of his films contained a sketch ..." - you can find a film on this planet which will promote just about any pov you care to maintain. that doesn't however justify it. most directors wouldn't touch the subject with a barge pole, comedy[!] or not.
"I don’t think we have reached that point" - i did.
"very few people on this board who would push the limit given the chance" - it only takes one, and the trouble is, such posts give them the chance.
"I think there is a level of decency that the posters on this board wouldn’t exceed" - i'm willing to bet that among our many lurkers and intermitttent posters are not a few who would raise your eyebrows.
"are you serious" - 'fraid so. i said 'in any context'. i was not drawing parallels between the contexts but rather pointing out it's uselessness as a defence.
"Yes, you deleted one of my posts in response to Xoggoth. It was harmless" - it was a post in many and rather than delete the entire thread, i tried to be selective. to be honest, i was surprised at the people who did contribute to that thread, although maybe not all.
ws, if you want to see a relatively unmoderated board, go [if you haven't already] to ccnet. if you can suggest any reasons why this, if it were to become umnmoderated, would not descend to equal depths, post them up to the owners and they might take you up on it...Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
"Can we talk about tits in the Light Relief section?" - if you feel you must. are you lot not married or have girlfriends?.Comment
-
Re: ScotsPine, please explain
"ws, if you want to see a relatively unmoderated board, go [if you haven't already] to ccnet. if you can suggest any reasons why this, if it were to become umnmoderated, would not descend to equal depths, post them up to the owners and they might take you up on it... "
Yet the level of insulting and bullying isn't that different. Especially when even moderators advocate the right to label people as "knuckleheads".Comment
Comment