dirkhh
Middle-aged Member
I know... so how can it be choking you?We don't wear underwear at the nude beach.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I know... so how can it be choking you?We don't wear underwear at the nude beach.
Well that's a minute of my life I'll never get back.
My eyes. They are bleeding.Well that's a minute of my life I'll never get back.
We move posts over to snippiness because they don't merit continued readership and discussion. We don't like to delete posts whenever possible, so this is where they are vanquished. At least some of the people in the discussion have been rude and/or engaged in personal attacks. And as you've noticed now, Snippiness is locked to prevent continued nastiness. So I'm not going to go out of my way to point out where the nastiness is. In any case, hit LAST and you'll find the latest.A friendly suggestion on how to not make it seem like transfers to snippiness etc. are post deletion through oblivion - please don't do it like Doug_G here just now did - posting a link to the first page of a 138 page (relative to settings) snippiness thread:
Well my first approach was to warn the member that he was flirting with a personal attack, and I explicitly stated that I would have been harsher had it been against anyone else. His response was to up the ante. Now I could have gone and found another moderator to do the job, but that's just wasting everyone's time, because it's pretty clear that the move was entirely warranted.because the moderator involved in the conversation could have a conflict of interest - it looks a bit bad if a moderator debates and then moves the messages:
I will not comment further on this case.
By the by, inserting a link to the particular post location in Snippiness would add about a minute to the time it takes me to do that. Given that I've already spent perhaps five minutes trying to find where exactly to slice the mold off the cheese, I'm not interested in spending the extra time to link to posts that really shouldn't have been posted. I will even go to the lengths of copying a post to Snippiness and then excising the snippy bits so that the rest can remain.Thank you Doug_G for taking the time to respond to my suggestion. In any case, the info is appreciated.
LOVE that phrase... will need to steal it.[...]Given that I've already spent perhaps five minutes trying to find where exactly to slice the mold off the cheese, [...]
Go after what people say, go after their arguments, their style, their misuse of words (oops, wrong thread). Don't go after the people.Posts that critique ideas and avoid profanities endure, but I have very little patience for posts that critique TMC members.
Posts that critique ideas and avoid profanities endure, but I have very little patience for posts that critique TMC members.
Go after what people say, go after their arguments, their style, their misuse of words (oops, wrong thread). Don't go after the people.
And this is exactly why I finally used the 'ignore' option. I got tired of the passive-aggressive digs at what my motivation was or why I said what I said or attributing intent that wasn't there. I asked it to stop and just focus on the topic. It didn't. So I used the option available to me.
There is another question entirely raised by this thread, which is whether peer pressure intimidates some posters. The answer: absolutely. I've seen "drill, baby, drill" posters in the Energy & Environment section who lasted only a few days under the withering rebuttal they encountered. I've seen investor bears have their arguments dismantled before quietly slinking away. I don't interfere at all in such threads until the argument gets personal. Posts that critique ideas and avoid profanities endure, but I have very little patience for posts that critique TMC members.
I'm open to hearing your ideas about what practical changes we could make to moderating practices that would encourage more open discussion. All of the options I can think of would require moderators to limit or otherwise censor unobjectionable speech.I think it needs to be noted, too intense peer pressure can also result in pushing away people and silencing opinions one wouldn't wish to go away for diversity's sake. Just something to think about.
I think it needs to be noted, too intense peer pressure can also result in pushing away people and silencing opinions one wouldn't wish to go away for diversity's sake.
I'm open to hearing your ideas about what practical changes we could make to moderating practices that would encourage more open discussion. All of the options I can think of would require moderators to limit or otherwise censor unobjectionable speech.
A minority voice that states factually inaccurate claims, that insists on stating as "fact" or "analysis" what is wild speculation, that keeps bringing up claims that have long been refuted or keeps bringing up the same claims without any new arguments actually SHOULD be contradicted - consistently.If enough senior people were to stand up for even more of a culture of inclusiveness (including when it means welcoming "dissent"), it could bring change with it. A fruitful opportunity would be pretty much any thread where a minority voice is getting a solid beating from the majority. Maybe in those instances if a few senior voices were to genuinely want to calm the atmosphere, to make sure the minority voice is better heard (that doesn't mean agreement must happen, but sometimes the voice is drowned out by misunderstandings) and that it doesn't become merely a free for all of ignorant one-liners against one or two.
But what my wish - and motivation for bringing up the topic - has been is that moderators and other senior membership that hold major say and sway over the forum would take note and maybe pass the idea forwards amongst them. If enough senior people were to stand up for even more of a culture of inclusiveness (including when it means welcoming "dissent"), it could bring change with it. A fruitful opportunity would be pretty much any thread where a minority voice is getting a solid beating from the majority. Maybe in those instances if a few senior voices were to genuinely want to calm the atmosphere, to make sure the minority voice is better heard (that doesn't mean agreement must happen, but sometimes the voice is drowned out by misunderstandings) and that it doesn't become merely a free for all of ignorant one-liners against one or two.
There is another question entirely raised by this thread, which is whether peer pressure intimidates some posters. The answer: absolutely.
I'm open to hearing your ideas about what practical changes we could make to moderating practices that would encourage more open discussion. All of the options I can think of would require moderators to limit or otherwise censor unobjectionable speech.
I don't think you get it. If someone comes here saying 'you drive around in coal burning cars that are more polluting than a Hummer' should we all join hands and sing or are we allowed to point out the errors in their logic? People have the right to point out factual errors and argue their point. As long as they don't belittle the person or call them names we don't step in. If that person is offended there isn't much we can do about that. Please stop trying to turn this isn't an issue when it isn't.Just to be clear, my response was to Robert.Boston who showed understanding with his comment:
I hope you don't mind if I choose not to waste any of our time trying to repeat the point to an uninterested part of the audience. It really has dawned on me I can not reach you all, guys - maybe it is a limitation of the medium, I think over those beers we'd get over it in no time. I really think it is for all our best.
But those who hear what I say, please feel free to think of ways to improve the diversity and inclusiveness of the site if/when you encounter a thread where someone with a different kind of opinion/view is getting the "communal treatment". Maybe a calming voice or two, a bit more understanding could help calm threads down, without any need for moderation.
As for all the comments suggesting some other forum might be a better place for people who feel like me (and there have been several already, in this thread too), I find that an unfortunate approach, but it is what it is. I'm hoping for a more inclusive outcome, if not for myself, then for others who will follow.
Peace out.
I hope you don't mind if I choose not to waste any of our time trying to repeat the point to an uninterested part of the audience.