Sure, my mom used this expression whenever I would express problems getting along with a number of people. I would come home and complain that it was all those other people who were being mean, and she would try to teach me ways to change my own behavior in situations where I was having the same problems with multiple, unrelated people. The theme was that it's almost never everyone else who's wrong.

Of course, she didn't literally mean everyone, and I think that trying to attack that wording, which there's no way you could possibly think it referred to every single person on flyertalk, is totally non-productive.

No, why should I? I'm not here to badger anyone, and I'm not here to attack anyone. It's just very odd that Randy would post that you can come back and conduct yourself in exactly the same manner that has upset so many people in the past, and somehow that's entirely the fault of the other people??

Don't get me wrong, people who launch outright attacks on you are wrong and should be punished. Muggers should still go to jail, but people who keep getting mugged have a responsibility to stop going down dark alleys late at night holding a fistful of cash.

So, I wanted to clarify the "peace process" or just protest it if it truly means that you have no responsibility to reduce what your experience absolutely tells you is provactive behavior, even if your logic tells you it isn't.

I would like to point out that there was a brief time where I and a couple of others started a mock war with a group of FlyerTalkers (the COE) that was intended to be a humorous mirroring of the actions in Iraq at the time.

It got out of hand, and when people started to complain that we were detracting from the board, we immediately curtailed our actions and tried to stop what we realized was irritating other members. It is this kind of response that I'm talking about.

This is why I say that it's not that doc was supposed to know intrinsically or in advance that his behavior was disruptive, but realize that the effect of it was disruptive when a number of people began to complain.

Of course, on the other hand, there are many of us who appreciate doc posting his news stories.

But that is not what this is about. This is about some people wanting to post negatively in a thread that was started to welcome someone back who had taken a vacation from the forums. This type of sentiment has no business being posted anymore then adding I wish you were never born to a thread started to wish someone Happy Birthday.

------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin


[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-13-2003).]

and lots of people thought the COE war was funny, does that make it right?

tazi,

That would be all well and good if those of us who do not share the same view were not constantly told "Everyone appreciates _____", then we are pointed to the "welcome back" or "I appreciate" threads as proof that "nobody" disagrees.

Bottom line is that MANY people disagree. The problem is that we are not given an avenue to even politely disagree. IMO, that is wrong. Attacks are wrong, politely disagreeing in a "Welcome Back" or I appreciate" thread is not.

As for our misunderstanding in this thread, I am convinced that we are thinking of different people, please e-mail me so that I can elaborate.

YHM

------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-13-2003).]

Guess that's where we part company, I don't find it disruptive at all - in much the same way as I didn't find the "COE" or the "Either/or" posts disruptive either.

At the end of the day, I don't see the what the fuss is from some of the "regulars" about someone posting topics in OMNI, other than it looking like an attempt to censor someone or chase them away for whatever reason - think I'm done beating this particular horse and will sashay on to another area

Wow. Hard to say, but I don't know if I've ever read anything on FT that I disagree with more.

CameraGuy, I usually think you make a lot of sense, but I think you're missing the forest for the trees here. Why on earth would someone participate in a "Welcome Back" thread just to crap on the party?

You know full well that any subsequent argument will have its own absurdly long thread (like this one) in which members can register their feelings. Suggesting that restrictions to posting in the "Welcome Back" thread somehow make your "battle" vs. another member unwinnable is completely misleading.

Finally, already "girding" for this battle in a thread "Welcoming Back" a member seems unnecessarily agressive, and a sign that you're just lookin' for a fight.

Just MHO.

I think you're misunderstanding. I'm saying that the ensuing furor is disruptive.

I understand that everyone can differ on whether or not the original posts are disruptive, but everyone agrees that the fighting afterwards is very disruptive.

I just think that preventing those fights is both sides' reponsibility, and that's a peace process that I'd happily join.

Jeremy,

If an "I wish _____ would stay away" or an "I wish _____ would leave" thread was acceptable (AND I AM NOT SAYING IT SHOULD BE), then these "I Love ____" or "I Miss___" or "Welcome Back ____" threads would be fine.

My problem is the double standard. IMO, if someone were to start an "I appreciate CameraGuy" thread, then people who do not share that sentiment should be free to post there disagreement.

By the same token, if an "I appreciate CameraGuy" thread is acceptable, then IMO an "I despise CameraGuy" thread should be acceptable too.

The way I see it is that everyone has an opinion and they are welcome to it. I don't live and die over what a member of an Internet BB thinks of me, so I could not care less if someone were to critisize me here.

That's just my opinion.

Just a wee bit jealous, aren't you?

Well, if you want some attention, I am sure plenty of people would be willing to join in posting to a "Goodbye CameraGuy" thread.

And if you continue to taunt Randy with your posts, I'm quite sure we'll be opening that thread up quite soon.


------------------
-Otto

[This message has been edited by OttoGraham (edited 06-13-2003).]

Well, this certainly doesn't help matters! For the record, CG and I have managed to have a discussion here, and in private, without once being desrespectful to each other even though we do disagree on the issue at hand. We remain friends.




------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

I just had a thought. Would everyone still have such strong feelings if you were face to face with the person you are disagreeing with? I think the anonymous nature of the WWW is making folks bolder than they normally might be. The funniest thing IMO is how serious some people take things that happen here on FT. Granted, I haven't been here all that long, but during that short time, I have been able to meet numerous other FTers face to face and have enjoyed many dinners and get togethers. It is good that people have passion. Life would be boring without it. I have posted many questions and comments on various issues myself. I also have posted my share of silly threads also. I thought this board was for information and some fun. At least that is why I got interested. All I can say is that Randy must be sitting in his chair laughing at all of these "negative" posts because I sure am.

And some of us left the Omni forum completely until it stopped. To an outsider it came across as stupid and annoying. The hijacking of threads caused me to stop posting.

It was very nice, and appreciated, when you guys stopped and life returned to normal, well as normal as Omni is.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum95/HTML/003452.html

Now I might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer around here, but the words

"So, welcome back comments only, just like the topic title says"

Do not seem to have any ambiguous meaning WHATEVER to me????

So what does CameraGuy post immediately afterwards in response to Randy?
In the past I have benefited from Randy's generosity of spirit in EXACTLY the same as you have CameraGuy. I am therefore astounded you would directly challenge next post Randy's perfect right to ask Flyertalkers to STAY on topic, and his right to ask for "welcome back comments only" in a thread that you already tried to derail very early on by insisting Moderators close it down.

Seemed a pretty reasonable and VERY clear request to me from Randy?

Might I suggest that Randy's email is [email protected] if you or anyone else feel like badgering and lecturing him privately about what you feel he should or should not allow be posted on his own boards.

In the meantime, his message was VERY clear to me at least.

A small handful of (always the same) Flyertalkers have managed to have the several past "Welcome back ***" type threads locked down. I gained the distinct impression Randy was rather keen NOT to see that occur again and gave fair warning it had better NOT happen. Or else.

This thread is not too far from that mark, and this will be my only post to it.




------------------
~ Glen ~

Come visit HERE the most ** FRIENDLY FORUM ** on FlyerTalk. No flame wars, no personal abuse, no substance abuse. Not much of anything really!