Negativity on the eplaya

TawnyGnosis · Post by **TawnyGnosis** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:02 pm

"So I guess some would say I was a troll, maybe they felt I enjoyed arguing (I do enjoy sharpening my wits against others) and that I was just trolling to facilitate that (I wasn't, I was VERY passionate about the subject) and it's engendered a lot of negative feelings. But I also feel I imparted a lot of crucial information that wasn't getting covered in the mass propaganda media. Would I do it again? Absolutely. Would I do it better, more dispassionately, and less offensively? I certainly hope so. I'd sure as hell try."

Amen to that...I intend to sharpen my communication skills in a way that makes me less prone to snap and flame someone when they disagree with me. In real life especially. I'm a passionate person, and it can sometimes get in the way of ever resolving conflict.

But I still think that expressing annoyance is a healthy thing to do, if it's about something reasonable( ie. Digiman or Chunk-bot)

PJ · Post by PJ » Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:25 pm

aforceforgood wrote:..I also got pretty passionate due to a human failing where you can't understand how this other apparently intelligent person can hold a different view than you since you're an intelligent person also...

Argue with the argument, not with the person. You'll get fewer ulcers that way. You'll also win more arguments.

It's very possible to be intelligent yet be extremely wrong. It was "the best and the brightest" of their generation that eagerly took the US deep into Vietnam. (All of them Democrats, incidentally, not that anybody who learns their history from Oliver Stone movies would know that.)

Also note that very few people hold the same opinions at age fifty that they do at age twenty. If you pay attention you're going to change your mind about a great many things as you gain experience.

aforceforgood · Post by **aforceforgood** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:55 pm

PJ wrote:
aforceforgood wrote:..I also got pretty passionate due to a human failing where you can't understand how this other apparently intelligent person can hold a different view than you since you're an intelligent person also...
Argue with the argument, not with the person.

Right. Intellectually, I know this, but sometimes it's hard to bear that in mind in the heat of the moment.

PJ wrote:You'll get fewer ulcers that way. You'll also win more arguments.

Not sure it's possible to "win" an argument, though I feel you can make an impact in a discussion. Semantics.

PJ wrote:It's very possible to be intelligent yet be extremely wrong.

How well I know this- I've been wrong plenty. And without others sharing their views or data I didn't have, I might never have realized it. After all, it was my best attempt at being right that led me to whatever the position in question was.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:08 pm

One of the classes I took recently was an Ethics class. It was very interesting as the teacher was very enthusiastic and intellegent. He was also a native born Kuwaiti, yet would refuse to give any indication of his take on the Iraqi state of affairs until the end of class.

One of the interesting bits was a test that indicated were you stood in terms of how you apply your moral standards. Do you believe that an individual should act in a immoral manner if a greater number benefits? Some believe the individual should always act moral, even if it's to the detriment of society.

The scales basically determined three things:
Do you believe more in the individual or the "greater good"?
Do you believe more in individual action or the "greater good"?
Do you believe more in yourself or society?

An example would be capital punishment. If you believe that it's OK, you may be one of those that believe that the death of one would help society- even with the chances of them being possibley innocent (greater good). If you believe it's wrong because an innocent person could be killed, then you may believe in the individual's rights more.

The thing is, if you are wired in one manner- and the item of debate has one of the above as a core issue- you won't EVER see eye to eye on an issue.

Just another thing in the pot to stir around.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:09 pm

Lydia Love wrote: Oh... and I think the affirmations thread is hilarious. But if you are looking for a place to put ACTUAL affirmations please give it a try.

Well after reading all that the "Affirmations" thread had to offer and giving it a shot myself, Lydia Love was right. It is a blast.

I will listen to her more often.....I think it's time to start a Lydia Love thread.
But i made a promise not to post another thread. Can someone do it for me?

Please?

Markov Chaney · Post by **Markov Chaney** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:23 pm

DE FACTO wrote: I think it's time to start a Lydia Love thread.
But i made a promise not to post another thread. Can someone do it for me?

Please?

Perhaps an appropriate place for worship would be the Temple of Love thread?

Lydia Love · Post by **Lydia Love** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:35 pm

start a Lydia Love thread

Please no - would be kind of embarassing considering all my recent invective about vanity threads.

appropriate place for worship would be the Temple of Love thread?

And I promised AFFG I wouldn't suck the air out of that thread... so... um - that would have it's own embarassment involved.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:38 pm

Lydia Love wrote:
start a Lydia Love thread
Please no - would be kind of embarassing considering all my recent invective about vanity threads.

appropriate place for worship would be the Temple of Love thread?
And I promised AFFG I wouldn't suck the air out of that thread... so... um - that would have it's own embarassment involved.

I say we need to take a vote on it.

Lydia Love · Post by **Lydia Love** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:51 pm

And! And! I'm made pretty uncomfortable by the idea of adoration anyway. Friendship rawks, conversation rawks, trading little witticims rawks - adoration... gawd. You put someone up on a pedestal... I'm too clumsy, I'd fall.

I like it when someone says something nice to or about me (I'm an actor - a pretty affirmation hungry group - so really I freakin ADORE it) but I just wanna *talk* to people, you know? Create a thread about me and I'll just embarass myself by hanging out there fishing for more. Yuck.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 5:55 pm

Well i think you deserve it. Or at least something to praise your presence.

And plus your too far away for us to smother you and shower you with love you so overwhelmingly deserve.

Markov Chaney · Post by **Markov Chaney** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:08 pm

Truthfully, I wouldn't dream of hijacking the Temple of Love thread. It would be a shame to rededicate it from its noble purpose. While I feel that Lydia's posts are some of the most eloquent and insightful on the eplaya, dedicating threads to individuals serves no purpose save inflating the subject's ego.

I would like to suck on Lydia's toes though!

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:12 pm

Markov Chaney wrote: inflating the subject's ego.

I would like to suck on Lydia's toes though!

Dood.

you always beat me to it.

and I'm a foot guy.

PJ · Post by PJ » Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:36 pm

Markov Chaney wrote:...I would like to suck on Lydia's toes...

Not advisable. You don't know where they've been.

Booker · Post by **Booker** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:30 pm

I do think I'd want to know whose ass she'd kicked most recently first.

>>the practice until now has been self-moderation, from a sense of common ownership, and plonking seems like a too-easy and potentially troublesome method to opt-out from all that<<

OK, what about scroll-plonking? If I know the person has posted nothing I want to read over a long period of time, am I still somehow obligated as a good citizen of the board to read the next post from that same source? If not, how is that diff. from preselecting its omission via the plonk? The content would still be available to those who want to read it. To me, it's approximately equivalent to choosing not to visit a particular camp on the playa.

As for the public record, it would say only that I, for whatever reason, had chosen to skip certain content. Probably it would say at least as much about me as about the plonkee, although I'd have some control of the data about me and s/he wouldn't. And again, I think it would be worth admins' attention if a significant proportion of readers had taken the trouble to block someone's posts from their screens. If we never collect data that might conceivably be misinterpretted by sloppy analysis out of context, then we better quit collecting any data at all.

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 8:31 pm

Huh... managed to log on via Lynx... no ghoulish smileys cluttering up the interface, but had to page past the smarmy alt-text to get to the editing box... oh, well.

Kinetic II · Post by **Kinetic II** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 8:43 pm

Someone still uses Lynx? It still exists? Oh my gawd, I had no idea!

SED · Post by **SED** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 10:49 pm

Hey everybody,

Amazing how you can feel so certain you've got something figured out and then you find you're wrong.

I'd like to initiate a movement to ignore Time Con Fig U R a fuckwit.

Chagrined and chastened,

SED

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 10:53 pm

nuff SED!

I concurr

aforceforgood · Post by **aforceforgood** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:03 pm

Lydia Love wrote:I promised AFFG I wouldn't suck the air out of that thread... so... um - that would have it's own embarassment involved.

Markov Chaney wrote:Truthfully, I wouldn't dream of hijacking the Temple of Love thread.

It's not possible to "hijack" it, because I don't consider it as belonging to me, any more than a conversation started by me "belongs" to me, but it does have its own atmosphere... so I do appreciate the taste involved in recognizing that may not be the place for more vanity thread style posts, but I'd say celebrating your love of your friend Lydia wouldn't be out of place... please just remember it's a temple so I don't hear that needle-screeching-across-a-record sound in my head, kay? It'd be just like if 2 people were having a deep meaningful discussion and a 3rd person came up and started telling knock knock and fart jokes... time and place is all I'm sayin'...

Thanks!

-sits back and waits for the arguments over what was an appropriate post or not-

aforceforgood · Post by **aforceforgood** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:12 pm

There is no negativity on the eplaya. And anyone who says there is is just being negative.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:14 pm

aforceforgood wrote:There is no negativity on the eplaya. And anyone who says there is is just being negative.

hey that was a double negative

aforceforgood · Post by **aforceforgood** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:32 pm

DE FACTO wrote:
aforceforgood wrote:There is no negativity on the eplaya. And anyone who says there is is just being negative.
hey that was a double negative

Negative ions are good for you.

Lydia Love · Post by **Lydia Love** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:33 pm

3rd person came up and started telling knock knock and fart jokes... time and place is all I'm sayin'...

If there ever were a temple in my name... it would be all knock knock and fart jokes all the time...

I think it's reasonable, though, to start a thread and ask that a certain tone be maintained as long as you realize not everyone is going to have the same definition of what that tone means.

PJ - my toes have been on my *feet*. Where else?

Booker - I wear special boots for that.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:41 pm

Lydia Love wrote:
PJ - my toes have been on my *feet*. Where else?

Booker - I wear special boots for that.

any whips and chains?

aforceforgood · Post by **aforceforgood** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:43 pm

Lydia Love wrote:I think it's reasonable, though, to start a thread and ask that a certain tone be maintained as long as you realize not everyone is going to have the same definition of what that tone means.

Of course. Conversation is a dynamic. And far be it from me to try and censor someone or >snicker< try and control thread drift- I wouldn't have it any other way. I wanted to tread the line between making it clear to everyone that that thread belongs to the people that post there too, while preserving it's atmosphere.

Plenty of room on the internet for knock knock jokes elsewhere.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:48 pm

how about somebody start the thread and Lydia set the tone like she has on this thread. she can send how the topic starts out to whom ever starts the thread.

i'd be looking foward to seeing what transpires.

Lydia Love · Post by **Lydia Love** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:51 pm

Give it up honey. Really.

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:54 pm

ok i give up. she won't let me shower her with tons of love or watch her lovely toes get sucked...what's a poor boy to do.

III · Post by **III** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:23 am

>what's a poor boy to do.

learn to shut up?

DE FACTO · Post by **DE FACTO** » Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:44 am

III wrote:>what's a poor boy to do.

learn to shut up?

Never anything nice to say huh?

Negativity on the eplaya

Re: one man's fuckwit is another man's freedom fighter

Re: one man's fuckwit is another man's freedom fighter

fuckwits, revisited

I'm surprised it took until page 6 for this post to occur...

Re: I'm surprised it took until page 6 for this post to occu

Re: I'm surprised it took until page 6 for this post to occu