Skip to comments.
In-House Wars: For at least one, the goal was to drive people away.
Admin Moderator
| 8-2-02
| Admin Moderator
Posted on 08/03/2002 10:16:57 AM PDT by justshe
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 401-411 next last
To: justshe; Mo1; AmishDude; dirtboy
I personally don't mind Bushie......UNTIL it is linked with "flying monkeys" ( which he already apologized for)
In the interest of accuracy, my flying monkey comment was being offered as a pot and kettle counterpoint to an initial claim about "Bushbashers" having the highest percentage of disruptors.
The point, by implication, being that there are flying monkeys and disruptors on all sides, and none should feel complacent.
To: rintense; Sabertooth; RedBloodedAmerican; justshe
Many attacks on both sides, are excused because of "emotions" evoked about the issue. Let's take the immigration issue, Sabertooth. It is an emotional issue for many, but it does not excuse the attacks reguarly made on the President and other posters who enter the discussion. And because the issue is so critical to the future of this country,
all of us should try to work together for solutions, rather than attack each other, (or the President.)
The same can be said of the abortion issue.....equally emotional..... where any modifying statement about method can be attacked as being 'pro-death,' even if it is not remotely so. (I personally have received the most ugly personal attacks on threads discussing homeschooling vs. public school education, which is not specifically related to the President in most cases.)
The answer is for us to be aware that inflammatory posts may well be insincere attempts to divide us, but it is also important for regular freepers to keep their discussions issue-oriented, and not personally attack those who disagree. (I have more than once been told "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen" having been called a communist or a nazi, or a child abuser)
If we are all aware, however, that the problem is occurring on both sides of the fence, potentially at the instigation of an outside disruptor, and can modify our emotions, both on offense on defense, the problem might just be solved.
Sabertooth, you can call me a Bush loyalist, or a Bushbot (not Bushie, please....that's what the First Couple call each other) as long as you know that I am not blindly so, or that being one does not mean that one is incapable of thinking independently.
82
posted on
08/03/2002 1:33:44 PM PDT
by
ohioWfan
To: Amelia
Several seemed to have a thing for mocking Registered. [Not your words, but those of the AM who banned the poster being discussed.]
Registered has mocked me (and others) mercilessly - creating graphics to insult me, among other things. It's extremely difficult for me to see him as a victim (and clearly, he is the one who complained to the A/M). I am more than a little surprised that someone having "a thing for mocking Registered" would get someone accused of being an anarchist.
To: Amelia
I don't know who the poster in question is, Amelia. Perhaps you do.
But if you read the moderator's comments: "...we discovered someone who had at least 8 different accounts. One bashed Horowitz, Swaggert, and Art Bell. Another bashed Keyes. Another posted as a rabid Keyester. Another posted as a Klayman basher. Several seemed to have a thing for mocking Registered."
It sounds like this person what posting simply to disrupt...No? Sounds like the moderators monitored these various accts to discover the dichotomy of the posts?
84
posted on
08/03/2002 1:40:53 PM PDT
by
justshe
To: ohioWfan
If we are all aware, however, that the problem is occurring on both sides of the fence, potentially at the instigation of an outside disruptor, and can modify our emotions, both on offense on defense, the problem might just be solved.AND, speak up, when we see vicious attacks being made that do NOT further the discussion. If enough do this.....we WILL be monitoring ourselves, imo. And if it continues, ignoring the instigator of the uncivility (is that a word?) should help too, don't you think?
85
posted on
08/03/2002 1:46:40 PM PDT
by
justshe
To: Sabertooth
I have done this, and RBA should know because I have specifically asked him to play nice. It has also happened on the daily dose...
86
posted on
08/03/2002 1:59:26 PM PDT
by
rintense
To: Sabertooth; RedBloodedAmerican
Yes, Saber HAS stepped in on behalf of a Bushie on occasion. Neither of you is better than the other. So stop it. Please.
87
posted on
08/03/2002 2:00:32 PM PDT
by
rintense
To: Sabertooth
Apology accepted.
And behave, damn it! :-p
88
posted on
08/03/2002 2:02:03 PM PDT
by
rintense
To: justshe
Good job - don't be a stranger and bttt.
89
posted on
08/03/2002 2:08:01 PM PDT
by
lodwick
To: rintense
And behave, damn it! :-p
Your lips say no but your tongue says yes.
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Was just reading the thread about the DU posts at FR and saw your posts. Amazing how these two threads dove-tail.
Looks like some THERE should read HERE...LOL.
91
posted on
08/03/2002 2:15:20 PM PDT
by
justshe
To: justshe
There is no freedom without responsibility. In the context of this thread, our freedom to participate on Free Republic requires we behave responsibly in replying to our fellow Freepers. I normally avoid the threads which I think will degenerate into flames, but but perhaps that is a cop-out. We all have the capacity to behave as "assistant moderators" by avoiding ad-hominem attacks and doing our best to pull back from the brink those that do attack in such manner. The incorrigible's will of course have to be dealt with by the official Admin Moderators.
To: Sabertooth
Ha. In yer dreams, baby!
93
posted on
08/03/2002 2:18:08 PM PDT
by
rintense
To: inquest
"That part about being understanding can be made a lot easier if the mods would be more forthcoming as to why a particular corrective action was taken against a poster, rather than just deleting his comments and banning him out of the blue. That really is much more of a problem, IMHO, than flamers. Flamers for me have been mostly little more than a minor annoyance, but overactive moderators, or perceived overactive moderators, can really cast a pall over a thread at times" As the software improves, you will see more and more reasons why an action was done. For example, the new reasons why a thread was pulled is great. But, when a disruptor is nuked, everything they posted is gone. Where we need everyone's help is if a thread is deleted, and there isn't a reason for the deletion, just hit abuse, copy the link and ask. We don't read every post, or every thread, it's impossible. If the thread wasn't a disruption thread, we can restore it. The key is, most of the time, we don't know everything that was lost unless you let us know.
To: FairWitness
"The incorrigible's will of course have to be dealt with by the official Admin Moderators."
Yep!
95
posted on
08/03/2002 2:20:28 PM PDT
by
justshe
To: rintense
There too? I'll have to pay more attention
To: Grampa Dave
Thanks for the ping!
FREEPAKAZIS!??
You are keeping track of these additions to the dictionary, right?
To: ohioWfan
Sabertooth, you can call me a Bush loyalist, or a Bushbot (not Bushie, please....that's what the First Couple call each other) as long as you know that I am not blindly so, or that being one does not mean that one is incapable of thinking independently.
How about, "BushBuckeye?"
Does your Ohio"W" really stand for "Woody Hayes?"
To: IronJack
Bump.
99
posted on
08/03/2002 2:34:22 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: AmishDude; All
Please do not register multiple accounts.
Thanks,
Jim
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 401-411 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson