The Olive Branch Thread

hobbsyoyo

Deity
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Messages
26,575
Off-topic is a place where ideas contend with each other. We pit our personal beliefs against each other using facts and articles as ammunition. Sometimes, however, the ideas are not as hotly contested as the posters themselves.

I understand that there are many animosities here, some that go back years. They saturate threads and distract from real discussion. While this does make the Tavern more lively, it also works to ensure that when a personal spat breaks out, genuine discussion goes out the window.

There is no cure for this and I certainly don't want it all to go away. But I do think there should be a place posters can go to where they can de-escalate and discuss interpersonal issues in a constructive manner. Both sides have to be willing to try and bury the hatchet for it work. Having a place for it to happen though may enable some of us to extend an olive branch so that something good may come out of a personal dispute.

We'll call that place the Olive Branch Thread and I'm placing it in the Chamber to help ensure that spats actually get talked through and the argument doesn't just spill over here.


If you have beef with someone and you'd like to squash it, come here and post about it. If someone's posting style grates you and you wish to frankly discuss it, this is the place for that as well. You can't guarantee that they will respond postively (or at all), but at least you will have tried. If the person doesn't respond to your olive branch, then you have to drop the issue. You can't post more than once here if the other person isn't responding because then you'd just be digging at them and/or trolling.

-OR-​

We can dance around the flames we light with the olive branch. The choice is up to each of us.
______________________

I would like to extend an olive branch to Patraklos.

This post was meant to be a lame attempt at something funny. It was worded in such a way that no smiley could have changed it's perception, it came across as a nasty attack. I just wanted to be funny, but it wasn't.

I don't want to be enemies with Patraklos. While I disagree with him on issues, I respect his posts enough that I don't want to go down the path toward personal animosity.

I do feel that the post that prompted my nastygram was an ad hominem. I felt that you were extremely dismissive of my ideas and posts in such a way that insinuated that I want children to die. That is how you read in the post I responded to and I did not take kindly to that characterization or how my point from the previous post was sidestepped in order to make that characterization.

The issue we were discussing is hotly contested and both sides have firmly held beliefs. I don't think either of us did our side a favor in our posts and my post in particular was nasty in a way that I didn't really mean it to be and I don't fault you for responding in kind.

One last thing, if the nickname 'eagleface' bugs you I will stop. Honestly, I would personally like that nickname if someone applied it to me, but if it is offensive, I will stop. It wasn't meant as a personal dig at you either, again I was trying to be humorous.
 
I calls them as I see them, and while I surely could have used less inflammatory language (and should have) I stand by the underpinning of everything I said. And it has to be said tnat the posters you keep faith with largely dictate the flavor of a response, when things are dog piling responses become more general in nature as opposed to solely for the benefit of the quoted individual.

As to the original disagreement, I honestly think you have missed the point and are not seriously considering root causes of the problem. As a gun owner I see you pursuing a convienient scape goat (which invokes stripping me of a right I cherish and exercise thus making it personal) and directing whatever energy is available to a solution in that direction which will violate rights while making no progress at all, give an excuse to avoid tackling deep seated problems in the character of our modern society, or both.

However, I am sure you are a nice dude and I really don't like flame wars. I didn't take anything you said personally and I hope you didn't take anything I said personally either. When they figure out how to make beer an online experience I will gladly skull one with you.

"eagle face" made no difference to me. Like I said that avatar was given to me as a gift and I used it to be polite. Before that I just has a default board avatar. I keep it largely because it provokes a certain irrational response from some posters that generally degrades their debate abilities based on their own assumptions. Opportunity for me.
 
With Respect Master Hobbsyoyo perhaps this is a man you don't fully understand either?

...Some men aren't looking for anything logical like money, they can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with - some men just want to watch the world burn.
 
I calls them as I see them, and while I surely could have used less inflammatory language (and should have) I stand by the underpinning of everything I said.
Fair enough.

And it has to be said tnat the posters you keep faith with
I am not sure who you mean here? I disagree with pretty much everyone at some point even if they are like-minded atheist liberals.

largely dictate the flavor of a response, when things are dog piling responses become more general in nature as opposed to solely for the benefit of the quoted individual.
Totally. Take my post as a good example. It was meant as much for everyone else to have a laugh as it was for you. Plus, with dog piles you reach a point where everyone is tripping over themselves to make someone or some group look stupid and not actually discuss anything.

As to the original disagreement, I honestly think you have missed the point and are not seriously considering root causes of the problem. As a gun owner I see you pursuing a convienient scape goat (which invokes stripping me of a right I cherish and exercise thus making it personal) and directing whatever energy is available to a solution in that direction which will violate rights while making no progress at all, give an excuse to avoid tackling deep seated problems in the character of our modern society, or both.
It is not as simple as that for me. I want to own a gun (don't have the funds at the moment) and I don't simply want to take your guns away. I get flippant and throw out lines about taking all your guns away etc. because from your side, it's impossible to discuss anything related to gun control without being told I'm ignorant about guns, that I want to take rights away and other stuff.

However, I am sure you are a nice dude and I really don't like flame wars. I didn't take anything you said personally and I hope you didn't take anything I said personally either. When they figure out how to make beer an online experience I will gladly skull one with you.
Sounds like a plan!

"eagle face" made no difference to me. Like I said that avatar was given to me as a gift and I used it to be polite. Before that I just has a default board avatar. I keep it largely because it provokes a certain irrational response from some posters that generally degrades their debate abilities based on their own assumptions. Opportunity for me.
Who gave it to you? I'm just curious. In any case I'll stop using eagleface out of respect. :D
 
This thread is an impressive effort, I must say. Wherever it leads.

Now. Who have I upset?

Who haven't I upset?
 
With Respect Master Hobbsyoyo perhaps this is a man you don't fully understand either?

...Some men aren't looking for anything logical like money, they can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with - some men just want to watch the world burn.

I have no beef with the Joker. :confused:

@Borachio - I think you and rugbyLEAGUEfan are the only two posters who are incapable of pissing someone off. You guys are pure awesomesauce.
 
I've pissed people off in the past with my young immaturity and pissed people off in the past year by having unpopular opinions so if anyone holds a grudge: I'm not sorry, but I appreciate that you care enough to think about me so much. :)

(Also, I'm usually not as crass as I sound. One-on-one I'm a pretty reasonable guy but in groups I tend to go for the unpopular opinion so that other people move ahead of me. I'm really a nice guy, I swear!)
 
Hmmm, I must agree with Borachio, valiant effort with making this thread. Lets see if it goes anywhere (I hope it does).

As for myself, I dunno if I've created any sort of personal animosities with other posters, or if I have I'm entirely ignorant of them. I try not to be overly aggressive or dickish in my posting (although it does get hard sometimes). I'll just say that there's no one on this forum, or even in real life, that I hate. I refuse to use the ignore list for this very reason. Just about everyone here is cool and has something interesting about them that you'll miss if you ignore them for some dumb political tiffy. And I'd rather not miss out on that.
 
I am eagerly awaiting, Grisu.......

Tapping foot.......

Whenever you are ready.....

:huh:
 
@Borachio - I think you and rugbyLEAGUEfan are the only two posters who are incapable of pissing someone off. You guys are pure awesomesauce.
Why, thanks for saying/thinking so.

If only it were true!
 
I try to not have a personal animosity towards anyone. I disagree, sometimes vehemently with lots of people, but there is probably no one here I'm incapable of being friendly with, or wouldn't meet for a beer (or root beer for our non-alcoholic friends) if they came to town.

EDIT: Well, let me add a caveat to that. I don't think many people that I disagree with here think I'm a bad person, just merely a believer in wrong ideas, but I wouldn't want to be around someone who thinks I'm a bad person, and I can't say that I regret animosity with such a person.

Sometimes in the heat of debate, things get...excited. I don't think that's a bad thing. It would be far worse if everything was heavily sanitized and our interactions lacked passion.

"eagle face" made no difference to me. Like I said that avatar was given to me as a gift and I used it to be polite. Before that I just has a default board avatar. I keep it largely because it provokes a certain irrational response from some posters that generally degrades their debate abilities based on their own assumptions. Opportunity for me.

The Eagleface (never heard the term before, but :lol: ) is a CFC OT classic in itself, kind of like the Far Left's :hatsoff: smiley. Pretty funny when BSmith was assumed to be amongst the conservative American servicemen/veterans because of it!
 
I would like to extend an olive branch to Patraklos.
It's a nice thread, but the consistent misspelling of his name does come off as a bit passive-aggressive.... :mischief:
 
I know I'm usually a big jerk.

I still like all of you on some level :crazyeye:

But hey, if a classroom of dead kindergarteners was something we could all keep our **** together about I'd be very disappointed in us.
 
I would like to apologize to Cheezy the Wiz for my somewhat venomous comments I've made to him in 2010-2011 about Marxism. I still whole-heartedly disagree with >90% of your beliefs therein, but I'm sorry for the manner in which I have made my comments. Doesn't seem like you ever held a grudge about that, but there you go.

I also offer to start a new beginning with innonimatu and Formaldehyde, under the caveat that you cease making defamatory comments about the Catholic Church when it's something that's already been repeatedly addressed. (I.e. I'm not telling you to stop disagreeing with me, but I am respectfully asking that you not repeat anticatholic myths.)
 
MisterCooper is still a sock puppet/troll, though :p

He's like a bored liberal or an independent or something. He's really good at it, though ;)
 
MisterCooper is still a sock puppet/troll, though :p

He's like a bored liberal or an independent or something. He's really good at it, though ;)

what exactly are you basing that on
 
what exactly are you basing that on

Eh, just seems like it. I admit I don't have any completely solid evidence. The only other possibility I consider realistic is that he's straddling the line between his real opinion and self-parody.
 
I know at least two people in real life that nonironically say pretty much the same things he does. Unless you've done an IP trace or analyzed his writing style, or he's said something to you in private, there's really nothing to base him being a sockpuppet on.
 
For the record I'm not really bashing him. In fact, he's actually really funny most of the time even if he's not a fake. He's not even just funny in a "laughing at" way, he's actually legitimately hilarious even when he's doing it on purpose. He is funny independent of his ideology.
 
I would like to apologize to Cheezy the Wiz for my somewhat venomous comments I've made to him in 2010-2011 about Marxism. I still whole-heartedly disagree with >90% of your beliefs therein, but I'm sorry for the manner in which I have made my comments. Doesn't seem like you ever held a grudge about that, but there you go.

Water under the bridge. :hatsoff:

I also offer to start a new beginning with innonimatu and Formaldehyde, under the caveat that you cease making defamatory comments about the Catholic Church when it's something that's already been repeatedly addressed. (I.e. I'm not telling you to stop disagreeing with me, but I am respectfully asking that you not repeat anticatholic myths.)

I think this is a good example of what I'm talking about: did they say things about you or Catholics that are defamatory, like "Catholics are stupid," or were they attacking the Church as an institution, as in "The Holy See is an introverted, shriveled old man?" One is a personal attack, and one is not, though it might still be offensive to you because it's an assault upon something that you happen to think is legit. It would be a good exercise for us (not merely you, I'm simply using this as an Exhibit A) in this thread to try to dissociate the two, and thus determine the appropriate amount of hostility to return. I seem to remember you and I having a very heated argument about Lenin once. He is a man that I admire, but he is not me. So, much as it might upset me that you think he was a bad person, you weren't really saying I'm a bad person, at most you might be indirectly implying that I'm an ignorant supporter of someone who was bad, which is really a much smaller indictment that we might surrender unto opinion, don't you think?

For the record I'm not really bashing him. In fact, he's actually really funny most of the time even if he's not a fake. He's not even just funny in a "laughing at" way, he's actually legitimately hilarious even when he's doing it on purpose. He is funny independent of his ideology.

Mr. Cooper seems to get that he's quirky, in the same way that Herman Cain does, and is willing to run with it and have fun with that. I like that.
 
Top Bottom