While We Wait: Writer's Block & Other Lame Excuses

[Symphony D.]

 

[North King]

This is the internet.

Oh, I get it! The second that social interactions no longer take place face to face, basic conversational skills are not only irrelevant, but actively discouraged!

 

[Symphony D.]

In the same way that you're being particularly civil and patient right now, right?

 

[Luckymoose]

Seriously, Symphony, just shut up. You're one of the most disgusting people in this community.

 

[North King]

In the same way that you're being particularly civil and patient right now, right?

Well, I did attempt to enter the conversation with some civility:

It doesn't matter if you don't want to teach it. Intruding in a conversation and essentially saying "your all dumm" is the equivalent of playground name-calling. It contributes nothing to a conversation besides the self-gratification of the name-caller.

That said, I do have a problem maintaining civility. Especially with certain individuals on this forum -- such as yourself, because you have such a long history of being tetchy over such completely stupid things that I've got no reason to believe it would be anything but wasted effort. We can't all be Iggy, smiling in the face of spittle.

The reason I feel fine pointing it out is that I'm working on it. I see no evidence that you (and Masada, and others) do anything but revel in jackassery.

 

[qoou]

Seriously, Symphony, just shut up. You're one of the most disgusting people in this community.

Why? In all seriousness.

 

[Symphony D.]

You seem to be working on the assumption that anyone particularly noticed or cared about Masada's remarks before you interjected to criticize him for them. Let me ask: was anyone hurt or offended by his remarks? Did anyone feel belittled by them?

Would you stop every discussion you encountered on the internet where you felt one side or the other or both were being uncivil?

Do you see the hypocrisy in being extremely passive-aggressive and bringing up past conflicts while supposedly arguing for the sake of civility?

I have not been particularly aggressive in my response so far, whatever your assertions. Allow me to change that, since you seem to want me to be: the answers are "No," "No," "No," and "No." Please continue "working on it."

 

[Terrance888]

Spoiler :

Let me ask: was anyone hurt or offended by his remarks? Did anyone feel belittled by them?

I was.

Would you stop every discussion you encountered on the internet where you felt one side or the other or both were being uncivil?

No. Then again, this is OUR part of the internet, as much as one can say that a group occupies an ill-defined part of a region.

Do you see the hypocrisy in being extremely passive-aggressive and bringing up past conflicts while supposedly arguing for the sake of civility?

Not if you are trying to solve one's own passive-aggressiveness, I wouldn't think. So there are different circumstances.

Personally, I was hurt somewhat, but I'm not sure if all this fighting over it was worth any amount I was hurt by.

Nothing to see here.

See below.

 

[North King]

I think the fact that two other people, active participants in the conversation in question, noticed AND cared about the remark enough to post on it before I did, would answer your questions well enough.

 

[Symphony D.]

I was.

Fair enough.

I think the fact that two other people, active participants in the conversation in question, noticed AND cared about the remark enough to post on it before I did, would answer your questions well enough.

And your response to Crezth was not at all of the same kind as Masada's input on that conversation? It was not at all just as much of a drive-by snipe of a response? I don't begrudge you desiring civility. I think Terrance made a compact and eloquent enough statement on the matter. Instead, you're being just as rude and snarky as the people you're supposedly railing against.

Now, since I'm "tetchy" you don't have to listen to me, but what I don't like, North King, is hypocrisy.

 

[North King]

And your response to Crezth was not at all of the same kind as Masada's input on that conversation? It was not at all just as much of a drive-by snipe of a response? I don't begrudge you desiring civility. I think Terrance made a compact and eloquent enough statement on the matter. Instead, you're being just as rude and snarky as the people you're supposedly railing against.

Now, since I'm "tetchy" you don't have to listen to me, but what I don't like, North King, is hypocrisy.

It was an honest question. There was no sarcasm there, dude; I honestly didn't get Crezth's question. How was that not smug?

 

[Symphony D.]

And there was no other way to have structured it that would have fulfilled utilizing "basic conversational skills" to make the tone clear on a medium distinctly lacking in nuance, such as "Could you please explain to me how that is not smug?" I would also note your total absence of commentary on Luckymoose's contributions to this discussion.

It's all well and good to want something, but one does sort of have to practice what one preaches.

 

[Luckymoose]

No one has to say a thing about my contributions. You're just a squishy blubberbutt!

 

[qoou]

Edit: Nothing to see here, move along.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

That's horrendous qoou. And Terrance shouldn't even joke about that.

 

[Terrance888]

Iggy is right.

 

[North King]

And there was no other way to have structured it that would have fulfilled utilizing "basic conversational skills" to make the tone clear on a medium distinctly lacking in nuance, such as "Could you please explain to me how that is not smug?" I would also note your total absence of commentary on Luckymoose's contributions to this discussion.

It's all well and good to want something, but one does sort of have to practice what one preaches.

I believe it was fine. Certainly not as egregious as you're making it out to be. And I actually DO talk to Lucky about these things, but in a private medium. Should I call him out in public? Possibly, but you were already doing that well enough. No need for me to pile on.

 

[Symphony D.]

I believe it was fine. Certainly not as egregious as you're making it out to be.

So if I can read your remark as being snarky, that's okay, because you didn't mean it. If Luckymoose makes snark about predicting the next recession which contributes nothing to the discussion, that's okay, because it's harmless. Oh, but that Masada, making a snarky but rather inconsequential remark (not to set aside Terrance's feelings), that's just incorrigible!

And I actually DO talk to Lucky about these things, but in a private medium. Should I call him out in public? Possibly, but you were already doing that well enough. No need for me to pile on.

... But Luckymoose gets different treatment, even when he's actively and obviously tryhard trolling. So why can't you post on Masada's wall asking him to tone it down? Why can't you send him a PM? Why can't you talk to him on chat? I mean, you didn't feel bad about piling it on after, as you so noted, Iggy and lj had already made the point with an honest question, or following up to me consistently.

Lashings for Masada in the square of public opinion, and when I question the need for such a response in the first place you rebut me every step of the way and call me "tetchy," but Luckymoose calls me "poopoo head," "disgusting" and "squishy blubberbutt" in three separate pieces of communication which he was never prompted to make and, oh, well, that's not uncivil discourse, it's merely deserving of some slaps on the wrist in private.

Do you not see your own ridiculous double standards even as you demand civility from the rest of us? Again, it's great that you want polite and civil discourse, but you seem to only care for it when it benefits you and those who agree with you. It makes it rather hard to take you seriously on the matter.

 

[Nylan]

I know I'd love to learn more about both economics and the environment right now.

And to those who bicker: what do you hope to gain?

 

[Symphony D.]

And to those who bicker: what do you hope to gain?

1. For years people have acted like a little bit of attitude is an incredibly divisive force in this community that, at any moment, could tear it asunder like a piece of paper.
2. This attitude in so far as it exists has been and continues to be mild by the standards of both the internet and of humanity at large.
3. This attitude is practiced by the very same people who constantly warn of its foul influence with the same passion and verve as seen in the people they rail against.
4. The moralizing's getting really old.

What do I hope to gain? "If you live in a greenhouse, don't throw stones at glass houses," or perhaps "Pot to kettle: you're black." It is not a big deal, if you act like it is one you're probably a hypocrite, and as this conversation has shown, it doesn't really go anywhere. Leading by example on the last issue seemed to be the best way to drive the point home.