35 replies to this topic

[Biancoblu]

@delta_blues

are you finished yet? you do enjoy the sound of your own voice, don't you? or rather, the sound of your own typing...
Your occupations or certifications are of little or no interest to me, you could be a rocket scientist for all I care, I/we'd still have a problem with your behaviour. When one registers more than one identity to keep posting virtually the same things as if one owned the forums, that is called spamming, when this same person proceeds by calling names those that don't agree then by playing the victim of it all, that is called pure and simple bad manners and anti social behaviour. Your name calling, condescending attitude and superiority complex irritate a lot of people.
How very convenient to quote the only positive reply you've given me, but do you really think people can't read your other posts?
By the way, I'm glad to see you've listened to my advice at feedback and edited your site accordingly....funny how a "self appointed guru come coercing ruffian posting personal hogwash" can help you of all people.
With this I close all contact with you, whichever nonsense you will post to me from now on will be ignored.

@GemRock

what you said is very true, but I think what Jan is trying to convey is that it's not "politically correct" for someone to search someone else's posts and rate them all negatively, but that of course doesn't mean the negs weren't deserved to start with.
Perhaps that could be solved by looking at when and how the negs were given, I don't know if this can be done already. For example, if you see that someone got 20 negatives in a few minutes, that would look suspicious, but if they got all their negatives at the rate of 1 or 2 every now and then, well, it's probably because they were left in good faith.
Just my thought.

Edited by Biancoblu, 30 November 2009, 14:07.

[burt]

I consider using the - and + buttons to be a worthwhile exercise, but if the general consensus is that it's pointless, then please ignore this topic lol

@ Jan - if an individual is receiving many -/+ votes per day, then it must be from either;
- different individuals (as each day sets a limit as far as I can make out), hence the - or + is well deserved.
- multiple forum IDs -ing or +ing the other owned IDs, in which case the system is being gamed.

[delta_blues]

Biancoblu…

Of course, you don’t care to see my response to negative personal post towards me.

You and others make typical forum bully statements about a person and then dismiss response before it is made.

My conduct is of excellence. It’s now time to dissect the harassment of which a few are engaged.

Let’s start with you Bianco.
First you use the psychology of depersonalization, be referring to me as the complaining poster. Although you know my forum name, you do not address other members in that fashion.
Then you attempt to refuse to believe and reject the true reason for my responses, by misrepresenting them as differences of opinions.
My replies were not about opinions but concerning derogatory statements against me such as you have made.

Then your ignorant complaint against my reason for multiple accounts, somehow concluding and insinuating that more than one account is wrong. After I told you that I had forgotten, I had logged on one account and forgotten which ID when I posted in a thread.

Your dismissal of my reason for the need for 2 accounts, as if my explanation was worthless.

Then picking out yourself as if you were being singled out and then to exhibit Indignation for being called names.

Firstly, Discourtesy was repeatedly posted towards me I only responded.

Finally, a typical bully tactic, to make an accusation towards someone and then dismiss the response before it is given.

Spamming is unsolicited contact. Several of you are continuously making personal comments about me and then try to stop me from making a response, by attacking my replies.

The contact that is contemptuous is what is being displayed by this form bully clique.

Who are you to attempt to shut me down? Who are these bullies that are trying to control or direct according to rule, principle, or law they have imposed.
This forum is regulated by it’s by it own rules and standards not yours.

If what I have to say is of disinterest to you, close your mouth and go away.


Regards, Robert

[delta_blues]

Hello, Burt,
Not how many neg. votes per day. That would be per week... 5 a day x 7 days = 35 x 2 weeks = 70. Even on posts such as, "Will you please review my web".

This is what's happening, to some this would appear to be abusive.

Regards, Robert

Edited by delta_blues, 30 November 2009, 20:56.

[burt]

Hello Robert - perhaps it is the way you say things rather than what you are saying that gets people riled up? I don't know, I still find your posts amusing, even though others patently do not.

I would like you to note, that yes, in fact you have attacked a forum member - namely me - and this is only because we have a difference of opinion that I believe you cannot deal with for whatever reason known only to yourself. As you have atttacked me, you are therefore, by your own standards a "forum bully" - accusing me of "babbling nonsense", when all I have pointed out is that the validator to which you link has around 90 known bugs, hence may not give proper validation in all circumstances. I ask you to have a look back through my responses to your posts and your responses to mine, and see whom is bullying whom.

If stating that the tool is broken - fact
and stating that it would be better to not use a broken tool - fact
and stating that you linking to w3schools is great advice - fact

...if those 3 things amounts to me being a forum bully or a coercing ruffian or an abuser or a self appointed guru or a forum enforcement vigilante or a nonsense babbler, then I'm quite happy to be all of the above

[delta_blues]

Ok, Burt, message received.

First, let me inform that I have posted definitions not to be a smartass, but rather for myself and all readers of the exact meaning of the messages that are being posted, and that the problems are not cause by a misunderstanding of usage.

You have described my posts as amusing.
I am posting a dictionary definition as to be sure of your meaning.
As defined your post is diminishing towards me or even,
de·rog·a·to·ry (d¹-r¼g“…-tôr”, -t½r”) adj. 1. Disparaging; belittling: a derogatory comment. 2. Tending to detract or diminish.

Amusing…
Arousing laughter:
a. funny
b. humorous
c. comic
b. humorous
c. comical
d. droll
e. laughable

I have reviewed the topic threads as you have suggested and see that at least in one instance I have attributed a post to you which was written by another member.

I therefore apologize for disparaging comments I have made toward you because of mistakenly copying your name into my word processor when I wrote my response.

I also apologize to the forum and retract concerning the above error.

As far as descriptive adjectives I use towards conduct which is exhibited by certain forum members, I do not retract.

Especially:
bul·ly1 (b‹l“) n., pl. bul·lies. 1. A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people.

This definition says that I do not bully you.
As I stated, anyone that wants can step forward and accept any of the titles as they wish.

Continuing on, as I have said… MS has produced over years application after application completely packed full of bugs. Therefore, it follows using your criterion of 85 to 90 bugs in the W3C apps. Against hundreds in the MS apps. We also should not use MS Windows.
You then immediately called my post ridiculous.
ri·dic·u·lous (r¹-d¹k“y…-l…s) adj. Deserving or inspiring ridicule; absurd, preposterous, or silly. See Synonyms at foolish.

There was no problem between us until you made the first personal derogatory remark towards me.

Best Regards, Robert

By the way my salutations to you and other forum members are a sign of respect. The word salutation is a derivative of "Salute", In other words I welcome and salute you.

[delta_blues]

Burt, concerning my writing style...

Attending college, I was required to write 1,000 to 1.500 word essays in "English 1A, due Friday of each week.
From there, I worked writing, “overhaul, maintenance and repair manuals” for Naval Aircraft.
I understand that my style is somewhat expanded, this comes from a requirement of zero errors, and exact details, to direct the course of and manage or control work orders.

Perhaps I should write in a happy go lucky style, but I am not sure how to go about that.

Best Regards, Robert

[Jan Zonjee]

Can we get back to topic here please. Otherwise I will be forced to close this thread.

[delta_blues]

Thank you Jan...
I cannot post without being required to answer personal criticism.
It has been impossible to maintain a thread without it being broken up.

Best Regards, Robert

[Xpajun]

Err...


What was I saying?

Xpajun, on 18 November 2009, 08:49, said:

Reputation buttons are the quickest way to kill a good forum - believe me I've seen it happen time and time again - very often they are used as a retaliation button putting down a poster you don't like or have fallen out with...

In a perfect world - or on a perfect forum they are probably a good idea...


Unfortunately neither exist

[burt]

Getting back on topic, there is in fact an admin setting that allows the forum owner to "prune" messages that have a define level of "negative" rating.

By "prune" that could be as simple as hide the message using ajax, and have a little "+" button to open up for viewing. Or as draconian as deleting the message entirely I suppose.

This would make the forum much more useful in my opinion, as the number of crappy posts here needs to be remedied.

[delta_blues]

Greetings.

This blatant call for forum censorship by Burt in a troublesomely urgent and persistent manner by insisting that a practice of censoring be imposed in this forum, is not required, necessary, or warranted by the organization, policies and guiding principles of this forum.

Forms of censorship such as Burt calls for are psychologically unhealthy and unwholesome for any place where people are allowed to speak their piece.
For any forum member to declare another member's post to be "Crappy" and therefore justifies self-satisfying but incorrect reasons for editing and/or deleting another members post, is repulsive to say the least.

Maybe if the forum cleansing campaign is successful there will follow a call for ethnic cleansing!

It appears that Burt and I follow different social standards.
A continuous and constant struggle is being waged against censorship by government, religious bodies, news media and political groups; we certainly don't want self-appointed censors here!

Regards...

[Xpajun]

Wow - delta_blues - someone does have it in for you, a neg on your post already.

Can't think why as your post does make sense though you might have gone a bit OTT accusing Burt of wanting to be a forum cleanser as he has a good point too.

The forum does need decent posts of how a problem can be solved with answers understandable by all and as I said before it can only be done using more moderators to sort through the chaff to get at the answers that solve, then put those posts in a locked FAQ board.

The reputation buttons do nothing more than cause more problems than they solve - none of us are perfect especially after a few drinks and who hasn't sat on this forum with a glass or can in hand slowly getting intoxicated and then making that inebriated post that really embarrasses us the next day, and if you can make an embarrassing post then you can certainly sit reading and saying "I don't like this guy - lets give him a neg!"

The idea is good but unfortunately will never work.

[delta_blues]

Hello, Xpajun thank you for your input.

I have re-read my reply and see that I did not accuse Burt of wanting to be a forum cleanser.
Although I did cite "forum cleansing campaign" I mentioned no one in particular. Actually there are several folks attempting to stifle members which oppose their clique.
From my point of view "Pruning" is cleansing = censorship. Hiding messages? “Crappy”? Crappy to some may be jewelry to others.

As you may notice, it is perfectly acceptable to advocate censorship, but unacceptable to oppose it.
I wonder if those negatives are really a vote for censorship of just sheep following the leader.

One of the major problems with forum topics is that, “readers input into the post what they want it to convey”. The originator cannot then immediately respond to correct the misunderstanding. Many times the distorted interpretation is denied correction by the opposition. “a locked FAQ board” is an excellent problem solver.

Quoting you, "none of us are perfect especially after a few drinks and who hasn't sat on this forum with a glass or can in hand slowly getting intoxicated and then making that inebriated post that really embarrasses us the next day".
I can assure you that I have never done that in any forum in my lifetime.
I can also assure that I have never given a negative post to anyone in this forum.
I always make my disagreement public.

Best Regards, Robert

[ThailandTopper]

Jesus, I thought this was a support orientated forum. If you guys want to sling mud, may I suggest www.subzerosiam.com.

[Jan Zonjee]

Sorry guys, but this thread is unfortunately getting of the track. I will close it for the time being.