The questions was "You should look at the top ten posters and see how many of them have been banned or no longer post here?" which is very different from your interpretation.
Also given that your banned list is also incomplete given to certain people no longer having an account......
Oh my God, trumpt, 1 whole person in the Top 10 is banned!
And people decide to stop posting here, since when does that ever happen on the Internet!?
The sky is falling!
You forgot the second claim, or no longer post here. Why don't you recompile that exact list and show the date of last post for all ten.
That would indeed be telling.
Nick
Edit: While people do indeeed stop posting for whatever reason strikes their fancy, these folks were obviously members for years and additionally had posted thousands of times. You are taking a general and applying it to folks who clearly are the exception.
Well there's a big reason some of those that don't post here anymore, well, don't post here anymore... and it doesn't need to be rehashed. It's old news, and there's no need to start a new fight over it.
Honestly Nick the list of people that bitch about being oppressed around here is a single digit number. So perhaps it's that tiny minority of people that need to review their behavior as opposed to everyone else needing to do so?
Well there's a big reason some of those that don't post here anymore, well, don't post here anymore... and it doesn't need to be rehashed. It's old news, and there's no need to start a new fight over it.
Honestly Nick the list of people that bitch about being oppressed around here is a single digit number. So perhaps it's that tiny minority of people that need to review their behavior as opposed to everyone else needing to do so?
Yes, it is those of which we do not speak, ala The Village.
That does deal with part of it but again, I'm sure several of them have post dates past the "great thought purity directive" which means they choose to leave well after that occurred. That and of course the obvious banishment of one member as well.
I did acknowledge the second point. Read my post again.
People can choose not to post here for any number of reasons. A lot of people hate the political discussions so they just go away to somewhere else. That?s life. Some people just stop paying attention to Internet message boards. That?s life. I?ve been away for 6+ months at a stretch. That?s life.
Further, how many of those listed above no longer have account here? It?s news to me.
trumpt:
Quote:
Yes, it is those of which we do not speak, ala The Village.
My God, yes, absolutely. Because if you think someone else is breaking the rules that certainly means it is fair game for you as well, eh?
At some point you simply must come to the realization that the complete lack of facts does considerable damage to your delicately spun conspiracy theory.
I honestly wonder what you think you?re helping by constantly providing nothing but negativity and fostering unnecessary hostility with fabricated notions of suppression. Is it really so burdensome to have a very simple set of rules to follow? And is your pride so delicate that having them pointed out to you is so vexing? Is it so horrible?
Some visit more than one board, but don't post as much here since the split, for reasons that might range from 'political', to 'cultural', to 'got a life/job/spousal', depending on the member, I'd suspect.
Old timers might note that AI has seen several "changing of the guard" member shifts, at times due to Blackouts or fresh PR, at times due to life just going on and tastes changing and evolving.
Attributing direct cause and effect to single events, threads, or posts seems both futile and potentially inflammatory. People may try and identify things/events/arguments that piss them off, but finger-pointing doesn't seem helpful.
Management makes a difference (in action and perception), as do moderators, but at the end of the day for me, the reasons I choose to visit a message board have more to do with the quality of the posts by other users with knowledge or wisdom to share.
Good reading material and cogent conversation appeal.
Obnoxious Tina ads do not.
If the noise to signal ratio gets too high and the tone of debate degrades, I change stations.
"Do first, ask the members later" as an attitude that led to this forum and this thread didn't impress.
The concept wasn't a bad idea, but the way it arrived left a bad taste for me.
edit:
groverat said similar things, at times more succinctly, while I was composing.
Some visit more than one board, but don't post as much here since the split, for reasons that might range from 'political', to 'cultural', to 'got a life/job/spousal', depending on the member, I'd suspect.
Old timers might note that AI has seen several "changing of the guard" member shifts, at times due to Blackouts or fresh PR, at times due to life just going on and tastes changing and evolving.
Attributing direct cause and effect to single events, threads, or posts seems both futile and potentially inflammatory. People may try and identify things/events/arguments that piss them off, but finger-pointing doesn't seem helpful.
Management makes a difference (in action and perception), as do moderators, but at the end of the day for me, the reasons I choose to visit a message board have more to do with the quality of the posts by other users with knowledge or wisdom to share.
Good reading material and cogent conversation appeal.
Obnoxious Tina ads do not.
If the noise to signal ratio gets too high and the tone of debate degrades, I change stations.
"Do first, ask the members later" as an attitude that led to this forum and this thread didn't impress.
The concept wasn't a bad idea, but the way it arrived left a bad taste for me.
edit:
groverat said similar things, at times more succinctly, while I was composing.
That's right, the Staff is not THAT important, but the members are.
I would say it was literally their choice. No different than people leaving of their own accord.
Jesus Christ... the Revolution! will never die.
I was only pointing out your selective use of the top 10 posters. You tried to make out that only 1 person in the top 10 had been banned when we all know that is not true to enhance your position.
Why try and sugar coat it? Or does 3/10 banned accounts in the top 10 reflect badly on the administering/moderating of this board?
I was only pointing out your selective use of the top 10 posters. You tried to make out that only 1 person in the top 10 had been banned when we all know that is not true to enhance your position.
Why try and sugar coat it? Or does 3/10 banned accounts in the top 10 reflect badly on the administering/moderating of this board?
I didn't know, and I still don't know, that Brad and LoCash were actually in the Top 10 posters.
Anyway, this thread has fulfilled its purpose. Closing it down.
Comments
Who needs it?
Also given that your banned list is also incomplete given to certain people no longer having an account......
Logic, who needs it?
Originally posted by groverat
yes, let's look at the Top 10 posters!
1. Eugene
2. groverat
3. Scott - banned
4. bunge
5. EmAn
6. Powerdoc
7. Amorph
8. Matsu
9. BuonRotto
10. pscates
Oh my God, trumpt, 1 whole person in the Top 10 is banned!
And people decide to stop posting here, since when does that ever happen on the Internet!?
The sky is falling!
You forgot the second claim, or no longer post here. Why don't you recompile that exact list and show the date of last post for all ten.
That would indeed be telling.
Nick
Edit: While people do indeeed stop posting for whatever reason strikes their fancy, these folks were obviously members for years and additionally had posted thousands of times. You are taking a general and applying it to folks who clearly are the exception.
Honestly Nick the list of people that bitch about being oppressed around here is a single digit number. So perhaps it's that tiny minority of people that need to review their behavior as opposed to everyone else needing to do so?
Originally posted by rageous
Well there's a big reason some of those that don't post here anymore, well, don't post here anymore... and it doesn't need to be rehashed. It's old news, and there's no need to start a new fight over it.
Honestly Nick the list of people that bitch about being oppressed around here is a single digit number. So perhaps it's that tiny minority of people that need to review their behavior as opposed to everyone else needing to do so?
Yes, it is those of which we do not speak, ala The Village.
That does deal with part of it but again, I'm sure several of them have post dates past the "great thought purity directive" which means they choose to leave well after that occurred. That and of course the obvious banishment of one member as well.
Nick
I did acknowledge the second point. Read my post again.
People can choose not to post here for any number of reasons. A lot of people hate the political discussions so they just go away to somewhere else. That?s life. Some people just stop paying attention to Internet message boards. That?s life. I?ve been away for 6+ months at a stretch. That?s life.
Further, how many of those listed above no longer have account here? It?s news to me.
trumpt:
Yes, it is those of which we do not speak, ala The Village.
My God, yes, absolutely. Because if you think someone else is breaking the rules that certainly means it is fair game for you as well, eh?
At some point you simply must come to the realization that the complete lack of facts does considerable damage to your delicately spun conspiracy theory.
I honestly wonder what you think you?re helping by constantly providing nothing but negativity and fostering unnecessary hostility with fabricated notions of suppression. Is it really so burdensome to have a very simple set of rules to follow? And is your pride so delicate that having them pointed out to you is so vexing? Is it so horrible?
Old timers might note that AI has seen several "changing of the guard" member shifts, at times due to Blackouts or fresh PR, at times due to life just going on and tastes changing and evolving.
Attributing direct cause and effect to single events, threads, or posts seems both futile and potentially inflammatory. People may try and identify things/events/arguments that piss them off, but finger-pointing doesn't seem helpful.
Management makes a difference (in action and perception), as do moderators, but at the end of the day for me, the reasons I choose to visit a message board have more to do with the quality of the posts by other users with knowledge or wisdom to share.
Good reading material and cogent conversation appeal.
Obnoxious Tina ads do not.
If the noise to signal ratio gets too high and the tone of debate degrades, I change stations.
"Do first, ask the members later" as an attitude that led to this forum and this thread didn't impress.
The concept wasn't a bad idea, but the way it arrived left a bad taste for me.
edit:
groverat said similar things, at times more succinctly, while I was composing.
Originally posted by groverat
Further, how many of those listed above no longer have account here? It?s news to me.
So if I mentioned Jack and Brad who would both have been in the 10 ten if they had not been deleted.....
Originally posted by curiousuburb
Some visit more than one board, but don't post as much here since the split, for reasons that might range from 'political', to 'cultural', to 'got a life/job/spousal', depending on the member, I'd suspect.
Old timers might note that AI has seen several "changing of the guard" member shifts, at times due to Blackouts or fresh PR, at times due to life just going on and tastes changing and evolving.
Attributing direct cause and effect to single events, threads, or posts seems both futile and potentially inflammatory. People may try and identify things/events/arguments that piss them off, but finger-pointing doesn't seem helpful.
Management makes a difference (in action and perception), as do moderators, but at the end of the day for me, the reasons I choose to visit a message board have more to do with the quality of the posts by other users with knowledge or wisdom to share.
Good reading material and cogent conversation appeal.
Obnoxious Tina ads do not.
If the noise to signal ratio gets too high and the tone of debate degrades, I change stations.
"Do first, ask the members later" as an attitude that led to this forum and this thread didn't impress.
The concept wasn't a bad idea, but the way it arrived left a bad taste for me.
edit:
groverat said similar things, at times more succinctly, while I was composing.
That's right, the Staff is not THAT important, but the members are.
Originally posted by curiousuburb
Happy 7000th post, PowerDoc! Way to set a good member example.
Thanks
Originally posted by Omega
So if I mentioned Jack and Brad who would both have been in the 10 ten if they had not been deleted.....
I would say it was literally their choice. No different than people leaving of their own accord.
Jesus Christ... the Revolution! will never die.
Originally posted by groverat
I would say it was literally their choice. No different than people leaving of their own accord.
Jesus Christ... the Revolution! will never die.
I was only pointing out your selective use of the top 10 posters. You tried to make out that only 1 person in the top 10 had been banned when we all know that is not true to enhance your position.
Why try and sugar coat it? Or does 3/10 banned accounts in the top 10 reflect badly on the administering/moderating of this board?
Originally posted by Omega
...
It only reflects what you want it to reflect given your own personal take on it, so let it go.
Originally posted by Omega
I was only pointing out your selective use of the top 10 posters. You tried to make out that only 1 person in the top 10 had been banned when we all know that is not true to enhance your position.
Why try and sugar coat it? Or does 3/10 banned accounts in the top 10 reflect badly on the administering/moderating of this board?
I didn't know, and I still don't know, that Brad and LoCash were actually in the Top 10 posters.
Anyway, this thread has fulfilled its purpose. Closing it down.