Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    You guys are jumping Vnzla's **** pretty hard for something a lot of people didn't really care for. If Roy wants to ask OJ to give up a board when they both grab it he should do that after the game. The message of this team is to always go after that ball, Roy understands it, he's the leader of that mentality when he hits the deck. He made a mistake by yelling at OJ about it IMO, nothing to crucify him about and nothing to get all upset about when someone points it out.
    I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it has essentially nothing to do with the specifics of what Roy did. It's just the Nth example of being the fly in the ointment. I don't even really give a **** anymore if he's doing it on purpose or not.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      I think that Seth's answer makes more sense. I agree...if Roy did it cuz he was p*ssed at OJ grabbing his rebound cuz he was "stealing his rebound"....that is really out of character. But Roy yelling at OJ to get back on script and head up the court for a transition score instead of rebounding the ball makes more sense for a veteran Player to tell a rookie Player.

      My point of bringing this up was to see if it was just Roy out of character, I also wanted to see if other people saw the same thing, I also want to know if it was probably some kind of bet between him and somebody else? I know Vogel talked to him before the game, could it be possible that Vogel wanted him to get 20 rebounds and he was using this as motivation? I don't know.


      Note that Roy is known for having bets with his teammates could that be why he was mad at OJ?
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

        None of that has answered my (I thought, completely legitimate and not overreacting) question - what did Roy actually SAY? All of the notes are based on people's interpretation of Roy swinging his arms and saying something no one seems to have heard well enough to quote.

        I'm not saying it might not be true, but I'd like a little more information. People watching games have come up with all kinds of "explanations" for things they caught a glimpse of on the court, many of them oriented negative simply because it is a lot more fun to say now that Roy is a selfish b*****d who in the middle of what was turning out to be a good game acted completely unsportsmanlike and yelled at his teammates for getting in the way of his stats. Which hasn't been seen before from him, so I need a little more than "Roy waved his arms, he must be p**sed at guys stealing rebounds".

        For one thing, given the number of media people wanting to jump on anything negative about the Pacers, I'd have expected a tweet from Wells saying "Roy is acting like an a$$" or a column from Kravitz talking about how clearly the myth of Roy as a character guy has run its course and the Pacers are on their way to another downward spiral because they can't get good community people like the Colts can.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

          Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
          I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it has essentially nothing to do with the specifics of what Roy did. It's just the Nth example of being the fly in the ointment. I don't even really give a **** anymore if he's doing it on purpose or not.
          So your overreaction is pretty much because whatever I say is supposed to be negative to you, got it......

          And yes you give a s*** or you wouldn't be overreacting(once again) to my observation.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

            Originally posted by Drewtone View Post
            So could he be sort of like James Jones if we'd kept him?
            Hmmm. Not sure about that comparison. Orlando can definitely stroke the three, and I think he'll get better at that in the NBA over the next couple of years. But he has more slashing ability than I ever remember Jones showing and while Orlando is three inches shorter than Jones, he still weighs a bit more, and has the potential to be a much more physical defender.

            I always thought Jones should have been better overall than he was at 6'8. He's an OK defender, but with the wingspan he has I expected more. James was also a really bad rebounder for his size while Orlando is pretty good for his.

            With Orlando we will get every drop of what he has to give and he's a tough guy (if you know anything about his story you know that he has had to be to get where he is today). To me, Jones is a specialty player (shoot the three) and if he's not doing what he does best he isn't a lot of use to you. Orlando will never do anything at an elite level (not consistently, anyway - there will be games where he gets hot and shoots lights out though, if given enough time), but he'll be average to above average in pretty much every area.

            So what I'm saying is that I think Orlando will have a better career than James Jones. A good player to have off the bench, though I never imagined I'd see him on our Pacers! Too bad he'll probably get squeezed out when Granger returns, but there's only so many wing minutes to go around...
            Last edited by gummy; 02-07-2013, 03:16 PM.
            "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

            "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

            "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              PG is better than Reggie and that's the truth. Reggie was clutch and one of the purest shooters ever but his career had less defensive impact than one year of PG.

              PG is obviously a better defender than Reggie ever was, but he's not better than Reggie yet. Reggie had the ability to kick his game up a notch and single-handedly take over a playoff series. What finally pushed us into the Finals in 2000? It was a 17 point fourth quarter explosion from Reggie in game 6 at the Garden (34 for the game). I hope PG is able to do something like that someday.

              Defense is obviously important, particularly from a team perspective, but in the playoffs you need that special player who can take over on offense and will you to wins. History has shown time and time again that this is what wins in the playoffs. We had that in Reggie.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                The Roy yelling seems pretty simple. A big grabbing the board and making a quick outlet pass gets the ball up the floor much faster than a 2 guard grabbing it and dribbling. If either guy can get it, the big man should be deferred to. He is the one with the task and the experience of making a crisp outlet pass.

                Now, if that's the case, why does Lance not get the same tongue chewing? Perhaps because when Lance grabs the board, the ball DOES get up the court just as fast as a nice outlet pass.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  So your overreaction is pretty much because whatever I say is supposed to be negative to you, got it......

                  And yes you give a s*** or you wouldn't be overreacting(once again) to my observation.
                  I don't necessarily agree with Hicks on this. But I do think it's worth pointing out that when he ran the board, he apparently disagreed with you just as much, but wasn't as vocal about it, for reasons of propriety I'm guessing. And he never abused his power. That's pretty impressive in my book.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                    Originally posted by tadscout View Post
                    To me if I was in Roy's shoes I would have been mad too, not for getting a rebound 'stolen' away, but for a smaller teammate needlessly cutting under me... Cutting under a larger teammate like that is just asking for an accidental injury to happen. Orlando could have bumped Roy's knee, or Roy could have accidently caught OJ's head with an elbow.

                    Roy easily had those rebounds, so there was no need to take a chance like that for OJ... although I love that OJ was going at 100% and trying his best, just saying I imagine that's way Roy was frustrated... but really we as fans have no clue, and we all are just speculating, so there's no need to be reading to deep into this.
                    This. On one of those (the one where Roy was clearly visibly upset about the play), Orlando ducked right under him and into his body to get the rebound. I think he was probably just watching the ball and wasn't aware of where Roy was, but I understood Roy's reaction.

                    There was no rebound "stealing ala Troy Murphy going on.

                    Also, this:

                    Naptown Seth:
                    ...And their are ASSIGNMENTS, roles guys need to follow to get into transition offense quickly. Typically I'd bet they'd like Roy and West to block out when PG24's man shoots and the long rebound goes toward Lance simply because this starts a 2 on 1 the other way given Lance's ability to dribble up court in a hurry. But a rebound at the baseline where you are better off having one of the bigs make a long outlet where a scorer like OJ gets down to the other end in a hurry? If that's the plan then Roy should be reminding OJ of his role.


                    Yes, Roy was upset. And I don't have any problem with that.
                    Last edited by gummy; 02-07-2013, 03:28 PM.
                    "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                    "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                    "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                      I bet whatever Roy said was enough to rectify the situation. He was out to prove a personal point last night, and probably would have pushed over his own mother last night to prove it.

                      If we're going to bring up these little non-issues though, then Lance getting frustrated and clapping for the ball on outlets is a much bigger pattern.
                      Last edited by Since86; 02-07-2013, 03:30 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        Man, don't let that ruin your mood. It's just an observation. Pacers are still kicking ***, and Roy may be turning a corner. I think they aren't worrying about it, I'm sure Roy and OJ talked about it. It doesn't have to be negative.
                        I'd almost bet money they're not worried about it. I know I'm not, either.

                        It's not really specifically what he's saying this time, it's just the bigger picture of his style and attitude. It amounts to a kind of social pollution to me; take a given topic, add his normal brand of commentary, watch the topic go sour or (more) negative in some way and to some (further) extent. Quite possibly to the point where no one or close to no one is even talking about anything else. And he posts so much it also becomes a type of spam to me as well. Ignoring the account doesn't stop the effect. I don't even really care anymore if it's intentional or unintentional; it is what it is. Personally I got sick of it a long time ago. If I could read through threads minus that stuff, I'd do it. But I can't.

                        I guess today I just felt more like complaining about it than usual. I'll stop.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                          Lol I leave a thread for an hour and all hell breaks loose!!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                            Originally posted by vnzla81
                            I tried to PM you but it says that your mailbox is full
                            Thanks. I think I just fixed it.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                              I'd almost bet money they're not worried about it. I know I'm not, either.

                              It's not really specifically what he's saying this time, it's just the bigger picture of his style and attitude. It amounts to a kind of social pollution to me; take a given topic, add his normal brand of commentary, watch the topic go sour or (more) negative in some way and to some (further) extent. Quite possibly to the point where no one or close to no one is even talking about anything else. And he posts so much it also becomes a type of spam to me as well. Ignoring the account doesn't stop the effect. I don't even really care anymore if it's intentional or unintentional; it is what it is. Personally I got sick of it a long time ago. If I could read through threads minus that stuff, I'd do it. But I can't.

                              I guess today I just felt more like complaining about it than usual. I'll stop.
                              I wholeheartedly agree. Maybe once a month I'll say something about it directly, if that. It's just a fact of life on the board now that doesn't seem likely to change since it's been going on so long.

                              It all follows a very similar script too:

                              Vnzla makes a negative comment and/or a hyperbolic comment.

                              A bunch of people jump in to disagree.

                              Vnzla vehemently responds, usually peppered with passive aggressive "Well I guess I shouldn't have said anything/you can just delete this thread if it's not appropriate/I guess I'm just a hater/I guess I should have expected this" type comments.

                              During the course of the exchanges Vnzla often responds to people as if they said something different than they actually did or as if something one or two people said is something dozens of people have said (usually by greatly oversimplifying what other people said or ignoring the basketball argument to focus on the personal - "I guess you can't say anything bad about X" or "Many people were saying I was wrong/making it up," or "You just don't like me anyway."). He will express surprise that people are reacting strongly to his exaggerated arguments and makes it about feelings as much as whatever basketball tidbit was at issue ("Why are you overreacting," "Well there's no reason to get so mad about it."). Not infrequently he will slide from one argument to the next without ever conceding that he's saying something different now.

                              Some people get really upset by all this and usually a quite few people say something. This just reinforces Vnzla's tendency to play the martyr and he doubles down on whatever it was he was saying. Sometimes in this atmosphere people go too far and get too personal in replying to him. A few other people jump in to defend Vnzla. The whole thread becomes about the conflict for pages and pages where it all just snowballs. Some people try to calm things down. Some people pour oil on the water. Eventually it peters out because people get tired of it (I've never seen it end because Vnzla stepped back from it - though sometimes he will go back and delete some of his comments, which makes it harder to piece together what happened). Some people I am sure just sigh and move on to another thread where they hope not to find the same.

                              Rinse, repeat. I guess some people enjoy this, but I do not and I wonder what the silent majority thinks. To me, it's not so much discussion as it is discursive bickering. It's fine when it happens sometimes, it's a message board and people are people. It's going to happen. But when it happens all the time and one particular person almost always plays a key role in getting it going and/or escalating it? The relentless negative snark, shifting positions, poor me attitude and what appears to be argument for arguments sake gets old, old, old.

                              Every once in awhile Vnzla has moments where he expresses a negative or contrary opinion in a way that isn't uber confrontational or passive aggressive. Times when he more or less deals with the things that have been said rather than reacting to the feeling that people are out to get him. Sometimes he even has decent arguments that people miss the point of - probably because they are caught up in the cumulative emotions of so many vitrolic interactions in the past. Sometimes the way people react to Vnzla is just as much of a problem as the style and substance of his communications.

                              I've calmly called Vnzla out for the pattern above a few times before (though never in this kind of length and detail - this will be the first and last time). I'll admit that I've sometimes allowed myself to be reduced to snarky comments that aren't useful at all out of sheer frustration. I've also had a several pretty good exchanges with him. Sometimes he is more funny than grating. I have even defended him once or twice over the years. I fervently wish we got what I consider the "good" version of him even 50% of the time.

                              But I'll stop too, because what's the point? I didn't want to just be the silent liker this time. I love this board. But somehow one personality has come to dominate a good portion of the content and I don't think that's a good thing. Hell, it's not necessarily a good thing for a community even when the person in question is as reasonable as can be.
                              Last edited by gummy; 02-07-2013, 05:03 PM.
                              "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                              "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                              "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Philadelphia freedom

                                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                                Thanks. I think I just fixed it.
                                Still won't let me PM you because your message thing is full.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X