So What Is It Now? What Should It Be?

[Bastet]

I don't think he cares, DFG. You, OTOH, show that you do care, with every single post.

The same could be argued about you defending him like he somehow "needs" it. I care to a certain point. I wanted to follow it through. Kinda an OCD thing, I think. And yes he does care. I want entertainment too. I made it so I have nothing to occupy me due to purposely removing distractions from schoolwork. It's playtime now.

^That argument would be flawed, though, since my reply was about you caring, not about him.

I "care" about the double standard and hypocrisy I see here. I find it odd out of all the members here you choose to defend MLA of all people. After all, the way he acts, he doesn't need your protection. Or does he? And yes he does care. He cared too much and left, IMO. Of course you will defend him until you are blue in the face. Nothing I say will be right in your eyes. We will have to agree to disagree at this point.

[Al Swearegen]

What hypocrisy and double standard?
I like MLA and did not think he had two different standards.
I like you too. I think you had every right to call him out and he to defend himself.

[Jack]

Simply like Hubert. It's tempting to defend him, not because he needs or deserves it, but because he's not here to do it. He should come back.

[Bastet]

What hypocrisy and double standard?
I like MLA and did not think he had two different standards.
I like you too. I think you had every right to call him out and he to defend himself.

I can go in to greater detail later if you want.

[Al Swearegen]

What hypocrisy and double standard?
I like MLA and did not think he had two different standards.
I like you too. I think you had every right to call him out and he to defend himself.

I can go in to greater detail later if you want.

I am OK with that, I am not sure how everyone else will feel.

Here is where I am coming from. I like all of you.
 
MLA was a nice and smart bloke. He did not mind a stoush and he is pretty thick skinned. Some time ago he started making the majority of his posts either witty comebacks or pit downs. The percentages increased slightly. Whilst they remained cohrent and clever or witty, for me, I generally skimmed over them because it started having a sameness to them. As soon as I saw he posted, I suspected it would b saying some negative criticism of the proceeding post.

Each to their own though. This was not disallowed and it entertained him. A lot of people here (myself included) do certainly criticise other members and so on. The big difference was he would do this on a larger percentage to me.

THAT said....we are not moderated. If someone is being what YOU consider an asshat, you can not expect admin to sort them out or even consider they are breaking the rules. Call the fuckers out or flame them/debate them/argue them.

You saw something an attitude/behaviour/argument style you did not like and you called him on it. So did Rage.

Full marks, that is what we should do. 

BUT if that means he did not have a point with "Perfectly allowed to do this. I want to do this, I have no problem doing this" then it is hard for you to gain much purchase on this point....unless there is more.

At the same time I do not think he could really contest much against your right to call him on that or your belief of what kind of a person you thought he was for behaving that way as much of it is subjective. So long as you do not start to make grand claims (which you may wish to do if you feel you do not have enough decent ammunition to sink him) then you do not overplay your hand and place  him in a better or stronger position. Likewise his trying to play with words or concepts to redefined your arguments will not work because at base tacks it is obvious "You thought he was picking on people too much and not lending any variety beyond the putdown and that he was a jerk"

It makes for a fairly evenly positioned battle and with little to get a better footing. There is not likely any big blows or the like to be landed. Any claim or position has to be not too grand and any I think it comes down to who can "paint the better picture of the other"

[McGiver]

I know that Skyblue1 dislikes me.  Some people just don't like other people.  Nothing can be done to solve that.

[Bastet]

What hypocrisy and double standard?
I like MLA and did not think he had two different standards.
I like you too. I think you had every right to call him out and he to defend himself.

I can go in to greater detail later if you want.

I am OK with that, I am not sure how everyone else will feel.

Here is where I am coming from. I like all of you.
 
MLA was a nice and smart bloke. He did not mind a stoush and he is pretty thick skinned. Some time ago he started making the majority of his posts either witty comebacks or pit downs. The percentages increased slightly. Whilst they remained cohrent and clever or witty, for me, I generally skimmed over them because it started having a sameness to them. As soon as I saw he posted, I suspected it would b saying some negative criticism of the proceeding post.

Each to their own though. This was not disallowed and it entertained him. A lot of people here (myself included) do certainly criticise other members and so on. The big difference was he would do this on a larger percentage to me.

THAT said....we are not moderated. If someone is being what YOU consider an asshat, you can not expect admin to sort them out or even consider they are breaking the rules. Call the fuckers out or flame them/debate them/argue them.

You saw something an attitude/behaviour/argument style you did not like and you called him on it. So did Rage.

Full marks, that is what we should do. 

BUT if that means he did not have a point with "Perfectly allowed to do this. I want to do this, I have no problem doing this" then it is hard for you to gain much purchase on this point....unless there is more.

At the same time I do not think he could really contest much against your right to call him on that or your belief of what kind of a person you thought he was for behaving that way as much of it is subjective. So long as you do not start to make grand claims (which you may wish to do if you feel you do not have enough decent ammunition to sink him) then you do not overplay your hand and place  him in a better or stronger position. Likewise his trying to play with words or concepts to redefined your arguments will not work because at base tacks it is obvious "You thought he was picking on people too much and not lending any variety beyond the putdown and that he was a jerk"

It makes for a fairly evenly positioned battle and with little to get a better footing. There is not likely any big blows or the like to be landed. Any claim or position has to be not too grand and any I think it comes down to who can "paint the better picture of the other"

I don't care if people like some and not others, it isn't my point. I will go into detail if anyone wants to see. I hate hypocrisy and I saw it with MLA. I ignored him after the whole Meadow thing until he decided to get butthurt about  me poking at him for using spell checker. I wasn't even trying to offend him, I was just poking at him. I didn't think he'd care. What annoys me is how he calls me or other fat and or ugly, yet well.. he won't be winning any bodybuilding competitions and he most certainly will never be on the cover of GQ. It annoys me when a fat person calls me fat as an insult. It is hypocrisy. The dude has a triple chin, himself. I am going to be busy till Thursday. Then I can talk more if you want.

[McGiver]

It is so difficult to be even.  Maybe impissible. Hypocrisy is I each one of us.

[Al Swearegen]

Ah OK. Hell that I do understand and yeah I honestly did not realise you were talking about that.
With shit like that, you could probably put forward a case for it being subjective or he could say "You are fat and so am i, so I know what I am talking about" BUT yeah in either case it is a bit weak and hypocritical.
I think he says it for effect. If I say x and the person dislikes x then all good and if they call me x back i will laugh it off and they won't. Dunno if this makes sense?
i am not sticking up for him but i will play the devil's advocate he, partially because i like you all and partially because I think neither claim is a bad claim and yet neither claim stronger than the other.

[odeon]

I don't think he cares, DFG. You, OTOH, show that you do care, with every single post.

The same could be argued about you defending him like he somehow "needs" it. I care to a certain point. I wanted to follow it through. Kinda an OCD thing, I think. And yes he does care. I want entertainment too. I made it so I have nothing to occupy me due to purposely removing distractions from schoolwork. It's playtime now.

^That argument would be flawed, though, since my reply was about you caring, not about him.

I "care" about the double standard and hypocrisy I see here. I find it odd out of all the members here you choose to defend MLA of all people. After all, the way he acts, he doesn't need your protection. Or does he? And yes he does care. He cared too much and left, IMO. Of course you will defend him until you are blue in the face. Nothing I say will be right in your eyes. We will have to agree to disagree at this point.

/shrugs

All I'm saying really is that you talk a lot about him now that he is gone.

[odeon]

I think he says it for effect.

I think most of what he said was for effect.

And I think he'd be thrilled to know that it's still working.

[RageBeoulve]

I think he says it for effect.

I think most of what he said was for effect.

And I think he'd be thrilled to know that it's still working.

^yeah. I think he was a fag too. Funny that a high school dropout and freshman in college was able to whip his lawyer ass in an argument.

Anyway. He showed character when he lost gracefully. He was a bully and a fag, but at least he was a good sport. *throws dingleberries on the grave* Ashes to ashes, shit to shit. Byebye MLA.

[Bastet]

I don't think he cares, DFG. You, OTOH, show that you do care, with every single post.

The same could be argued about you defending him like he somehow "needs" it. I care to a certain point. I wanted to follow it through. Kinda an OCD thing, I think. And yes he does care. I want entertainment too. I made it so I have nothing to occupy me due to purposely removing distractions from schoolwork. It's playtime now.

^That argument would be flawed, though, since my reply was about you caring, not about him.

I "care" about the double standard and hypocrisy I see here. I find it odd out of all the members here you choose to defend MLA of all people. After all, the way he acts, he doesn't need your protection. Or does he? And yes he does care. He cared too much and left, IMO. Of course you will defend him until you are blue in the face. Nothing I say will be right in your eyes. We will have to agree to disagree at this point.

/shrugs

All I'm saying really is that you talk a lot about him now that he is gone.

I only talk about him when someone mentions him. I do have a lot of thoughts I was never able to express. I was very busy with real life stuff which is more important. I got an A and that is all that counts. I am proud of myself for putting work before play. 

[Jack]

It is so difficult to be even.  Maybe impissible. Hypocrisy is I each one of us.

Really hoping you do that on purpose. It's great.

[McGiver]

It is so difficult to be even.  Maybe impissible. Hypocrisy is I each one of us.

Really hoping you do that on purpose. It's great.

its my stupid touch screen ignoring my commands.  And my ADD refusing to proofread.

You'll get used to it.