odeon's ask away-thread

[Osensitive1]

Sorry to butt in. Most of what you've said is a little confusing to me, but I think people here recognize what's going on with other members very well (not just talking abour richard) and everyone reacts in their own individual way.

Ok, cool. It's Callaway's way that I was objecting to. I think her approach is particularly ineffective in cases like the crap with Richard.

Yes, maybe I read things wrong and you are writing about specifics. The things you wrote about trust read as more general to the membership and kind of idealistic, but after reading again, see you may be writing specific in relation to Odeon. That's understandable, as I've been doing something simalar all along. I'm not a trusting person either, but don't much feel the need to start anywhere. Thanks for your reply.

[Pyraxis]

The things you wrote about trust read as more general to the membership and kind of idealistic, but after reading again, see you may be writing specific in relation to Odeon. That's understandable, as I've been doing something simalar all along. I'm not a trusting person either, but don't much feel the need to start anywhere. Thanks for your reply.

Ok that makes sense.

I don't know if it's idealistic or not. On one hand, sure, trust is a load of bullshit and I wouldn't ask it from anyone on a site like this. On the other hand, it's kind of staring me in the face right now that something like that is needed. I've been watching the callouts since, gawd I don't know when, when the site was founded I guess. Even when I wasn't posting, earlier this year, I was keeping one eye on the bits of the main event that you can see without logging in. I was thinking of the membership as a whole, since I don't know some of the newer members (you included), but Odeon in particular.

I mean if it's not about some basic level of respect for your opponent, where else are the callouts going to go? Will they always come down to these screaming postwhore tantrums? Probably... but the original idea was meaningful debate. Back up your words, all that jazz. So if I can see ways to encourage that, I will.

[Parts]

If someone fixed it with paint and posted it, you would really be ok with that and consider the whole thing resolved?

Anything can be altered the fact that paint was used on it already if posted  just proves that.  

[Pyraxis]

Anything can be altered the fact that paint was used on it already if posted  just proves that.  

Yeah I know. The point wasn't whether it could be forged, but whether Richard in particular would trust it, since he was the one asking for it.

[richard]

I mean really. My goodness, Just piant out ALL the sensative areas and post it already.

[Scrapheap]

Yes. i've already said I would. for the entire day of november 30th. Hit it

Richard, do you seriously believe that all 4 admins have conspired together, to lie to you about a profile prank that was so subtle, that it had to be pointed out to you, for you even to be aware that it even happened??



When I was an admin, I pranked your profile. Callaway jumped on my ass for it because she knew how sensitive you were. That's not consistent with the behavior you're accusing her of.

[odeon]

I was trying to say that it's just a message board. It should never be more important than real life, but I sometimes get the feeling that you treat it rather more seriously than that, and that's where I don't want to go. That is what I don't want to touch.

As for trusting me, why should you? Do you need to? I don't trust or distrust you, but I do find your posts entertaining and worthy of thought. Isn't that why we are here?

Where's the irony?

The irony is that some degree of trust is required when you have a bunch of really stubborn people. All the evidence in the world wasn't resolving this callout between Richard and Callaway. Neither Richard nor Callaway would drop it, even though the horse was ridiculously beyond dead. It was like an endurance game, who could hold onto blind stubbornness longer, or would it get blabberized or locked to stop the madness. And the thing that's missing in all that is trust, simple trust for somebody's word.

I get that it's only a message board to you. I do treat it more seriously than that because I don't see much difference between online life and offline life. It's people on the other end, regardless of whether you can see or hear them. I wouldn't say that a blind and deaf person had less of a life than a sighted and hearing person, because they communicated only through text, and in the same way I won't say that someone in front of their computer has less of a life than someone sitting in a group of friends. (I acknowledge there's as much stupid drama offline as online, it just presents differently, so I don't mean that all stupid drama is of life-threatening import.)

At any rate, trust. I would like to trust you on some level because it would allow me to continue having interesting arguments without it having to devolve to inane tactics like spamming or blabberizing or blatantly disregarding evidence. As the system is currently set up, those things are the inevitable results of arguments where people won't back down. But if there could be some kind of fundamental trust between comrades... not sure what word to use here, since clearly not everyone is friends, but you don't need to be friends with someone to treat them with respect... if it could be acknowledged that a degree of trust is necessary to have a functional community where everyone has the right to say what they want, then I think it would benefit this place as a whole.

OK... I agree--it would be nice with that sort of trust.  My question was honestly meant, though. Why should you trust me? I think I'm pretty much a WYSIWYG person. This is me, this is how I see things. But obviously people don't always trust me and I don't know how to change that. With Richard the issue is so basic that I don't even know how to approach it. I don't blame him but I also don't know what to do about it. No irony but also no trust.

It's still only a message board but don't think for one second that it isn't important to me. It is. I've met enough people online who've been as important to me as anyone offline, and I do not treat people differently depending on where I've met them. But people generally behave differently here than they would offline so it's different, for better or worse.

Make of that what you will.

[Semicolon]

What is the difference between the groups "News Box Feature" and "News Box Slave"?

[odeon]

Here's a snapshot of the mod log, sans IP addresses. Now can you let this subject die, Richard?

[odeon]

What is the difference between the groups "News Box Feature" and "News Box Slave"?

The news box feature group includes those who are the subject of a news item while the news box slave is the person responsible for writing or editing the news in the box.

[richard]

Finally. And yes, I can let it die now.

its exhuasting arguing with people online

[odeon]

Thank you.

[Adam]

what was that pmselle topic removed ?

Just asking out of curiosity btw, not accusing you of anything

[Semicolon]

What is the difference between the groups "News Box Feature" and "News Box Slave"?

The news box feature group includes those who are the subject of a news item while the news box slave is the person responsible for writing or editing the news in the box.

Is there a list, hyperlink, etc. that links the tagged item with the tagged member? In other words, is there a way to see which news box item is linked with which member (or vice versa) in such a way as to be visible to non-administrators?

[Callaway]

What is the difference between the groups "News Box Feature" and "News Box Slave"?

The news box feature group includes those who are the subject of a news item while the news box slave is the person responsible for writing or editing the news in the box.

Is there a list, hyperlink, etc. that links the tagged item with the tagged member? In other words, is there a way to see which news box item is linked with which member (or vice versa) in such a way as to be visible to non-administrators?

No, not unless the newsbox item happens to have a hyperlink to the post.