Something earlier I read got me thinking. Consider this:

Statement1: I would like more civility
The protagonist sees: I'm being dealt with uncivilly and I would like to see more civility
The antagonist sees: I'm being accused of being uncivil and the protaginist would rather not have me here

Statement2: I would like more decency
The protagonist sees: I'm being dealt with indecently and would like more decency
The antagonist sees: I'm being accused of being indecent and the protagonist would rather not have me here

To me the second statement antagnoist stance seems more ridiculous than the first and I got to thinking why that was to me.
I believe it's because whatever stance we're talking about more people have the assumption that others are at least decent people.

This leads me to believe that decency is more of a qualifier for what's considered basic human morality than civility is. Maybe civility isn't a desired trait in every environment but decency is expected. Their only difference being connotation according to some definitions.

This also leads me to believe that people step into the protagonist/antagonist role and personalize words and their meanings. Perhaps this is the root of the phrase "taking it (too) personal". idk, just my thoughts.
The protagonist makes it about them and sees incivility and indecency as personal attacks on them, instead of that being just how that opponent is, or how the environment is.
The antagonist makes the same assertion and sees if as an attack on their character/behavior rather than it being just a desire or unproven stance.

IDK, maybe everyone's just cracra, this is definately the 3 lbs of food talking. I'll have to get back to the other couple of threads after nappynap, just wanted to get this thought down.

Jimi Hendrix:
When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

(November 22, 2018 at 2:10 pm)no one Wrote: Jimi Hendrix:
When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.

Needs more Stratocaster.

(November 22, 2018 at 1:57 pm)tackattack Wrote: Something earlier I read got me thinking. Consider this:

Statement1: I would like more civility
The protagonist sees: I'm being dealt with uncivilly and I would like to see more civility
The antagonist sees: I'm being accused of being uncivil and the protaginist would rather not have me here

Statement2: I would like more decency
The protagonist sees: I'm being dealt with indecently and would like more decency
The antagonist sees: I'm being accused of being indecent and the protagonist would rather not have me here

To me the second statement antagnoist stance seems more ridiculous than the first and I got to thinking why that was to me.
I believe it's because whatever stance we're talking about more people have the assumption that others are at least decent people.

This leads me to believe that decency is more of a qualifier for what's considered basic human morality than civility is. Maybe civility isn't a desired trait in every environment but decency is expected. Their only difference being connotation according to some definitions.

This also leads me to believe that people step into the protagonist/antagonist role and personalize words and their meanings. Perhaps this is the root of the phrase "taking it (too) personal". idk, just my thoughts.
The protagonist makes it about them and sees incivility and indecency as personal attacks on them, instead of that being just how that opponent is, or how the environment is.
The antagonist makes the same assertion and sees if as an attack on their character/behavior rather than it being just a desire or unproven stance.

IDK, maybe everyone's just cracra, this is definately the 3 lbs of food talking. I'll have to get back to the other couple of threads after nappynap, just wanted to get this thought down.

Do you remember a forum war (happens once or twice a year), that went to a forum split (atheistheaven or something) some years ago? It was something about a new rule introducting "no insults". History does repeat itself.

I really don't care personally for insults, even when someone says bad things about my mother. I know she isn't those things and such ideas reveal a wavering mind to me.

I have told this before. There is the factor pride or to admit to ever be wrong here. This is augmented in the internet. But then I am no shrink, all I have is a release paper on a napkin

No different to rl.

We want this place to be real, right?
I WANT to know who the rude arseholes are so I can skim past their posts ...

Been working well for me....

Why are they still here? Because the RULES says so! CHANGE THE RULES but don't shoot the postman.

Statement 1: I like to squeeze the tooth paste from the middle of the tube.
The protagonist sees: I should be able to squeeze the tooth paste how ever I want.
The antagonist sees: I see a waste of tooth paste which causes a constant irritation for no good reason. The madness must stop!

Now that's inspired. Might just save my wife's life.

Ya'll just can't even imagine how glad I am that I was not around for any/every thing that led up to this point.

(November 22, 2018 at 10:05 pm)outtathereligioncloset Wrote: Ya'll just can't even imagine how glad I am that I was not around for any/every thing that led up to this point.

It appears to be far from over, though it appears to be only at a simmer at this point. Some departures, some people told to fuck off, some outright banned. You know, the usual for a site on the web.

Hast thou not seen the holy roller of toothpaste, tis the only way to even the battleground with the wife
Holy Roller