[split] Discussion About Potential Rule Change and Staff Action

[Violet]

What he does isn't achieved by a simple reference and even if it was you make efforts towards other subjects on a regular basis.

* Violet makes absolutely no effort to do anything.

Responding to Cinjin in a certain thread would require effort. I don't like exertion, even when polite and amiable.

Other subjects just happen to be in my noggin, down some deep hole probably caused by worms in the brain. Mehmet too does speak on other subjects, and he might make an effort on it. Example: Gay marriage. He's all over that, and it's not nationalistic in the slightest.

Or maybe I'm wrong and it is slightly nationalistic... I don't care. Everything I say is tinged by those things most important to me, and Mehmet is not different from me in this case.

The fact of the matter is you and he are not remotely comparable because you're extremely open to the discussion of other subjects and the only thing you do that could be seen as derailing are the short yet amusing references you occasionally leave that are read, laughed at then forgotten just as quickly. The disruption, if any, is minimal.

This is more of a notation on how much of a failure I am than it is an understanding that I do infact disrupt threads (constantly). Even, and sometimes especially serious ones. Like this one.

Mehmet is open to discussion of other subjects... simply not the same ones I am open to. I am not really that open to discussion of anything... I spout off some ridiculous nonsense that might at first hold up and deflect most critical things. Sure, I'll explain trans-related issues to a foul-mouthed asshole... no, I won't go into existentialism, determinism, and have you even seen me in the philosophy forum lately? Sure, I am these things... but they just aren't important to me. Similarly, I will not discuss atheism/theism: I do not care in the slightest about these.

I only come off as particularly open... I think largely because I am particularly open about sex, transsexuality, relationships... and I'm very happy-go-lucky that says (often silly) things about her personal life.

Mehmet is open to a different set of topics to me... and perhaps he does have less 'net openness'. I don't think that's what is at issue here... how much do you see leo-rcc post? Not often... and when he does it usually involves robotics (because leo is a badass), (a)theism, or humor. This has nothing to do with Mehmet not being as multifaceted as Cthulhu... far more likely that your concern is that he is overabundant in a singular topic that you find disruptive/distasteful. I'm assuming this is your worry... please correct me if I am wrong.

If you were a conservative republican person reading my posts... would not you find what I have to say incredibly distasteful, and very disruptively off-topic? Reading with my surviving grandmother's voice, I'm practically foaming at the mouth in effort to maintain that sneer.

I fail to see why you would subject yourself to such an inadequete and insulting comparison.

Personally, it does not feel inadequate, or insulting. I like Mehmet, no I do not agree with much of what he says. Outside of my pretend ego, I do not feel any sort of superiority over him (or that many people, frankly).

And I do not endure remote slighting by comparing myself to him.

I used myself as a comparison because I can easily see it. Yes, we are different people... but thing about apples and oranges? They are both fruit. We're certainly not so far apart as the honeybee and the space rock.

[Reforged]

What he does isn't achieved by a simple reference and even if it was you make efforts towards other subjects on a regular basis.

* Violet Lilly Blossom makes absolutely no effort to do anything.

Responding to Cinjin in a certain thread would require effort. I don't like exertion, even when polite and amiable.

Other subjects just happen to be in my noggin, down some deep hole probably caused by worms in the brain. Mehmet too does speak on other subjects, and he might make an effort on it. Example: Gay marriage. He's all over that, and it's not nationalistic in the slightest.

Or maybe I'm wrong and it is slightly nationalistic... I don't care. Everything I say is tinged by those things most important to me, and Mehmet is not different from me in this case.

The fact of the matter is you and he are not remotely comparable because you're extremely open to the discussion of other subjects and the only thing you do that could be seen as derailing are the short yet amusing references you occasionally leave that are read, laughed at then forgotten just as quickly. The disruption, if any, is minimal.

This is more of a notation on how much of a failure I am than it is an understanding that I do infact disrupt threads (constantly). Even, and sometimes especially serious ones. Like this one.

Mehmet is open to discussion of other subjects... simply not the same ones I am open to. I am not really that open to discussion of anything... I spout off some ridiculous nonsense that might at first hold up and deflect most critical things. Sure, I'll explain trans-related issues to a foul-mouthed asshole... no, I won't go into existentialism, determinism, and have you even seen me in the philosophy forum lately? Sure, I am these things... but they just aren't important to me. Similarly, I will not discuss atheism/theism: I do not care in the slightest about these.

I only come off as particularly open... I think largely because I am particularly open about sex, transsexuality, relationships... and I'm very happy-go-lucky that says (often silly) things about her personal life.

Mehmet is open to a different set of topics to me... and perhaps he does have less 'net openness'. I don't think that's what is at issue here... how much do you see leo-rcc post? Not often... and when he does it usually involves robotics (because leo is a badass), (a)theism, or humor. This has nothing to do with Mehmet not being as multifaceted as Cthulhu... far more likely that your concern is that he is overabundant in a singular topic that you find disruptive/distasteful. I'm assuming this is your worry... please correct me if I am wrong.

If you were a conservative republican person reading my posts... would not you find what I have to say incredibly distasteful, and very disruptively off-topic? Reading with my surviving grandmother's voice, I'm practically foaming at the mouth in effort to maintain that sneer.

I fail to see why you would subject yourself to such an inadequete and insulting comparison.

Personally, it does not feel inadequate, or insulting. I like Mehmet, no I do not agree with much of what he says. Outside of my pretend ego, I do not feel any sort of superiority over him (or that many people, frankly).

And I do not endure remote slighting by comparing myself to him.

I used myself as a comparison because I can easily see it. Yes, we are different people... but thing about apples and oranges? They are both fruit. We're certainly not so far apart as the honeybee and the space rock.

No offence but I don't see anything here that I legitimately need to counter.
The lack of content for your arguement kind of speaks for itself, theres very little defence for him if any.
The fact of the matter is he is about as open to other subjects as the clu-clux clan is to minorities which would be fine if he didn't make a direct effort to sabotage as many discussions as he can get away with and replace them with his own favorate subject. That is what I object to in this instance. Not nationalism, not racism but intentional disruption on a massive scale.

I never claimed to feel a superiority over him, just a distain for those who would intentionally, maliciously and repeatedly destroy any chance of a fresh debate. Say what you will about yourself, I find you a pleasent individual, I've never witnessed you do what he does and I sincerely doubt you've done it 7+ times in a row. Even now you have the basic decency to attempt to speak at least in part on the subject we are discussing instead of shifting to a particular one of your choosing. The randomness you mix in with it is simply endearing, not disruptive.

[Violet]

No offence but I don't see anything here that I legitimately need to counter.
The lack of content for your arguement kind of speaks for itself, theres very little defence for him if any.

Dismiss me if you wish, but don't dare suggest that your kiss-off is anything but your short attention span getting in the way of your ability to counter my multifaceted defense of mehmet (and of my comparing him to me, which you contested previously.)

I have very little defense for your behavior, if any. I'm lax about rules and procedure, but that doesn't mean you're not engaging in similarly sketch behavior.

---

http://atheistforums.org/thread-1952.html

It is not appropriate to make a public thread to complain about another user.

If you feel a user has violated the rules, the best thing to do is to report the post in which they have done so. Doing so brings the matter to the attention of the moderators/admins almost immediately and action, if deemed necessary, is taken soon after.

---

Your concerns have been summarily rejected, and you have the audacity to to suggest that such needs no legitimate response, AND THEN GO RIGHT ON WITH THE WITCH HUNT?! What the fuck man? It's bad form, and that's just not cool.

The fact of the matter is he is about as open to other subjects as the clu-clux clan is to minorities which would be fine if he didn't make a direct effort to sabotage as many discussions as he can get away with and replace them with his own favorate subject. That is what I object to in this instance. Not nationalism, not racism but intentional disruption on a massive scale.

He has 2000 posts, and I have yet to notice any intentional disruption. Hell, I'm hard pressed to see any disruption. He provides his opinion and it is not a popular one. THAT IS THE ISSUE HERE, and I don't think you're blind. You're calling out intentional disruption... and just what are you doing?! Think about it. But don't think too hard, you might give yourself a headache. It feels like a heartache, minus the wrenching and fear that your heart's gonna explode.

Here are examples of his openness to discuss:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-13090-po...#pid291966
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12827-po...#pid289541
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12966-po...#pid288411
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12951-po...#pid288410
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12895-po...#pid287137

His posts are varied. Get your head out of your arse and maybe you'll see that.

I never claimed to feel a superiority over him, just a distain for those who would intentionally, maliciously and repeatedly destroy any chance of a fresh debate.

Hmmm...

"The lack of content for your arguement kind of speaks for itself, theres very little defence for him if any."

Try again. I'm giving you a fresh debate, please do not intentionally skip by my arguments unless you wish to look hypocritical.

Say what you will about yourself, I find you a pleasent individual, I've never witnessed you do what he does and I sincerely doubt you've done it 7+ times in a row. Even now you have the basic decency to attempt to speak at least in part on the subject we are discussing instead of shifting to a particular one of your choosing. The randomness you mix in with it is simply endearing, not disruptive.

I've done some pretty bullshit things, Raphiel. Usually happens when I get pissed off (not a particularly easy thing to do).

Once again, read my typical post from the standpoint of a very conservative and reserved individual. It just so happens this forum is particularly populated by generally 'liberal' people... Mehmet's views would largely fit in with a conservative and reserved population. Here they are unpopular. We don't blatantly call out 5th's tendency to turn everything into sex-related bull. You want someone who is confined to a singular topic, and disrupts/derails threads onto that topic... look no further than 5th Horseman's sex talk. Again, that is the environment of this forum, hence it is accepted and even liked.

As demonstrated, Mehmet often discusses the subject(s) of a thread. I can count far more easily the number of times his nationalism is baited out than I can find times when he brought it up out of the blue. And when he does bring it up, it is usually related to the topic in some way.

[Shell B]

I feel like I should point out that this was meant to redirect this discussion about the rules and what you would like to see change. There is certainly no guarantee that anything will change, but this thread is meant for discussion about that.

Now, if there continues to be derailing of threads and creating of threads meant to attack one member, I will start a discussion with staff about potential warnings. I have said enough times by now that we do not condone that kind of behavior. This thread becomes about the rule change objectively and without regard to a single member or I will move to close it.

Thank you.

[Reforged]

Small sample with the little time I had, I'll look for more if you like:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12979.html
http://atheistforums.org/thread-11694.html
http://atheistforums.org/thread-13009-po...#pid289875
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12870-po...#pid287110
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12846-po...#pid285777
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12762-po...#pid284454
http://atheistforums.org/thread-12780-page-3.html

He does it subtly where he can get away with it. Read through those threads and you'll find everyone of them has an instance where he twisted the subject matter into a debate on his country.
Would you like me to find more? I hope I'm not disrupting this single thread too much by using it for its intended purpose of debate on a potential rule change Violet.

---

I feel like I should point out that this was meant to redirect this discussion about the rules and what you would like to see change. There is certainly no guarantee that anything will change, but this thread is meant for discussion about that.

Now, if there continues to be derailing of threads and creating of threads meant to attack one member, I will start a discussion with staff about potential warnings. I have said enough times by now that we do not condone that kind of behavior. This thread becomes about the rule change objectively and without regard to a single member or I will move to close it.

Thank you.

Fair enough.

[Shell B]

I hope I'm not disrupting this single thread too much by using it for its intended purpose of debate on a potential rule change.

Don't be facetious. I have brain cells. Objectivity, try it. You can discuss the rule change without continuously making it about a single user. It's starting to sound more like a vendetta than a constructive discussion and I am slowly becoming intolerant of it. I offered up a place to discuss the rule change, not a place to continue the snarky, sarcastic singling out that brought us to this level.

ETA: I appreciate your acknowledgement of my previous post.

[Violet]

* Violet nods at the Shelly.

I don't see any rules that need changing or adding. Y'all got an awesome forum here

* Violet dons her farmer's hat, plucks a piece of dead grass out of the field, and lightly chews on it out of the corner of her mouth.

---

I have brain cells. Objectivity, try it.

What kind of drink is Objectivity if it has left you with brain cells? Seems counterproductive to me

[Reforged]

I hope I'm not disrupting this single thread too much by using it for its intended purpose of debate on a potential rule change.

Don't be facetious. I have brain cells. Objectivity, try it. You can discuss the rule change without continuously making it about a single user. It's starting to sound more like a vendetta than a constructive discussion and I am slowly becoming intolerant of it. I offered up a place to discuss the rule change, not a place to continue the snarky, sarcastic singling out that brought us to this level.

ETA: I appreciate your acknowledgement of my previous post.

I was directing that at Violet in response and have altered my post so thats more apparant, my mistake. I apologize.

[Violet]

I was directing that at Violet in response and have altered my post so thats more apparant, my mistake. I apologize.

That entire discussion is about a singular member... hence my discontinuation of it. I'm a good girl, I listen to the Master's Mistress

Forums go in every direction... all at once! No wonder I love them

[Reforged]

* Violet Lilly Blossom nods at the Shelly.

I don't see any rules that need changing or adding. Y'all got an awesome forum here

* Violet Lilly Blossom dons her farmer's hat, plucks a piece of dead grass out of the field, and lightly chews on it out of the corner of her mouth.

---

I have brain cells. Objectivity, try it.

What kind of drink is Objectivity if it has left you with brain cells? Seems counterproductive to me

My point is that there is a loophole in the rules that has clearly been exploited to monopolyse multiple threads for a particular purpose regardless of their original subject matter. It prevents free discussion.

I believe this loophole should be closed to prevent any further exploitation by people who have similar ideas of using multiple threads to force their own agenda on others. It would be protecting the very thing which the majority of people go to forums for; the ability to discuss a wide variety of interesting subjects.