|
Post by ducktrapper on Sept 29, 2006 11:58:45 GMT -5
Hmmmm. Of course, then there was the "civil war".
|
|
|
Post by TDR on Sept 29, 2006 12:13:27 GMT -5
Hey,
I appreciate the candid talk about the Quotables thread.
I submit to you it was no more private that any other thread on the board. Anyone could post to it.
I wished it to remain a collection of quotable statements, by board members or from anywhere. Sometimes it devolved into a venue for spatting, which kinda messed it up. For me anyway.
I attempted to make it a cross section of what went on from day to day. And if you page back thru it, it will bring to mind various times and discussions.
It was meant to show the wit and humor, the sagacity, and the sometimes pithy exchanges we saw. That some folks saw it as an attack or an attempt to discredit anyone bothers me, because that was never my intent.
To folks who got their feeling hurt or felt they were misrepresented, I regret that. If in this discussion of governance, the tribe wants to determine a Quotables thread is divisive and forbidden, so be it.
Personally, I'm watching this whole process with some bemusement at this point, and I don't feel a need to jump in and try to control any of it.
|
|
|
Post by Supertramp78 on Sept 29, 2006 12:24:22 GMT -5
On the whole, I really liked the quotes. The folks here are some of the smartest, funniest people I have ever read and my gosh there were way too many coke on the keyboard moments to not try and save.
|
|
|
Post by John B on Sept 29, 2006 12:25:44 GMT -5
Oh CRAP, you've been reading all this?
|
|
|
Post by ducktrapper on Sept 29, 2006 12:37:28 GMT -5
TDR - As a whole I guess I agree with Tramp. I'm not easily hurt so I wasn't ever hurt by the thread but that doesn't mean I liked being quoted out of context to make me look stupid. Heck, I don't need anyone's help for that.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 29, 2006 12:43:00 GMT -5
TDR,
I want to be really clear here. I REALLY LOVE the idea of the quotables thread. I even said...
"2. Quoteables. I have SUCH mixed feelings about this because I really love it when we highlight the wit, the intelligence, the compassionate good feelings that are so often expressed here."
And as I page back through the quoteables, it functions as you say -- a wonderful slice of the time in which the quotes were pulled. Enjoyable nostalgia.
And I prefaced my first post here expressly saying that what I had in mind was NOT to influence potential rules ), but rather, to influence potential behavior (I suppose I put it in the wrong thread.)
The original intent of the quotables was good. Heck, cheerleading is actually often good -- I want someone (everyone who believes it to be so) to cheerlead when VI posts a narrative about a stroll in the woods. I want to cheerlead when tramp posts soomething pants-wettingly funny. I want someone to cheerlead when Bill or Dave (from Scotland) talks about his gigging.
But what I also want is for people to think twice when they post to the "quoteables". I want them to ask themselves a few questions:
1. am I only posting this to emphasize a point I agree with, or is this really "quoteworthy" prose?
2. am I being unfair to the other side of the debate? Have they made an equally valid point that is now, herein, going to be impossible to answer.
3. would I consider posting this -- is this good enough of a quote -- that I'd post it even if I didn't agree with the pov?
4. who is going to be hurt by my emphasizing this quote?
I am also quick to admit that anyone COULD have posted to your thread, TDR. And for some reason, the only quote-worthy people were spokesmen for the "left". That's not the fault of those who pulled the quotes. That's obviously just the serendipity of a forum full of un-quoteworthy conservatives. ;D
|
|
|
Post by TDR on Sept 29, 2006 12:49:42 GMT -5
Well if we start another quotables thread, I for one will be especially sensitive not to quote anyone in such a way that it might offend them or misrepresent. I tried to do that after Millring and Duck expressed how that's the way they were seeing it. And I quit quoting Strick altogether.. even some of his funny stuff, because it got too sensitive.
Maybe someone else wants to start a Quotables, and then nobody has to think its a "private" thread. There's no such thing.
On another subject. Apparently some folks thought the problem was politics. It was repeatedly suggested we needed a quarantine area for all political discussion. Too radioactive.
Is that the consensus here? Das politikal est verbotten? Much of the daily topical stuff out of the news turns political. Those silly politicians, that pesky war, them goofy French. Haillary. Are we gonna talk about the news, or is that for somewhere else?
Just wondering what the rules are.
On edit: Hadn't seen your post yet when I did this one, Millring. As to those quote worthy conservatives.. Strick was one, sometime Southernfried and Shannon and Flake and Evan and AlanC and Millring and Loopy and Cribbs. All those guy are in there someplace. And if there was a point you thought belonged in, heck say it and quote yerself. I won't slam you for it, I'll just smile.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 29, 2006 12:53:31 GMT -5
I just hope we don't have an overreaction to what has happened. For the most part, a reasonably thick skin and a willingness to ignore some things will solve most problems. People have to be given a fair amount of leeway if the place is going to have any zip. Sometimes they'll go too far. Ordinarily, that should be accepted and put behind us. I hope we don't get to the point where we're hearing about rules all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Cribbs on Sept 29, 2006 12:55:09 GMT -5
I was thinking about that earlier when I was driving around to some job sites, enjoying the everlasting goodness out of a large lip-stretcher of Copenhagen.
Like anything here, it depends on what the forumites want. I would guess if it ever got to the point where everyone wanted a forum just for political no-holds-barred discussion, then so be it, I'll make one.
I had no problems with the no-holds-barred political postings at TTT, I just hated to see them get personal.
I suppose we should give it a wait-and-see approach once the honeymoon period is over.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 29, 2006 12:59:22 GMT -5
Ditto. No one's views ever offended me. Vehemence didn't bother me. Personal put-downs did.
|
|
|
Post by ducktrapper on Sept 29, 2006 13:08:31 GMT -5
Easy. When I'm an idiot ... don't tell me so!
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Sept 29, 2006 14:14:32 GMT -5
I don't mind people quoteing me out of contex and making me look like a fool. I think it's funny
|
|