Nope, me! #1! #1! #1!
Problemo?
Nope, me! #1! #1! #1!
E=I*R
Not!
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
o
Problemo?
Not!
This is going to take a while.
E=I*R
Not!
(that's the general idea)
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Problemo?
Or... Is it?
E=I*R
I think it is...
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Problemo?
Ummmmm...
or let others argue while you watch from the sideline and MODERATE them.Originally Posted by ohms_law
thank you for understanding this aspect.
and for stating so eloquently what is at the core of recent events
In many of these threads someonne , or several someones, have asked him to just quit it already. leave them alone , whatever.
and yet he persists.
should i really have to refrain from posting about a cool player because i fear a mod might twist it into a flamewar ?
should i even be thinking that ?
a "moderator" by definition is a non participant in whatever the "fray" may be.
mediator diplomat negotiator referee are decent synonyms.
one simply cannot be boxer AND referee.
not in a fair fight at least
o
If moderating entailed "watching from the sidelines" and not participating in discussions, I would not have accepted the position.
Don't even try to say that I twisted your thread into a flame war. ALL I did was make an observation and state that the screenshot showcased an issue with the game. Nor did I flame anybody. I have rarely flamed in debates, despite being the target of many flames. Arguing my position, however strongly I may, is not flaming. Nor is defending myself.should i really have to refrain from posting about a cool player because i fear a mod might twist it into a flamewar ?
should i even be thinking that ?
I'm not going to sit back here and take insults. I'm not going to let myself be baselessly attacked, sorry. If defending myself against attacks is wrong, than I'm guilty. I'm not going to give up any debate if I am not confronted with a strong enough case against my position. There aren't many people that would.
Frankly, I'm sick of the notion that I'm the only person that "never gives up". I argue my stance, and if somebody argues against it, I refute their arguments, if possible. That is how a debate works. Nearly everybody that participates in a debate "never gives up" unless they are a) tired of the debate or b) change their opinion due to the argument against them.
A forum moderator is not a non-participant in the forums. A forum moderator is a poster. I've never been on a forum where this wasn't the case (outside of Wizards of the Coast, where the moderators are actual employees of the company). As I said above, if moderating entailed not participating in forum discussions, I would not have accepted the position.a "moderator" by definition is a non participant in whatever the "fray" may be.
mediator diplomat negotiator referee are decent synonyms.
one simply cannot be boxer AND referee.
E=I*R
In support of HGM here, he's hardly the only guilty party. Indeed, I'd say that he's most often baited into the problem threads, and go so far as to say that there are people who do the baiting intentionally and with malice.
As for the thread that started this, I'd classify that as "baiting". I don't believe that you did it intentionally by any means, but there was really no reason for that thread to turn in the direction that it did beyond "I don't like HGM".
To HGM (and several others as well) it's not the debate itself that people become upset about. It's the restating of points, over and over again, that creates the problems. Yes, others do bring this on. Yes, it's acceptable to defend yourself. However, for one thing there are others around who will defend you. For another, simply rephrasing statements to restate your arguments doesn't move the debate forward at all, and frustration is why people tend to become upset more than anything else. What's worse though is that, aside from those of you who end up being directly involved in the debates, no one is really paying attention to the conversations after a certain point. They end up becoming a waste of space, but what's worse is that the bad feelings develop between everyone and there are long term consequences to that (this thread is a good example of that).
You insist that there is something a machine cannot do. If you will tell me precisely what it is that a machine cannot do, then I can always make a machine which will do just that! -J. von Neumann
Banishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?)A Duesenberg reference is "how to get the last word no matter what"? You're right! I should just be banished from these boards for that outrageous statement!
o
I often times find myself having to repeat my point because others continually ignore the points I make, or selectively ignore certain parts of my argument, or attempt to state my position and do so wrongly.
They still using the guillotine for it in Paris?Banishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?)
Registered User
Vick might have some ideas that he practiced on those dogsBanishment is not enough how about Hung,Drawn & Quartered ? Always liked those civilised punishments,am surprised they aren't still in use ....(or maybe they are for speeding offenses in Texas ?)
Posting Permissions
