Forums | MacLife

Alien wrote:

...I was called on it by Oatmeal (in private) and promised him to tone it down...As for the XYZ thing:
http://www.clubhouse54.com/phpbb2/image … /drama.gif

,xtG
.tsooJ

I figured Oatie would do as much.  that is why I didn't raise anything in that thread.  He has done the same with me... in private!  Not every reprimand/ comment needs to be on public display for the drama lovers.  This is why I respect and listen to oatie

Yes. So stop doing that.

Donovan Osaya, is there any reason why you seem to feel the need to defender a moderator, even when he was clearly out of line? 

Users have all the right to complain, and if you don't have a problem with what Alien said in the linked thread, then you have major ethical issues.

Alien said:

You're quite welcome. Now kindly go smurf yourself and croak, will ya. You smurfing piece of human waste.

What if, what of, what if? Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's nice and easy for ya, right there. Good thing they shot him, huh? I really,t ruly hope some copper someday will mistake you for a terrist and blow your smurfing head off.

No. NokX would die a happy man knowing that the guy blowing his dysfunctional brains out was doing the right thing by taking out the threat that is NokX. And the world would be a better place, rid of human garbage like him.

You are an idiot.

Difference is, I'm not about to betray the trust that others have placed in me.

Yeah, because you're obviously someone of high moral:

What if, what of, what if? Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's nice and easy for ya, right there. Good thing they shot him, huh? I really,t ruly hope some copper someday will mistake you for a terrist and blow your smurfing head off.

If you want to be able to post as if you are just another poster you should at the very least be held to the same standards.

Their argument makes no sense. 

The moderators want to post like "any other member", but want the freedom of death wishes and insults, without being banned. 

I was called on it by Oatmeal (in private) and promised him to tone it down.

You had to be told to tone it down?   

You had to be told that death wishes were unacceptable? 

I'd hate to see what you would have said if Oatmeal didn't warn you.   By the way, we all know that if one of us had said the exact same things to a moderator, they'd all call for a banning. 

So, I'm free to call insult everyone now, right?  And I get off with just a warning?   Like Alien, I'm just 'any other member.'

Last edited by Habs24 (2005-08-01 8:52 pm)

IcarusFountain wrote:

As indicated by my occasional urge to send some discussions to a more private venue, I obviously prefer the settling of issues behind closed doors.  I understand, though, when some people want things kept public so that they're "on the record" and can be referenced later on.

Part of me wants to settle this off-record, and part of me wants it to be public.  That's why I'm fine with this either way.

No no no, public flogging in the town square I say. We minithinkers like our blood

Habs24 wrote:

Yes. So stop doing that.

Donovan Osaya, is there any reason why you seem to feel the need to defender a moderator, even when he was clearly out of line?

Habs, re-read the quoted part in my post and response again.

Word play, is the hint.

Not that your assumptions are wrong, but they're not entirely right, either.

Last edited by Donovan Osaya (2005-08-01 9:16 pm)

Whoops, I was not trying yo filter dodge.  Just have slow fingers with the double h.  Who knew.

XYZ wrote:

I do not label everyone who disagrees with me a homophobe. I only point out homophobia when it occurs. My interest in gay issues has been poorly received by many posters and moderators, people whose homophobia causes them to lash out at me or snipe.

From what I've see, if you posted about icecream with the same verve and vigour you do gay issues then you'd still be getting the snipes and lashings.

benightedbastard wrote:

XYZ wrote:

I do not label everyone who disagrees with me a homophobe. I only point out homophobia when it occurs. My interest in gay issues has been poorly received by many posters and moderators, people whose homophobia causes them to lash out at me or snipe.

From what I've see, if you posted about icecream with the same verve asnd vigour you do gay issues then you'd still be getting the snipes and lashings.

eh?  Mods are closing in.  I have made myself a target!  Oh no!  I take it back!!!  No really, I don't care.  This  thread is getting boring.  Too much "he said 'she" said'",  Would rather find out how to bump my PB 1 ghz into the next level.  Smell ya later.

Yes, Habs, et al., let's find the member/moderator that we don't find favour with today and oust them so that we might form a perfect utopia!

mo' ron wrote:

IcarusFountain wrote:

Wait wait wait... XYZ, Mo'ron, how exactly was what I said homophobic?

You said:

And XYZ, you do whine too much.  And Alien was right on when he pointed out that you create drama.  You know I've agreed with you on a lot of things, but if you're the same in real life as you are around here, you're definitely one of those people that give the majority of homosexuals in the world a bad name.  You're a drama queen.

Basically, you implied that homosexuals around the world, as you see it, have a "bad name". This shows that for some odd reason, you view homosexuals as being looked down on by most people, and that they have a "bad name". It's not explicitly anti-gay, but it does seem to reflect some latent bitterness or distaste for people who are gay. If you live in a backward area of the country, where people around you constantly bash gays, and they change the TV channel is they see a gay, or walk out of a movie if they see a gay, then your skewed perspective of gays around the world might be understandable. But, I wouldn't expect someone who was completely okay with the idea of gays, and someone being gay, to comment how they think gays around the world have a bad name. I don't feel this way, and i'm also not a homosexual.

Okay, you seem to have taken what I said, misunderstood it, and then dug WAY too deep to find some hidden meaning (and then got so confused that you make no sense).  I didn't say that all gays have a bad name, nor did I say that all people in the world think poorly of gays.  However, you can't deny that there is a stereotype, and that there are people int he world who do think poorly of gays.

As you admitted, there are people out there who think poorly of homosexuals.  However, from my experience, those people are actually against what they think homosexuals are (the stereotype).  One of my pals in high school was gay, and the only people who knew back then were his partners, myself, and one other mutual friend.  The "hicks" at the school didn't bother him because he kept his preferences low-profile, although they beat up a couple of his partners.  Why?  Because he seemed "normal" by their standards, while his partners were what is commonly called "flaming."  If they had found out Dan was gay, he'd have gotten hurt too, even though he didn't fit the "flaming" stereotype.  From my experience with homosexuals, most of them don't match that stereotype, but they are victimized because they're gay.  Then there's the group that I perceive as being the minority of gays; the ones who are flamingly gay, who push their sexuality (which should be private) in anyway they can (think "Jack" from Will & Grace), and always think that they're being victimized, even when they're not.  These relatively few homosexuals give the entire group a "bad name"--a stereotype.

IcarusFountain wrote:

Then there's the group that I perceive as being the minority of gays; the ones who are flamingly gay, who push their sexuality (which should be private) in anyway they can (think "Jack" from Will & Grace), and always think that they're being victimized, even when they're not.  These relatively few homosexuals give the entire group a "bad name"--a stereotype.

These people aren't "pushing" their sexuality on anyone... that's their natural personality. However, since it's somewhat effeminate, other people are offended by it for some reason, which is a bigoted way to think. Being one of those types of effeminate, flamboyant gays isn't necessarily being a drama queen, and there is no reason that those types of gays should give the rest of the gays a bad name. Someone being a drama queen is just someone being a drama queen, and that classification isn't exclusive to gays.

Goddamit,  I thought we were talking about alien being an smurf!

I dunno about that.

You think?