Expressing our opinions

[drew70]

Kitten sweetheart, I'm almost always in a great mood, and up till now thought you were as well. I'm just giving my opinion, always to be taken with a grain of salt. Just because my opinion differs doesn't mean I don't listen to anybody, any more than I expect others to change their opinions listening to me. It's just a simple exchange of ideas. Don't read too much into it.

Mitch, I know you're a big believer in the Golden Rule, and I'm happy for you that this environment suits you. This isn't a new issue, as you're no doubt aware. I don't know if you were around two years ago when I and several others hashed out all the pros and cons of moderated forums and the TMF's particular style thereof, but I don't intend to repeat that lengthy thread. The one thing I did learn from that thread is that my opinions of forum censorship are in the vast minority, so the TMF administration is pretty much doing the right thing in accommodating the majority. I'll abide by it, but don't expect me to buy into the philosophy.

My feelings on this subject are summed up nicely in a song parody I posted a while back...

People Ought To Be Free by Drew70
(sung to the tune of "People Got To Be Free" by the Rascals)

All the forum over, so easy to see
People being censored most heinously
Listen, please listen, don't moderate me.
When posting their feelings, people ought to be free.

You should see, what a lovely forum this could be.
If only we could be less dependant...on the mods.
It seems to me, what an easy easy thing this should be,
To deal efficiently with all offendants

All the forum over, so easy to see
People holding back, posting cautiously
I can't understand it, so simple to me
People ought to post what-ever they feel

If there's a man, who posts a personal and then gets slammed.
All it takes is him to understand it's just words on a screen..ah..ahh
It seems to me, we should solve it individually.
And I'll do unto you if you get too mean.

There'll be shouting, there'll be pouting, there'll be posturin'
It's best to let it out rather than hold it in.
Ask me my opinion, slamming trolls is no sin
Moderation's boring, let the fun begin!

 

[ticklkitten]

Drew- I wasn't referring to you when I posted the above comment. I was referring to yjgfn's refusal to take to heart anything we were saying. Your opinion of the matter is argued well. Even if I don't agree with someone's pov I can respect it if there is thought behind it. Anyhow, yeah, still pretty chipper here. 😀

 

[Mitchell666]

Sheep

This is how I see it, the sheep shall follow their leader into the fire and enjoy every minute of it.

 

[qjakal]

The Golden Rule is futile, in my opinion, and it's definition is lost in ambiguity. On the one hand, we're told it's okay to disagree as long as it's done with respect. On the other hand we're told that everything we say must be positive, constructive, and keeping to the topic of the thread as set by the original post. These two prime directives can clash with each other in many instances.

For example, let's say Frank starts a thread by saying that feathers are the best way in which to tickle, and maybe gives some examples from personal experience. Joe reads the thread and thinks to himself, 'That's bullshit. Long nails are best!' Now Joe would prefer to be able to say it like that, but knows if he does, he'll get bleeped. So instead he says, "Gee, I don't know, Frank. Feathers don't tickle nearly as much as people think. Long nails are far more effective, in my opinion."

That sounds pretty innocent and sociable doesn't it? Yet by TMF standards this is a Golden Rule violation on two counts. First, by contradicting Frank outright, he is being neither constructive, positive, nor supportive of the original post. He is in fact saying the exact opposite, that feathers are not the best way in which to tickle. The second violation comes when he mentions "long nails," which is not mentioned at all in the first post and is therefore by TMF standards, "Off Topic." In order for for Joe to "legally" make his point, he has to start a new thread promoting the benefits of tickling with long nails, to which the only people who can legally reply are those that agree with him.

You're over analyzing this, drew. I'd bet dollars to donuts you'd never see a mod edit on the above statement or any other similar one. The message isn't ambiguous at all...it's just stated politely. If I were to rewrite the Golden Rule I'd call it "Try Not To Be A Jerk And Remain Civil" Rule or somesuch. Being devious about insulting people isn't really a great skillset to acquire, but there have indeed been those on the Board who have mastered skating on the edge. Time wounds all heels...and most of them are gone. The system does work, and the wheels do grind, slowly but inexorably to a conclusion.

Your love of a wild west atmosphere is well known, and if all things were equal I'd agree with you...but they are not. We've had this discussion before, and circumstances haven't changed. You may indeed be well equipped to withstand an AMT like environment, and perhaps would even prosper within it, but the bodies you'd leave in your wake are not worth the satisfaction you'd get, imo. We're here to make sure all voices *can* be heard...not *will* be heard.

There's plenty of outlets for you to rip on topics/people on the internet.

We just choose not to be one of them...

Q

 

[TummyDragon]

Glad to see you join in this thread, Drew. While is pretty obvious that we disagree on this particular topic, the fact is you made an excellent post – one which caused me to pause and think about my position and the larger picture. I appreciate that type of a post anytime, anyplace, anywhere. I think your response to this thread is quite exemplary of how to disagree (quite eloquently I would add) without being confrontational. That is how it came across to me anyway.

Let’s discuss the dialogue between Frank and Joe a bit more.

“Frank starts a thread by saying that feathers are the best way in which to tickle, and maybe gives some examples from personal experience.”

We don’t know the exact subject of the thread, but we do know that the content summary is “feathers are the best way to tickle”.


“Joe reads the thread and thinks to himself, 'That's bullshit. Long nails are best!' Now Joe would prefer to be able to say it like that, but knows if he does, he'll get bleeped.”

For Joe to respond with “That’s bullshit”, would add nothing to the discourse. While the meaning of “that’s bullshit” could be considered the same as “I would have to disagree with you here” (maybe that’s just how Joe expresses himself?), the phrase itself would be considered confrontational by most and would put Frank in the position of feeling he has to defend his initial opinion rather than just express an opinion he has derived from his own past experience.

While I would be the first to say that no words are inherently ‘bad’, after all, words are nothing more that phonetic utterances, i.e., audio envelopes meant to convey mental images from one mind to another, the connotation of “That’s bullshit” is one of confrontation.

So instead he says, "Gee, I don't know, Frank. Feathers don't tickle nearly as much as people think. Long nails are far more effective, in my opinion."

Okay, I’m with you here, Frank has changed his approach from what he originally desired to express, to something less desired, but conveying his message.

That sounds pretty innocent and sociable doesn't it? Yet by TMF standards this is a Golden Rule violation on two counts. First, by contradicting Frank outright, he is being neither constructive, positive, nor supportive of the original post. He is in fact saying the exact opposite, that feathers are not the best way in which to tickle. The second violation comes when he mentions "long nails," which is not mentioned at all in the first post and is therefore by TMF standards, "Off Topic." In order for for Joe to "legally" make his point, he has to start a new thread promoting the benefits of tickling with long nails, to which the only people who can legally reply are those that agree with him.

There are several points in this passage. I’ll try to address them as best I can from my perspective. Let me address the “on topic” point first.

If we take the two dialogue illustrations, we have:

Frank: “Feathers are the best way to tickle”
Joe: “Long nails are best”

If we run these two through a search engine analysis content matching algorithm, (Arelis in this case) we get a 46% match. So, Joe’s response as typed is 46% on topic. Now, if we take the inferred sentence structure of Joe’s response, which is:

Joe: “Long nails are [the] best [way to tickle].

We now get a 93% content match. So, I would certainly consider Joe’s response as being on topic. This having been said, the “on topic” reference as related to the GR is actually a non issue. The Golden Rule simply states:

“If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all.”

There is no correlation between being ‘on topic’ and GR violations. Those are separate issues that I think I might have combined into a single issue at the beginning of this thread.

So now we are down to a single possible GR violation since being on topic isn’t under the Golden Rule umbrella.

Continuing:

…by contradicting Frank outright, he is being neither constructive, positive, nor supportive of the original post.

He is being nice though, which is what the rule actually states. The further defining of the GR gives us the reference to which you are referring here:

“This doesn't mean that people can't disagree with other people, but it does mean that everyone who wishes to post here is required to go out of their way to make sure that they are being constructive and positive…”

The term ‘constructive’, connotes, “creating or building”. It also connotes “derived from”.

Joe is indeed creating a new avenue of thought, building upon Franks initial statement, and his message content is derived from Joe’s initial post. This is exactly in line with the GR addendum.

So, in my opinion, there is no golden rule violation in this dialogue. I don’t see an ambiguity in the letter or ‘spirit’ of the GR, but perhaps it does exist and I just don’t fathom it.
I would add though, that three or four years ago, I would have echoed your sentiments on censorship, and very vocally as well. Over time, I’ve come to a realization that freedom of expression isn’t nearly as important as community participation. One ideal tends to suffer by the promotion of the other.

I know of several who never participate in any of the forums because they are fearful of being butchered by the expressionists. I suppose it could be argued that if they can’t take it, then they don’t need to be here anyway. I cannot concur with this position. I fully believe that everyone should feel comfortable participating – that everyone has the potential to add value to the community and that no one should ever be subject to personal attack on a fetish/fantasy forum. If this means stifling the freedom to express some opinions in any manner desired, then I obviously support a degree of censorship.

Take care,
David

 

[qjakal]

Okay...

I take it back, drew...*you* weren't overanalyzing it...lol.

Q

 

[TummyDragon]

Re: Okay...

I take it back, drew...*you* weren't overanalyzing it...lol.

Q

LOL..

 

[drew70]

Kitten, thanks for setting me straight. My mistake. 🙂

Tummy, excellent analysis sir. I agree with you that GR violations and violations of topicality are seperate issues or at least ought to be, but I can show you instances where "GR Violation" and "off-topic" are used synonymously. The supposition (which I of course strongly question) being that if your response insults the poster however eloquently, you've changed the the topic to the poster himself rather than the subject of the post, thereby giving added credibility to the Golden Rule. Check out Myriads' response in the thread in the Politics & Religion Forum entitled "The Future of the P&R Forum," you'll see what I mean.

Also I look up "constructive" in the dictionary and I don't see any reference to the phrase "derived from."

Finally, one more point and I'll let it go. Your statement: Joe is indeed creating a new avenue of thought, building upon Franks initial statement, and his message content is derived from Joe’s initial post, could be said of any insult. If Joe told Frank to pound sand, that would be creating a new avenue of thought, as well. "Creating new avenues of thought" is dangerously close to "veering off-topic," if you think about it.

Anyway, this is really nitpicking, I know. Hey, if the censorship works for you guys, I can live with it too. I doubt I'll ever like it or agree with the philosophy behind it, but as has been said, there are other forums on the Internet.

 

[Mitchell]

Drew, actually, let me be clear about my feelings on this issue.

I cant say I actually call myself a "fan" of the Golden Rule. Believe me, there are times that I've been attacked in this forum, or things I have seen written, by certain posters, no one in particular , when I wish the Golden Rule WASNT in existence. Instead of reporting something, or having a mod take it down, I'd love to have responded by saying something like:" You think that, well to hell with you." Or, "You're attacking me, well, I think you're an asshole too." Alas, such isnt allowed, and because I want to stay here, I dont engage in those kinds of verbal attacks.
Not agreeing with the rules doesnt mean I still wont follow them to stay here, or dont understand why the rules are such. This is a private site, Jeff doesnt only have to please Mitch, he can make his own rules, and if Mitch doesnt like it, I can leave. I do understand why the GR is such. The mods have enough things to do in their other lives, and Jeff has enough to do with his company, his videos and the maintainence of his site, that he doesnt want assholes being reported every five minutes, or a site filled with people hurling insults at each other. Imagine if we came on here, and in every thread, whoever hated us, kept posting:" John Smith is an asshole, and Terry Jones is an asshole", and this was all over the entire site! New people would come in and think:" What kind of a place is this? I dont want to join a site where people hurl personal insults at each other. Due to this, the rules are best, even if we dont always agree. It keeps the site as civil as possible. In circumstances such as this, I would rather have a rule like the one in existence, then one which allows a free for all. It keeps things more simple for Jeff, and the ones who have to run this site.
So, that is my view. While I admit that there are things and people here who tee me off to no end, as it cannot be expected for someone to like everyone in a site with 20,000 members or whatever we have now, I will not cross the line. I want to stay here, and the best bet for me in the overall picture is to ignore the troublemakers, follow the rules, like it or not, move on, and try and get what I can out of TMF. That is really all I can do.

Mitch

 

[SimplyRio]

Good Lord, are you all STILL dissecting this??? LOL

Everybody, pleeeeeease don't give TummyDragon any more ammunition... he will over-analyze this to the death!

TummyDragon, you need to learn when to SHUT UP... just my (humble) opinion, of course!

*giggling*

 

[Mimi]

We are gathered here today to pay our respects to the beloved Rio, who met her untimely demise at the hands of community legend, TummyDragon. We will always remember her bright cheerful smile, her bubbly presence, and her smart-assed, sarcastic mouth which ultimately led to her final hours of torment.

R.I.P. Rio....

(give it to her good, TD)

Mimi 😛 😀 😉

 

[TummyDragon]

You know....

This is funny... I mean this is *really* funny.

I'd actually bypassed this thread twice today thinking that, okay, Drew had made his final comments and had left the thread, Mitch had left his final word, everything of any value has already been said by one party or another so if Mimi joined in the thread this late it could only mean some troublemaker had crawled in to try to bait a reaction out of somebody (gee, am I intuitive or what?).

Curiosity finally got the better of me and I had to look.. and 'lo and behold, the troublemaker crawling out of the woodwork is my own (extreeeeemely supportive) other half!


Mimi (your post is hilarious,btw..), please keep the wake at the ready, I have juuuuuuuuusssssssst a weeeeee bit more 'analysis' to do... there's is this little sweetly delicious, insanely ticklish spot just above her hips, and right below her ribs that could use an intense, no holds barred scrutiny to an exponential degree of scientific certainty (and maniacal hysteria).

Okay Rio, my Sweetness, the joke's on me.. but the hands will be all over you... at least I know exactly how to render *you* speechless...

 

[JoBelle]

Re: You know....

Okay Rio, my Sweetness, the joke's on me.. but the hands will be all over you... at least I know exactly how to render *you* speechless...

I see that hands are nicely recovered from the temporary impairment.

As far as theis censorship/golden rule crap....

I don't LIKE being nice. It's just something I have to do sometimes. The point I always wander back to is why the heck even bother to insult, be nasty, whatever phrase you like to use? I mean, for real...aren't there better things to be doing? Once in a while, I can dig because we all get in a mood...but living in a modd that makes you constantly want to argue, or disagree just can't be good for ya.

Kiss*kiss
😀

And Mimi...thanks for the best laugh I've had all week!

 

[Mimi]

My pleasure! 😀


Though I have a feeling someone is getting a mighty good laugh over much more than my post. 😉

And don't worry, TD. My cats already at the flowers, and the cold cuts will keep in the fridge till you do her in. The rest of us will find SOME way of amusing ourselves till then, I'm sure. (just be sure to record her final half hour or so....you know, for the sick morbid freaks like me who get off on that sort of thing 😛 )


Mimi 😀