Jump to content

Are we all sheep?


matty40s
 Share

Featured Posts

It is worth mentioning though that a "robust" debating style can be very intimidating to new people who feel they will be shouted down if they post without having all the knowledge or the credentials of 100s of posts. It is not as simple as scrolling past posts you don't appreciate. When I first came here (around the beginning of the year, don't even know if this was before or after the big exodus), I opened a couple of threads on the Virtual Pub and closed them again very quickly. If that had been the style of posting on the more factual topics, I would never have joined (let alone dared to ask questions).

 

I am not arguing one way or the other, neither am I part of the "fluffy bunnies", because I haven't even been here then. But it is easy for a few people to dominate the discussion and inadvertently(!!) shutting out a large group. Maybe that is what you want, but you should be aware of it and make it a conscious decision.

If you read my OP, you would have seen that I skulked in the corner for almost 2 years before signing up, the internet and forums I was very wary of. The discussions were fantastically strong and scary to me then.

They are weedy and quite often empty in the main now, the legal ones and historical ones were/are possibly the only ones worth reading recently.

Some posters without relevant knowledge, constantly attacking the person , not the subject, impeded the fascinating discourse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those of us who argued for a halt to the depressing aggression this site was dominated by, were falsely labelled 'fluffy bunnies who wanted an end to all types of conflict' (as you have just done yourself above).

 

When in actual fact conflict and disagreement are fine. We were arguing for an end to the gratuitous and unnecessary personal insulting favoured by the aggrsseive few. Encapsulated by the advice 'play the ball not the man'. No bunnies involved, fluffy or bald.

I've have never considered you to be a fluffy bunny - fraud!

 

For most FBs it was not about "play the ball not the man" (with which surely most of us agree), it was about trying to get discussions about subjects they didn't like, stopped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For most FBs it was not about "play the ball not the man" (with which surely most of us agree), it was about trying to get discussions about subjects they didn't like, stopped.

 

Yes it was more like "taking the ball home so nobody can play"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is worth mentioning though that a "robust" debating style can be very intimidating to new people who feel they will be shouted down if they post without having all the knowledge or the credentials of 100s of posts. It is not as simple as scrolling past posts you don't appreciate. When I first came here (around the beginning of the year, don't even know if this was before or after the big exodus), I opened a couple of threads on the Virtual Pub and closed them again very quickly. If that had been the style of posting on the more factual topics, I would never have joined (let alone dared to ask questions).

 

I am not arguing one way or the other, neither am I part of the "fluffy bunnies", because I haven't even been here then. But it is easy for a few people to dominate the discussion and inadvertently(!!) shutting out a large group. Maybe that is what you want, but you should be aware of it and make it a conscious decision.

This is very true.

 

It does seem as though some with little knowledge on a subject still have to post to impose their superiority in some way. Whether it be to have a higher post count or to look cool, who knows.

 

All I know is that we are all capable of drawing our own opinions about someone's personality without prompting or moderation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not really. It originated as a term of pejorative hyperbole.

 

 

Well not quite - when I first used the term a while back, it was a reference to people who simply don't like robust debate and those on here who posted in a forthright fashion. It was actually a semi serious suggestion because we do seem to have a cohort of people on here who can't resit 'rubbernecking' at the 'ghastly nasty' © posts by the ghastly nasty © posters (despite what they say on here)

 

However it turned into one of those threads that allowed folk to have a bit of a laugh which was fine too.

 

© MJG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that fluffy bunny is a "put down" and also note that it is not directed towards individuals but a group.

 

carlt - for the record I find your style far more aggressive than MtB ;)

 

I've been on here a long time so I know how you operate but I do think you may put some people off. Your little 'spat' with Ray T yesterday was a good example :)

 

I'm not having a go by the way. You admitted on the "weather channel" that you are an "argumentative b-d" yourself. Point being that this can have an impact.

 

 

I am not a fluffy bunny or a shaved bunny :huh: i'm somewhere in the middle perhaps a moderately hirsute bunny.

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I was commenting on your overall forum persona, not one single post.

 

Your posting manner is no less assertive or some might say belligerent than mine and I have no objection to it at all but it is somewhat ironic that you argue against your own style.

 

 

Where have I ever argued against my (and your) posting style? I argue against personal insulting and unnecessary hyperbolic characterising of the opposing point of view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I've been on here a long time so I know how you operate but I do think you may put some people off. Your little 'spat' with Ray T yesterday was a good example smile.png

 

In my opinion there was no spat and my questions were genuine and inoffensive.

 

I can't help it if you misinterpret my intent.

 

 

Where have I ever argued against my (and your) posting style? I argue against personal insulting and unnecessary hyperbolic characterising of the opposing point of view.

 

This new regime has quashed robust debate by attempting to eradicate the hyperbole and insults.

 

Your defence of the present over moderation of the forum endorses the eradication of interesting, sometimes robust, discussion.

 

I

carlt - for the record I find your style far more aggressive than MtB wink.png

 

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

Many would endorse it and many would disagree with you.

 

Personally I think our belligerence level is about the same (and equal to yours when you're on one).

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong, Tony and others did take away my enjoyment of this forum by their antagonistic attitude, their personal insults, and their general disregard for the rules Dan introduced.

I consider it is those people that have ruined this forum.

I am not entirely sure that you are correct: for the very greater part, it seemed to me that the traffic now no longer here did keep within the rules, even if at times it annoyed me just as much as some from other parts of the spectrum have done. But that is life.

 

Of course, some people, Tony in particular but by no means alone, did like to push the boundaries as far as they could manage. But, that is often just what they were talking about - pushing the boundary of the waterways legislation. Nigel in particular often went out of his way to make it clear that he did not advocate illegality. However, he has long sought to maintain a particular view of how the legislation should be used - a factor that led to him eventually winning his cause celebre case, despite comments from the judge about his persistence!

 

Those who seek to narrow the world down to just those with whom they entirely agree will sooner or later find that world very lonely. Right now that does seem indeed to be the case here as this is the only thread at the moment that is attracting any significant traffic. But then it may well be too soon to judge the eventual outcome - things often have the habit of bouncing back, or else they die. Again, that's life.

 

However, do try to draw the parallels with the CC and moorings debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That's also like in any other forum. The majority is silent and that gives a skewed impression, because all you hear are the vocal few. Quite like in society in general as we are observing right now.

GD is quite vociferous I've noticed, nothing silent about him

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Point being that this can have an impact.

 

 

So what.

 

There are folk on here whose style I find deeply offensive and one who reduced my OH to tears with the nasty, vicious comments about the destruction of our home but I chose to scroll past them rather than get into a tizzy about them.

 

Like MtB I am not advocating the lifting of all moderation and a return to that brief period where the intransigence of two diametrically opposed political viewpoints reduced a tiny part of the forum to just insult slinging.

 

I wish a return to the time when light moderation allowed those of us who enjoyed lively, sometimes robust discussion could chat harmlessly, ignored by those with a more sensitive disposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Your defence of the present over moderation of the forum endorses the eradication of interesting, sometimes robust, discussion.

 

 

 

There you go again, putting words in my mouth. I do not defend the present 'over moderation'.

 

I argue for reasonable adherence to the Forum Rules and Guidelines. Recent moderation has overstepped this by some considerable degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Interesting you should say this. I have never visited the other site either, nor ever felt the need to despite being PMed occasionally and advised to. (I an confident from other PMs it would be a mistake.)

 

Another forum I lurve and spend far too much time on also seems to be suffering from similar dissent. There is 'something in the air' on the internet.

 

(Remember that song?)

Perhaps internet forums have had their day? Nothing is forever. I belong to a few forums (non boating) and all would seem to be seeing a downturn in posters of late.

I often ask on the cut if people are members of any boating forums, and many either aren't or perhaps were, but quit them. From my small sample, it would appear that most don't use internet forums. Personally I have found this forum to be a mine of useful information. OK there have been a few nobs, but these tend to be "here today, gone tomorrow." That said some very knowledgeable members have quit over the years, which is a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

There you go again, putting words in my mouth. I do not defend the present 'over moderation'.

 

I argue for reasonable adherence to the Forum Rules and Guidelines. Recent moderation has overstepped this by some considerable degree.

Not putting words in your mouth at all.

 

That was the impression you gave with your responses you gave to me and others.

 

Now you've clarified your position I can see that we both want the same (or very similar) thing.

 

I was always happy to argue against the hyperbole of my political opposites but I quickly bowed out when people who share my views lowered themselves to the same level.

 

A particular (but not solitary) example was when I felt Wanted badly let himself down when arguing with some of the more extreme right wingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps internet forums have had their day? Nothing is forever. I belong to a few forums (non boating) and all would seem to be seeing a downturn in posters of late.

I often ask on the cut if people are members of any boating forums, and many either aren't or perhaps were, but quit them. From my small sample, it would appear that most don't use internet forums. Personally I have found this forum to be a mine of useful information. OK there have been a few nobs, but these tend to be "here today, gone tomorrow." That said some very knowledgeable members have quit over the years, which is a shame.

 

As a longterm liveaboard and again at present in a static liveaboard community I completely agree with this post. Of the numerous liveaboards in this area nine out of ten never visit this forum and of those that did most are now gone, I do not need to mention names. Forums and especialy Bloggs are very seldom used/visited by liveaboards that I know and have known in my not inconsiderable experience.

 

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do agree with you,polite people are not inclined to use that sort of term.

 

The great majority of members would agree with you but would not wish to be vociferous,hence they remain silent,as one does

 

CT

Maybe we should give your "great majority of members" a voice then. Create a Poll so they dont have to remain silent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not putting words in your mouth at all.

 

That was the impression you gave with your responses you gave to me and others.

 

Now you've clarified your position I can see that we both want the same (or very similar) thing.

 

I was always happy to argue against the hyperbole of my political opposites but I quickly bowed out when people who share my views lowered themselves to the same level.

 

A particular (but not solitary) example was when I felt Wanted badly let himself down when arguing with some of the more extreme right wingers.

Quite agree

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_NbT1A4w8u4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NbT1A4w8u4&sns=em

Maybe we should give your "great majority of members" a voice then. Create a Poll so they dont have to remain silent

Good idea and in case anyone didn't know polls are anonymous (unless you genuinely think the site crew read all that kind of thing) Edited by magnetman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong, Tony and others did take away my enjoyment of this forum by their antagonistic attitude, their personal insults, and their general disregard for the rules Dan introduced.

I consider it is those people that have ruined this forum.

 

Yes but Tony and others also brought a lot of knowledge and facts about topical matters relating to canals and boating to the forum. What is it exactly that you bring ?

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not entirely sure that you are correct: for the very greater part, it seemed to me that the traffic now no longer here did keep within the rules, even if at times it annoyed me just as much as some from other parts of the spectrum have done. But that is life.

 

Of course, some people, Tony in particular but by no means alone, did like to push the boundaries as far as they could manage. But, that is often just what they were talking about - pushing the boundary of the waterways legislation. Nigel in particular often went out of his way to make it clear that he did not advocate illegality. However, he has long sought to maintain a particular view of how the legislation should be used - a factor that led to him eventually winning his cause celebre case, despite comments from the judge about his persistence!

 

Those who seek to narrow the world down to just those with whom they entirely agree will sooner or later find that world very lonely. Right now that does seem indeed to be the case here as this is the only thread at the moment that is attracting any significant traffic. But then it may well be too soon to judge the eventual outcome - things often have the habit of bouncing back, or else they die. Again, that's life.

 

However, do try to draw the parallels with the CC and moorings debate.

 

As I and many understand it, Tony and Nigel haven't pushed the boundaries of legislation, CRT have, acting outside the boundaries set down in the acts, as far as they can manage. This is being challenged for the benefit of us all.

 

Is the opposite of a fluffybunny a big bald wolf? The silent majority agree with me on thisicecream.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the forum really only for the few that post in one way or another or also for the silent majority who only ever read and benefit from the wealth of knowledge on here? You can argue that in order to be heard they need to speak up, so I think an anonymous poll is a good idea.

No it is not just for those who post and that is not what I meant but the forum is most definitely shaped by those that do post rather than those that don't. All of course post or not must be made welcome.

 

It is just that I find it dangerous to second guess what the "silent majority" want and most often find each "side" claims it is they who speak for them and assume they (silent majority) agree with them.

 

As you say why I thought a management sponsored poll on a number of changes/proposals on what it is folk want could be a useful tool.

I still think the opposite of fluffybunny is a spikey hedgehog!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what we need to lose from the forum, a criticism of a person's post couched in terms of their personal attributes.

 

biggrin.png Tee-hee.

 

I se that Matty's opening post has the word "popular" in a box on its right-hand side. Now, I realise that the post is indeed popular, but I've never seen one officially described thus before. Is it a new thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps internet forums have had their day? Nothing is forever. I belong to a few forums (non boating) and all would seem to be seeing a downturn in posters of late.

I often ask on the cut if people are members of any boating forums, and many either aren't or perhaps were, but quit them. From my small sample, it would appear that most don't use internet forums. Personally I have found this forum to be a mine of useful information. OK there have been a few nobs, but these tend to be "here today, gone tomorrow." That said some very knowledgeable members have quit over the years, which is a shame.

I agree. Facebook is in the ascendant as the networking choice of boaties. Not least because of all the local groups springing up where help on the ground is just a small step away from a help request to the group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

biggrin.png Tee-hee.

 

I se that Matty's opening post has the word "popular" in a box on its right-hand side. Now, I realise that the post is indeed popular, but I've never seen one officially described thus before. Is it a new thing?

 

It happens when a post gets more than 50 ( I think that's the correct number) 'greenies'

 

Starcoaster is the only other poster I am aware of that did this. (there may be others)

 

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=44221&p=816040

 

ed correction Paul Claymore did too.

 

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=50728&p=945723

Edited by MJG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.