PDA

View Full Version : Anatomy of a thread derailment



Fred259
13th March 2011, 00:03
{mod edit, by Dennis Leahy: please jump down to post #14 to see what this thread is about}



Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

Harley
13th March 2011, 00:17
..........

astrid
13th March 2011, 00:25
Bill has said the same thing... But i sense the game has changed significantly.

Flexibility is key right now, being stuck in all or nothing thinking, isnt going to work,

rather taking each situation on its own merit, living in the moment, and keeping all senses open......

What you thought was true yesterday , might not be true tomorrow.

Intuition is key during chaos.

Fred259
13th March 2011, 00:35
Interesting comments from south of Capricorn Icecold.

jjl
13th March 2011, 00:53
Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

If you feel that way I am surprised you stay on this site. It's run by the same company, Bill and --- (name removed) share guests and they have renewed their friendship. I doubt you are safe here either.

Fred259
13th March 2011, 00:54
Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

If you feel that way I am surprised you stay on this site. It's run by the same company, Bill and --- (name removed) share guests and they have renewed their friendship. I doubt you are safe here either.

It better not be.......

TWINNICK
13th March 2011, 02:44
Interesting comments from south of Capricorn Icecold.


Whats where we are got anything to do with an opinion!

I think Icecold has the nail on the head so to speak, everybody is being watched and all these websites would be infiltrated to some degree, and --- (name removed) is just putting up a wall of protection as we all will do from time to time.

Plus she comes from a background in Horrorwood for crying out loud, you might be right Ice a good **** would prolly do us all good right now (LOL).

..nick..

Moemers
13th March 2011, 03:28
The tendency for threads to go OT on this website has increased dramatically...

How ironic is an argument about being infiltrated? Lol.

Tangri
13th March 2011, 05:07
Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

Sorry I am not agree with you. --- (name removed)'s intention is not at dark side. She might did some mistakes but still she is a fighter.

Tangri
13th March 2011, 05:12
The tendency for threads to go OT on this website has increased dramatically...

How ironic is an argument about being infiltrated? Lol.

Thanks, it is against to nature of the meaning. argument about being infiltrated
Maybe birth of the new creation being infiltrated

Bill Ryan
13th March 2011, 05:30
--------

This is an important subject. Let's see if I can share some perspectives.

1) Fred, you just made a public statement, searchable on the internet, that "--- (name removed) is working for the other side".


Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

No way is this okay. Remarks like this only show you up as being crudely belligerent, unintelligent, and unkind.

Any accusation that a member of the alternative media is somehow dishonorable needs to be based on very solid grounds. Otherwise, please take your trashy rhetoric to ATS or GLP where I'm sure it'll be welcomed. :)

2) Different insider agencies and factions protect different interests, and operate in different ways. The guys monitoring the 9/11 truthers don't care about people talking about the Mars base. And those watching the Free Energy researchers don't care about people blowing the whistle on Bohemian Grove.

And some subjects are more dangerous than others. Free Energy activism can still get you taken out (ask Wade Frazier (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?10672-WADE-FRAZIER-A-Healed-Planet) about this.). And if a whistleblower offends someone personally (which can sometimes be considered a serious matter of discourtesy and dishonor), then you can also find yourself 'handled'.

In general, the best place to hide is definitely in the open. Dan Hanley's disappearance simply means that either he must have been saying something very significant (a confirmation) - or he upset someone personally who made a decision in anger.

Sometimes this does not work. Our friend Mr X (http://projectcamelot.org./mr_x.html) (who blew the whistle on a major ET/UFO archiving project) was almost certainly killed for stating that he was going to speak out in person at UFO conferences and no longer be a behind-the-curtain anonymous voice. Henry Deacon (http://projectcamelot.org/livermore_physicist.html), who also spoke up publicly in July 2009 to support Brian O'Leary on Free Energy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=178TJujE5oY) and Bob Dean on the Mars Colony (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ngvIP0Za9M), has been 'taken care of'. (Not killed - but leaned on and removed from the game: he too was getting too vocal very quickly, and was no longer deniable as an anonymous fantasy figure who in some people's eyes, up till he went on stage, might not have even been a real person.)

So it's a dangerous game still, where the outcome is not assured. There are casualties. But what should Dan Hanley have done? I'm sure he was well aware of the potential outcomes (as are Kerry and I in our own work), and took a calculated risk.

I used to be a fairly serious mountaineer, and I took calculated risks all the time. Many mountaineers have died because they took a gamble and failed (this actually happened to me in one of my previous lives).

That doesn't mean they did the wrong thing... it just means they played the game to the very limit, and did whatever they thought was best. Nothing more and nothing less. That's all any of us can do.

RAKMEiSTER
13th March 2011, 08:29
Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

If you feel that way I am surprised you stay on this site. It's run by the same company, Bill and --- (name removed) share guests and they have renewed their friendship. I doubt you are safe here either.

It better not be.......

to be or not to be, isnt the question

you allready ARE.

you just gotta awaken to it.


division is created in the mind.

----------rightsidebrain-in-sync-with -leftside-syned-by-3rdeye-with-help-of_ -+- _guided-by-heart-is-duality-in-sysc-nondualistic-in-a-bipolar-3d-earth-end-crypto-

for the rest yes good man have died for a good cause. for the better of all sentient beings



http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/6199/flowe.jpg

PCAAV

EYES WIDE OPEN
13th March 2011, 12:56
--------

This is an important subject. Let's see if I can share some perspectives.

1) Fred, you just made a public statement, searchable on the internet, that "--- (name removed) is working for the other side".



Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

No way is this okay. Remarks like this only show you up as being crudely belligerent, unintelligent, and unkind.



I agree 100%. Stating an opinion as fact without any proof at all is wrong and intellectually dishonest. Fred has done this in other threads before and often resorts to name calling those who don't agree with him. Its not required Fred. :)

Dennis Leahy
13th March 2011, 13:55
There is no way to move this post up to the top of the thread. Posts go in order of date/time.

Please NOTE that this thread is destined for deletion (unless Bill tells me not to), so if you make any further posts to the thread, realize they are going to get deleted - including supportive posts.




All of the posts above were made in a topic about a whistleblower, Dan Hanley, going missing. None of the posts are about Dan going missing.

Rather than just delete all of the above posts out of the original topic, I thought I'd move them into a new topic, so that we can all analyze what went wrong and we can all learn how not to derail, dilute, and destroy threads. Those that are derailing, diluting, and destroying threads purposely know exactly what they are doing, and know it is against Membership Guidelines (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/faq.php?faq=avalonguidelines#faq_membershipguidelines) and the spirit of Avalon. Those that are derailing, diluting, and destroying threads accidentally will want to understand why it is not a good idea, and will want to work toward making content at Avalon readable, focused, informative, and interesting.

The new mod/admin team is working to neutralize the people that are purposely negative, mean-spirited, abusive, and divisive to Avalon. A lot of other members may occasionally, accidentally, derail a thread by going way off topic. (I think most of us have done that at some time or another, on this forum or other forums - it doesn't mean you are a bad guy or a negative person.) Some of this happens quite "organically" and appears to the poster that what they are posting is related. That can't be helped, and sometimes threads bob and weave and get more interesting than the original topic - but are still related to the original topic. (If not related, then start a new topic.)

A thread about nuclear reactors might morph into a discussion about fallout or underground bases, but when we find the topic changing to plum pudding, well, the thread has been diluted and derailed. Agents and others with a purposeful intent to destroy a thread know full well the "six degrees of separation" game, and know that you can take any two completely unrelated topics and relate them in a series of steps - but that doesn't mean they are truly related in a way that makes the content readable and focused for Avalon readers.

The posts above, removed from the Dan Hanley thread, begin with an ad hominem attack. That is a violation of Avalon Membership Guidelines, and would make no difference if it was or was not on-topic to the thread. Further posts followed the ad hominem attack tangent (some to decry, some to support, but all off-topic to the thread.) Note that though you also see Bill's post mixed in with the posts above, Bill addressed the ad hominem attack, then steered the thread back on course with information relevant to Dan Hanley's safety and the safety of whistleblowers in general. I moved a copy of Bill's post here, to show what Bill was addressing in decrying the ad hominem attack. I also deleted that portion from Bill's post, in the original thread, to keep people from quoting and re-quoting Bill's quoting of the offending post.

So, examine the above, please, and reply to this thread if you want - but do so knowing that this thread - due to the ad hominem attack against Kerry (and quotes of it) - is going to be deleted soon.

Thanks,

Dennis

RAKMEiSTER
13th March 2011, 18:36
*edited*, do whatever you want. /me removed the reason, and will observe this.

Chicodoodoo
13th March 2011, 19:07
I agree that deleting this thread is counter-productive. Correcting the error publicly and leaving it visible for all to learn from is the productive thing to do. It also supports transparency, the lack of which can be a disaster for any truth-seeking site.

mondaze
13th March 2011, 19:14
we are all involved in dangerous potentially life threatening subjects here, i dont understand why we need to call anyone anything. attack subjects not people. its that simple.

Fred259
13th March 2011, 19:21
--------

This is an important subject. Let's see if I can share some perspectives.

1) Fred, you just made a public statement, searchable on the internet, that "--- (name removed) is working for the other side".



Well you say that we trust Bill & -------------------------------------------------------------(content removed)

No way is this okay. Remarks like this only show you up as being crudely belligerent, unintelligent, and unkind.



I agree 100%. Stating an opinion as fact without any proof at all is wrong and intellectually dishonest. Fred has done this in other threads before and often resorts to name calling those who don't agree with him. Its not required Fred. :)

EYO, with the greatest of respect, again you don’t know what you are talking about.

HaveBlue
14th March 2011, 04:52
Why have you not provided any evidence/links to back up your statement Fred? I too do not not know what you are talking about.

Anchor
14th March 2011, 05:42
[B][COLOR="darkred"]There is no way to move this post up to the top of the thread. Posts go in order of date/time.

Please NOTE that this thread is destined for deletion (unless Bill tells me not to), so if you make any further posts to the thread, realize they are going to get deleted - including supportive posts.



Telling me up front you are going to delete the thread bothers me. Please be sparing with that move function (don't delete, move to the moderator area reserved for the purpose).

It is possible for moderators to edit the OP and clearly delineate the text they add - this is what I recommend you should do - it is obvious you can do it, because you put text in there already, and then close the thread so people don't comment.

I don't need a lecture in thread de-railment as you can see :)

John..

Anchor
14th March 2011, 05:47
The new mod/admin team is working to neutralize the people that are purposely negative, mean-spirited, abusive, and divisive to Avalon. A lot of other members may occasionally, accidentally, derail a thread by going way off topic. (I think most of us have done that at some time or another, on this forum or other forums - it doesn't mean you are a bad guy or a negative person.) Some of this happens quite "organically" and appears to the poster that what they are posting is related. That can't be helped, and sometimes threads bob and weave and get more interesting than the original topic - but are still related to the original topic. (If not related, then start a new topic.)

And another thing.....

Why have you mixed ad-hominem violations with thread derailment ?

Thread derailment is a fact of life on most forums - and is no where near as serious as ad-hom.

Unless it is a structured pattern of derailment and attack on the forum and persistent - and even then the action required is not often the same as it would be with serious ad-hominem.

If you start neutralizing people for derailing threads you will UTTERLY DESTROY this forum.

John..

Humble Janitor
14th March 2011, 05:49
Wait a minute.

Who made Dennis Leahy a mod and why?

In fact, I do not understand why some people are chosen to be moderators and others are not. Is there some sort of pecking order here at Avalon? How can someone who signed up two months ago, be made a moderator in such a short period of time?

I have always wanted to offer more to Avalon but I see that because I do not toe the Charles/Attitcus bull****, that I'm not even in the running.

Anchor
14th March 2011, 05:50
He said some pretty nasty things when he first joined up.

He said sorry :P

Didn't you ever make a mistake?

Mistakes are good. If you do it right, wisdom is the result.

Dennis Leahy
16th March 2011, 10:00
OK, I haven't gotten direction otherwise (whether to delete or leave a scrubbed version up), so at this point, I have gone through all the posts in this thread and removed the inflammatory material (material that Bill specifically took offense to, and that he did not want available to be found on search engines.)



I agree that deleting this thread is counter-productive. Correcting the error publicly and leaving it visible for all to learn from is the productive thing to do. It also supports transparency, the lack of which can be a disaster for any truth-seeking site.
Hi Chicodoodoo,

So, at this point, a scrubbed version is still here - not deleted. Defamation is slanderous or libelous, and so doesn't meet the test for material that should be left up for transparency. Or maybe a better way to say it is that transparency is trumped by slander. There are productive things to learn here, but it mustn't be at the expense of an individual's reputation.



[B][COLOR="darkred"]There is no way to move this post up to the top of the thread. Posts go in order of date/time.

Please NOTE that this thread is destined for deletion (unless Bill tells me not to), so if you make any further posts to the thread, realize they are going to get deleted - including supportive posts.



Telling me up front you are going to delete the thread bothers me. Please be sparing with that move function (don't delete, move to the moderator area reserved for the purpose).

It is possible for moderators to edit the OP and clearly delineate the text they add - this is what I recommend you should do - it is obvious you can do it, because you put text in there already, and then close the thread so people don't comment.

I don't need a lecture in thread de-railment as you can see :)

John..
Hi John,

OK, so far (at this point), not deleted or moved to an invisible area.



The new mod/admin team is working to neutralize the people that are purposely negative, mean-spirited, abusive, and divisive to Avalon. A lot of other members may occasionally, accidentally, derail a thread by going way off topic. (I think most of us have done that at some time or another, on this forum or other forums - it doesn't mean you are a bad guy or a negative person.) Some of this happens quite "organically" and appears to the poster that what they are posting is related. That can't be helped, and sometimes threads bob and weave and get more interesting than the original topic - but are still related to the original topic. (If not related, then start a new topic.)

And another thing.....

Why have you mixed ad-hominem violations with thread derailment ?

Thread derailment is a fact of life on most forums - and is no where near as serious as ad-hom.

Unless it is a structured pattern of derailment and attack on the forum and persistent - and even then the action required is not often the same as it would be with serious ad-hominem.

If you start neutralizing people for derailing threads you will UTTERLY DESTROY this forum.

John..
Ad hominem attacks are ONE method of thread derailment. You're right, derailment is a fact of life on forums, but hopefully you'll appreciate the reality that on a forum like Avalon, that if no moderating was done at all, EVERY thread with substantial material that agents wanted destroyed would indeed be destroyed.

I suspect most people would be very proud of the level and degree of compassion that the mods/admins and Bill are exhibiting in our behind-the-scenes discussions about how to moderate as gently and lightly as possible, to make sure that all (non mean spirited) personalities are allowed to shine, that the material be allowed to be passionately and respectfully discussed. No one wants to squelch dissent or the expression of differing points of view. And, we know that some thread derailment is inevitable, unintentional, stream of consciousness, and may require a gentle nudge to steer a thread back on course.

Some very controversial and very eye-opening material is presented at Avalon, and in among the hundreds of members that wish to interact and discuss the material, there will be people attempting to (all those "D" words) disrupt, divide, distract, derail, and ultimately destroy the credibility of the material by negative association. We're watching for that, and for individuals that purposely subvert the "spirit of the law" in the Membership Guidelines and Bill's welcoming message describing his vision of the Avalon community.

"The new mod/admin team is working to neutralize the people that are purposely negative, mean-spirited, abusive, and divisive to Avalon."




Wait a minute.

Who made Dennis Leahy a mod and why?

In fact, I do not understand why some people are chosen to be moderators and others are not. Is there some sort of pecking order here at Avalon? How can someone who signed up two months ago, be made a moderator in such a short period of time?

I have always wanted to offer more to Avalon but I see that because I do not toe the Charles/Attitcus bull****, that I'm not even in the running.
Hi Humble Janitor,

Bill asked me to become a moderator. For the "why", you'd have to ask Bill.

You might be surprised to find out that all of the mods and admins don't ALL "toe the line" on ANY subject. There is no "groupthink", no consensus on ALL the material presented. We are a mixed bag of personalities with varying interests and beliefs. What we do share is a sense that Avalon deserves our (volunteer) time, that we think Avalon is something pretty special, and that we're committed to helping Bill fulfill his vision of a thriving community that respectfully interacts and discusses material submitted by Bill and submitted by members.

As an aside, this thread is about thread derailment, and your post (which begins with what I'd call a "gentle ad hominem attack") is all material unrelated to the topic, and thus a derailment. So, I would gently ask you to go :focus:

Dennis

p.s. I'd like to know if that "Back to Topic" emoticon is seen by most members as lighthearted and a 'gentle nudge', because if so, it is a quick and easy way for a mod to help steer a topic back on-course. Thanks!

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 10:31
Wait a minute.

Who made Dennis Leahy a mod and why?

In fact, I do not understand why some people are chosen to be moderators and others are not. Is there some sort of pecking order here at Avalon? How can someone who signed up two months ago, be made a moderator in such a short period of time?

I have always wanted to offer more to Avalon but I see that because I do not toe the Charles/Attitcus bull****, that I'm not even in the running.

I would think that Bill knows what he is doing.
And it is his forum, his rules, his staff.
It isn't about how long you have been here, timeservers are usually part of the problem, not the solution.
Some people have been around for a long time with few posts as they like to read and lack confidence to post their own opinions.

araucaria
16th March 2011, 10:33
p.s. I'd like to know if that "Back to Topic" emoticon is seen by most members as lighthearted and a 'gentle nudge', because if so, it is a quick and easy way for a mod to help steer a topic back on-course. Thanks!

Yes, I think it can and should be taken that way, if only to ensure the mods have this useful tool - otherwise it's more derailment.

777
16th March 2011, 10:45
p.s. I'd like to know if that "Back to Topic" emoticon is seen by most members as lighthearted and a 'gentle nudge', because if so, it is a quick and easy way for a mod to help steer a topic back on-course. Thanks!

Yes, I think it can and should be taken that way, if only to ensure the mods have this useful tool - otherwise it's more derailment.

Agreed. I find this emotion aesthetically pleasing and emotionally congruent with mine as a "gentle nudge".

David Hughes
16th March 2011, 11:11
Quality posts = quality threads. Maybe limit the number of posts that a member can make daily.

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 11:14
i couldnt agree more dennis..............this thread derailment that goes on drives me nuts..........if i had my way and it was my forum, ALL new members would only be allowed to make say 5 posts / week ....... i would also limit more senior members to say 10 posts / week .......... far too many people on here adding zilch to threads...........if a members' # of posts was limited, maybe they would think twice about spouting the first piece of drivel that comes into their heads when they read a thread.........

I hate to say it, but this is the public service mentality.
You can't put a quota on creativity.
If you really did do this on a forum, you would either choke it to death, or people would leave.
I would simply go elsewhere.
Please don't take my criticism as an attack as that isn't the way I intend it, even if you feel like it is.

777
16th March 2011, 11:21
i couldnt agree more dennis..............this thread derailment that goes on drives me nuts..........if i had my way and it was my forum, ALL new members would only be allowed to make say 5 posts / week ....... i would also limit more senior members to say 10 posts / week .......... far too many people on here adding zilch to threads...........if a members' # of posts was limited, maybe they would think twice about spouting the first piece of drivel that comes into their heads when they read a thread.........

I think you've spent too much time being punched in the face by Brad Pitt, (joke btw). I'd hate my freedom of speech to be impaired on one of the very few places in the world left that I can freely express my sentiments.......whether or not someone else considers it
drivel .

Icecold
16th March 2011, 11:35
p.s. I'd like to know if that "Back to Topic" emoticon is seen by most members as lighthearted and a 'gentle nudge', because if so, it is a quick and easy way for a mod to help steer a topic back on-course. Thanks!

Yes, I think it can and should be taken that way, if only to ensure the mods have this useful tool - otherwise it's more derailment.


Really? I tried that on the AI thread twice and all that happened was that the thread was closed.

Did not work at all.,,,,even if the two members took notice or not was irrelevant at the time.

Gaia
16th March 2011, 11:50
When you derail a thread on a forum

These are the results...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZlNNSjsELs

David Hughes
16th March 2011, 11:57
Fair enough.

What im driving at here is that most people simply do not have the time to read the hundreds of posts that can make up an entire thread. It took me over a week to read Wade Frazier's thread, and i simply cant spare that amount of time for every popular thread. Im looking for a way to condense the 'juicy bits' of a thread so i don't have to read all the irrelevant off topic posts that ultimately contribute nothing to the thread as a whole - basically an edited version of a thread with all the fat removed. Time is obviously an issue with that and it also leaves the question of what is considered 'fat' and 'drivel' to be open to debate. Many members will get offended if their posts are removed.

Steph
16th March 2011, 12:09
i couldnt agree more dennis..............this thread derailment that goes on drives me nuts..........if i had my way and it was my forum, ALL new members would only be allowed to make say 5 posts / week ....... i would also limit more senior members to say 10 posts / week .......... far too many people on here adding zilch to threads...........if a members' # of posts was limited, maybe they would think twice about spouting the first piece of drivel that comes into their heads when they read a thread.........quality of posts = quality of threads

I appreciate it can be frustrating when threads derail, but Avalon values discussion and healthy debate. What may be considered drivel to some, could resonate deeply with others. It's worth noting that the vast majority here will do their level best to stay on topic :)

______________________

Just a MHO here, but ideally it would help if members 'moderate' themselves before posting. It's been said elsewhere before, but folk need to ask themselves... is this a healthy/worthwhile/valuable contribution to the current discussion? Or, is this a knee-jerk reaction?

It is often the case that a particular subject matter could be considered emotive or controversial. If so, before posting a response take a step back, leave the computer for five minutes and then ask yourselves honestly what your intentions are before posting. That's just my personal take on it :)

Steph

modwiz
16th March 2011, 12:16
I appreciate it can be frustrating when threads derail, but Avalon values discussion and healthy debate. What may be considered drivel to some, could resonate deeply with others. It's worth noting that the vast majority here will do their level best to stay on topic :)

______________________
Just a MHO here, but ideally it would help if members 'moderate' themselves before posting. It's been said elsewhere before, but folk need to ask themselves... is this a healthy/worthwhile/valuable contribution to the current discussion? Or, is this a knee-jerk reaction?

It is often the case that a particular subject matter could be considered emotive or controversial. If so, before posting a response take a step back, leave the computer for five minutes and then ask yourselves honestly what your intentions are before posting. That's just my personal take on it :)

Steph

You are kind to not ascribe an agenda or intentional derailment of a thread as a possible cause in your post.
Unfortunately thread derailment and certain usual suspects have a somewhat consistent pattern.

It must be some kind of AI involvement or something like that.

Fred259
16th March 2011, 12:24
Dennis with the greatest of respect, you have a copy of the documents relating to this post so why are you posting this bunkum here trying to discredit me.

For the avoidance of doubt the document in question was prepared by Bill, and they are sitting on your server, so please explain how it’s possible if anyone quotes from this document that it then becomes defamation slanderous or libelous.

You accuse me of an “A hominem attack,” again with respect, all I did was read the document and responded by commenting on the previous member’s post.

The inference that those people who use the “D Words” disrupt, divide, distract, derail and ultimately destroy the credibility of the material by negative association are subverting the “Spirit of the Law” you say. Its my view this is precisely what Charles has done, so if I express that opinion am I acting out with the “Spirit of the Law”. What is the Spirit of the Law? Global warming for example, if I express an opinion showing it to be a scam, am I derailing, distracting and dividing?

On the Japan thread everyone is convinced that the Jetstream is going to blow radiation over California. NO the jet stream is miles away so I am trying to explain the facts and reassure those who are concerned, and again I am at odds, so am I dividing ?

Please go back and read the documents I copied to you. I look forward to your apology in the fullness of time. The matter Dennis has been resolved.

Hervé
16th March 2011, 12:29
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Fred259
16th March 2011, 12:35
i couldnt agree more dennis..............this thread derailment that goes on drives me nuts..........if i had my way and it was my forum, ALL new members would only be allowed to make say 5 posts / week ....... i would also limit more senior members to say 10 posts / week .......... far too many people on here adding zilch to threads...........if a members' # of posts was limited, maybe they would think twice about spouting the first piece of drivel that comes into their heads when they read a thread.........quality of posts = quality of threads

I appreciate it can be frustrating when threads derail, but Avalon values discussion and healthy debate. What may be considered drivel to some, could resonate deeply with others. It's worth noting that the vast majority here will do their level best to stay on topic :)

______________________

Just a MHO here, but ideally it would help if members 'moderate' themselves before posting. It's been said elsewhere before, but folk need to ask themselves... is this a healthy/worthwhile/valuable contribution to the current discussion? Or, is this a knee-jerk reaction?

It is often the case that a particular subject matter could be considered emotive or controversial. If so, before posting a response take a step back, leave the computer for five minutes and then ask yourselves honestly what your intentions are before posting. That's just my personal take on it :)

Steph

I couldn’t agree more Steph, mods are needed on the Japan thread to stop these grossly irresponsible maps being published showing radiation blowing throughout down town LA.

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 12:36
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Hervé
16th March 2011, 12:40
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 13:02
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

I must be missing something.
I didn't address that, or are you asking me to?

Hervé
16th March 2011, 13:15
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

I must be missing something.
I didn't address that, or are you asking me to?

The first sentence of that post, an association of the initial poster's expression with that mentality...

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 13:18
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

I must be missing something.
I didn't address that, or are you asking me to?

The first sentence of that post, an association of the initial poster's expression with that mentality...

Now I get what you mean.
My question to you is; and?

Hervé
16th March 2011, 13:25
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

I must be missing something.
I didn't address that, or are you asking me to?

The first sentence of that post, an association of the initial poster's expression with that mentality...

Now I get what you mean.
My question to you is; and?

Back to:
Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?
...............

aroundthetable
16th March 2011, 13:28
What is Bill's beef with ATS? At the very least it is a good source of info and certainly on a par with Avalon. Plus although posters can get a rough ride at times, they certainly cut out the wheat from the chaff. I have posted ATS articles here on occasion and they have always been well recieved. I don't see it as constructive to keep dissing them, rather i think it is divisive. Just a thought...i'll still frequent wherever provides interesting articles.

Gaia
16th March 2011, 13:53
http://www.kaitaia.com/funny/pictures/ThreadHijack/thread_direction.gif

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 14:27
... but this is the public service mentality.

Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?

Type-written words do take longer than a spoken outburst, don't they?

Wouldn't this indicate a stubborn remanence of polarized intent?

Oh well... so it goes.

Is that not how the so called public service works?
And so I state what I believe is the truth, which is a problem for you, why?

Already beside the point.

What about the labelling of the initial poster?

I must be missing something.
I didn't address that, or are you asking me to?

The first sentence of that post, an association of the initial poster's expression with that mentality...

Now I get what you mean.
My question to you is; and?

Back to:
Then, why... oh why? Oh lord... why write it in such a way in the first place?
...............

So what?
My opinion is my opinion.
Why do you have a need to push this when the poster I was talking to wasn't worried about it?
You have in fact, derailed a thread about thread derailment.
So the gold star for nuggetry of the day award goes to you.
Sorry, not redeemable off of Coruscant.
Let me know when you will be coming to pick it up and I will have my apprentice meet you at the star port.

777
16th March 2011, 14:32
You have in fact, derailed a thread about thread derailment.
So the gold star for nuggetry of the day award goes to you.


This made me have a jolly good rofl, and a jolly good rofl is very important in these rofl-less times

Hervé
16th March 2011, 14:55
So what?
My opinion is my opinion.
Why do you have a need to push this when the poster I was talking to wasn't worried about it?
You have in fact, derailed a thread about thread derailment.
So the gold star for nuggetry of the day award goes to you.
Sorry, not redeemable off of Coruscant.
Let me know when you will be coming to pick it up and I will have my apprentice meet you at the star port.

Just that labelling is parts and parcels of thread derailment.

Hence "Why write it in such a way in the first place?"

No disagreement with the rest of the initial (not the above one) post.

Lord Sidious
16th March 2011, 14:59
So what?
My opinion is my opinion.
Why do you have a need to push this when the poster I was talking to wasn't worried about it?
You have in fact, derailed a thread about thread derailment.
So the gold star for nuggetry of the day award goes to you.
Sorry, not redeemable off of Coruscant.
Let me know when you will be coming to pick it up and I will have my apprentice meet you at the star port.

Just that labelling is parts and parcels of thread derailment.

Hence "Why write it in such a way in the first place?"

No disagreement with the rest of the post.

So that was all over nothing?
And if you notice, I didn't label him, I labelled, if you want to look at it that way, the thought process he was following.

Hervé
16th March 2011, 15:04
So what?
My opinion is my opinion.
Why do you have a need to push this when the poster I was talking to wasn't worried about it?
You have in fact, derailed a thread about thread derailment.
So the gold star for nuggetry of the day award goes to you.
Sorry, not redeemable off of Coruscant.
Let me know when you will be coming to pick it up and I will have my apprentice meet you at the star port.

Just that labelling is parts and parcels of thread derailment.

Hence "Why write it in such a way in the first place?"

No disagreement with the rest of the post.

So that was all over nothing?
And if you notice, I didn't label him, I labelled, if you want to look at it that way, the thought process he was following.

Sorry, edited my post while you were answering.

Correct about not labelling him, only the thought process applied.