Attraction from drama threads?

[Scribe]

Over 75% of people agree "posting hatred" here is a reason to lower encounter probability.
Both Ways.

[Tsmokies]

And...life goes on. I have no problem with a strong lady expressing her opinion. Butt the mods do and its ban town

My ego is just fine tyvm

[BLM69]

Originally Posted by Tsmokies

And...life goes on. I have no problem with a strong lady expressing her opinion. Butt the mods do and its ban town

My ego is just fine tyvm

Strong ladies being Tara Evans and TexasJess LOL, good for your ego dude

[Tara Evans]

Originally Posted by BLM69

Strong ladies being Tara Evans and TexasJess LOL, good for your ego dude

Loser asswipe as being you.

[Wile E Coyote]

Originally Posted by mikehammer002001

What drives me nuts is when arguing gets so bad you you have to go back to page one and see what the tread was even about, not just hobby vs provider but hobby vs hobby (see asian blog)

Originally Posted by Kendall4U

I'm not into the drama scene and have zero desire to interact one on one with those that do/are. We are adults with differing views and opinions. I cannot understand the constant combative behavior that a lot of members dish out. I fall into the "yikes, I'm out" category for sure.

Originally Posted by Tsmokies

And...life goes on. I have no problem with a strong lady expressing her opinion. Butt the mods do and its ban town

My ego is just fine tyvm

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing one's opinion and I think self expression is great for getting to know someone as apposed to a robotic tool that does nothing, stands for nothing and is nothing. And, like all things, there are always going to be times where others do not agree with a said opinion.

On Eccie, instead of respecting another's opinion on a subject matter and agreeing to disagree, there are certain individuals that insert themselves into a conversation just to stir the pot. And, that is the majority of coed discussions on this site, usually turning into the name calling, cyberbullying and drama thread(s).

The mods do not care if a member gives their opinion on something, as long as that opinion does not go against the guidelines of this site. Unfortunately, trolling and baiting posts are not against the guidelines, but clearly, disrespect, name calling and thread hijacking are. It is also abundantly clear that rarely, if ever, are those particular violations enforced with infractions by the mods, and consequently, leading those conversation threads to where they usually go.

[Admiral Giggle]

Many who scream that the sky is falling on posts do not read and/or understand the guidelines. Some can have multiple interpretations.

Knowing the difference between "Subjective" and "Objective" is the key.

[Scribe]

Originally Posted by Wile E Coyote

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing one's opinion and I think self expression is great for getting to know someone as apposed to a robotic tool that does nothing, stands for nothing and is nothing. And, like all things, there are always going to be times where others do not agree with a said opinion.

On Eccie, instead of respecting another's opinion on a subject matter and agreeing to disagree, there are certain individuals that insert themselves into a conversation just to stir the pot. And, that is the majority of coed discussions on this site, usually turning into the name calling, cyberbullying and drama thread(s).

The mods do not care if a member gives their opinion on something, as long as that opinion does not go against the guidelines of this site. Unfortunately, trolling and baiting posts are not against the guidelines, but clearly, disrespect, name calling and thread hijacking are. It is also abundantly clear that rarely, if ever, are those particular violations enforced with infractions by the mods, and consequently, leading those conversation threads to where they usually go.

Thank you W.E.C. +100

Hopefully, those of you who know me understand that (with the exception of humor), I try my hardest to avoid direct personal attacks. I have strong opinions, and will argue those to death... but, I respect that we have other opinions and each (although different) is valid.

That being said - I don't appreciate direct personal assaults on my threads. There's plenty of other places to do that.

As this particular poll shows - it doesn't help from a business standpoint and more than 3/4 of the people get turned off by it...

So, I'd like to see you apologize here publicly to each other.

[TinMan]

Maybe they are being sanctioned, but they just have an abundance of points to give. It’s funny how some folks don’t understand how the system works, such that when someone finally earns a ban there are others who can’t grasp it’s the accumulation of points that finally got them there.

[Wile E Coyote]

Originally Posted by Admiral Giggle

Many who scream that the sky is falling on posts do not read and/or understand the guidelines. Some can have multiple interpretations.

Knowing the difference between "Subjective" and "Objective" is the key.

Since you are a mod, and for those that do not know, do you mind telling us some examples of which of the 480+ posts in this particular thread, https://eccie.net/showthread.php?t=2388716 that are subjective and objective, many of which to anyone's opinion are seemingly to be obvious clear cuts of insults, name calling, disrespect to other members and threads hijacks? Keep in mind, the thread subject is "Texas Jess, has threatened me and others with a turkey baster".

Obviously, the guidelines are interpreted by mods that also have opinions, so since there are no actual black and white rules, per say, does it depend upon the mod that happens to read it as far as the infraction goes?

IMO, instead of those that respond to baseless accusations, trolling or name calling insults, the ones that SHOULD be worried about the points and bans are the instigating trolls that cause and are the source of the problems. Sure, the best scenario is to put them on ignore and not respond, but some just cannot do that for whatever reason, hence the targets on their backs for the trolls.

[TinMan]

I’ve been back-and-forth on how to answer the poll question, as the responses are too black and white for me. There have been women in the past who are labeled “argumentative” whose posts haven’t kept me from seeing. Others, it’s definitely been a factor.

[Scribe]

Originally Posted by TinMan

I’ve been back-and-forth on how to answer the poll question, as the responses are too black and white for me. There have been women in the past who are labeled “argumentative” whose posts haven’t kept me from seeing. Others, it’s definitely been a factor.

TM - thank you first for giving it actual thought... that's an admirable quality here. I do it, and I recognize it (actually, fairly often) in most people's posts.

The words I like to use is appropriate for classification are: Vitriol rhetoric and insults

Naturally, direct insults are direct personal attacks. If the word "You" is in the expletive, it probably qualifies. Vitriol is of course "cruel and bitter criticism" - so it's making these hateful statements on some thread - not to voice or defend an opinion against another opinion - but simply to voice cruel and bitter criticism against the other person.

Think of it this way. A person here says "I'm a Democrat" and someone else says "Democrats are libtards that don't understand the political aspect of... " Then they are really cussing out the opinion of the poster. Someone might not want to see them because they are, or are not a Democrat - that's a whole different topic.

But that same conversation goes like this: A person here says "I'm a Democrat" and someone else says "Screw you (Poster) YOU are a fucking weak ass libtard and you and you shitty thoughts..." - then that's a personal attack.

That personal attack stuff. Those comments that aren't opinions on anything; but are honestly attacks on someone directly is what I'm talking about.

Case in point on this thread - if the people who directly attack another on my thread can't apologize publically - and easily state "Hey, I don't support your views - but I have nothing against you as a good person"...

...then yes; they are posting in a pretty vile, directly combative to the poster manner - and those vile commentaries are what I'm polling about.

Hope that helps.

[Grace Preston]

I think it honestly depends. Not only on the posts created, but by the party creating them. There is a difference between someone choosing to defend themselves or others in a polite and intellectual way, and someone who enjoys stirring the pot just to stir or someone who has, in the past, created actual harm for others (outing, threats, etc).

Nothing in this world is black and white, there is always a fairly vast grey area.

[saustin]

Originally Posted by Grace Preston

I think it honestly depends. Not only on the posts created, but by the party creating them. There is a difference between someone choosing to defend themselves or others in a polite and intellectual way, and someone who enjoys stirring the pot just to stir or someone who has, in the past, created actual harm for others (outing, threats, etc).

+1
I think there is a line between supporting your point-of-view and defending yourself - the latter tend to display more volatile personalities

("oh no, my board personality is so much different").
At the end of the day, I am very hesitant to see someone who might try boiling the bunny.

[Bflexible]

For example, in BLM69's thread "Texas Jess..." BMM69 apparently has a current picture of Tara Evans and is asking for her permission to post it. This is a veiled threat to out a provider, if the picture is one Tara hasn't used in her advertising.

Why is this allowed to happen? I was an aspd member when St. Christopher was a moderator there. These threats of outting were shut down then. Why not now?

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by TinMan

I’ve been back-and-forth on how to answer the poll question, as the responses are too black and white for me. There have been women in the past who are labeled “argumentative” whose posts haven’t kept me from seeing. Others, it’s definitely been a factor.

Exactly. If their arguments are intelligent, articulately made, and I agree with them, I don’t see it as “argumentative.” I see it as spirited, spunky, or standing up for their beliefs. In that case, I’m more likely to see them. If they’re unpleasant harpies who use ad hominem attacks to advocate for a position I disagree with, they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of seeing me.