I have nothing to say ...

[Andy McGregor]

I've recently started posting again after a break of a few weeks while I moved house. Once in a while I did nip in and take a look at the Forum but didn't think I had anything to add to the particular discussions that were going on - so that's what I did, I didn't add anything.

The point of this thread is to debate a particular behavior trait I've observed. There is a certain kind of post where the sub-text is something like 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I've read what's being said and don't think you should be saying it' or 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the way you're saying what you're saying' or even, 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the people that are saying what's being said'.

Here's an example of what I mean;

Its well known on this forum how you feel about certain subjects and certain people,Christ you go on about it enough.If things change ,so be it,but for the meantime can we just have a rest from all this bickering.

I've found loads more and decided against boring people with them.

It is my opinion that when a thread is about a particular subject you should not post on that thread to say we shouldn't be discussing that subject. If people are discussing something it's because they think they should be. To go onto that thread and say that those people posting on it should not be doing so is quite insulting. And, it is also saying that the moderators aren't doing their job properly.

I think that if you don't want to read the debate about a particular subject don't click on it. My opinion is that if you want to police what's being debated ask Franck to give you a job as a moderator. But otherwise you should argue for or against the subject being debated rather than attempt to halt the debate or insult those who are debating the subject.

And, here is the question. Why do they do it?

[LMC]

I think that if you don't want to read the debate about a particular subject don't click on it. My opinion is that if you want to police what's being debated ask Franck to give you a job as a moderator. But otherwise you should argue for or against the subject being debated rather than attempt to halt the debate or insult those who are debating the subject.

If the subject is dance-related then fair enough. If it's a personal attack against an individual, potentially libellous or a "sensitive" topic that would be more appropriate for a topic-related forum, then you have to expect to end up armpit-deep in popcorn.

Unfortunately, you haven't given any examples of 'subjects' on which people are trying to halt debate.

Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks - I'm off to MJC later, the popcorn stall will be closing early.

And, here is the question. Why do they do it?

To annoy you of course

[JazzBug]

Woh! Brave post Andy, but you never where particularly shy

I’m with you on this one although I must say I’ve not read enough of the posts to have seen this a lot, I have however seen it happen all over the web and you make several excellent points.

As a relative noobie to this forum i don't want to spend hours pawing over information like a historian over ancient scriptures just incase the topics already been covered. I want to know what people think today!

If it’s just someone blowing their top at someone else then fine, boring! But everyone needs a rant every now and again Its want this medium is all about; take what you want and leave what you don’t but don’t stop other people from doing the same.

.oO) JazzBug (Oo.
aka Oli

[JazzBug]

Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks .

Do'h. Do you think i've been sucked in too easily???

I'm off to MJC later.

Cya there! First time tonight, i feel about 15 again, all excited.

[Little Monkey]

I just want to say I have nothing to add to this discussion, but I am, err, insulted and annoyed, and I think the forum is full of twerps and, errrr, plonkers and, err, I'm sure lots of people would agree, and lots of people would disagree, and I don't care, because I know nothing about the subject anyway, but I thought I'd post my opinion, or lack of opinion, because that's apparently the done thing, and I'm getting pretty sore fingers from typing this, and shouldn't ther be a full stop in this somewhere?

Phew.

Feel better now.

Rambling Monkey

PS - gimme some popcorn!!!

[Andy McGregor]

If the subject is dance-related then fair enough. If it's a personal attack against an individual, potentially libellous or a "sensitive" topic that would be more appropriate for a topic-related forum, then you have to expect to end up armpit-deep in popcorn.

This is the job of the moderator. If one of us humble Forumites sees this happenning there is a mechanism for reporting it to a moderator.

Unfortunately, you haven't given any examples of 'subjects' on which people are trying to halt debate.

Apart from the example I gave this is true. And I didn't give loads of examples because I didn't want to be seen as having a specific hidden agenda by picking on people - I even hid the name of the author of the one example I did give.

Therefore, IMVHO, this is a "hidden agenda" thread - line up folks

See above

All my agendas are very clearly stated.

To annoy you of course

I don't get annoyed at this, I get excited that someone has stuck their chin out and said 'hit me here'.

Do'h. Do you think i've been sucked in too easily???

No. As I've no hidden agenda there was nothing to suck you into

My objective, which I must admit I didn't state very clearly, is to reduce the level of people trying to throw wet blankets over heated threads. Those involved in heated debate are quite enjoying themselves. And, to judge by the number of views these debates get, they are quite popular threads.

This all about choice. And you don't have to look. Consider TV, there are many programmes you don't watch because you find them offensive. But some people do watch them and write in to complain. To them the answer has got to be don't watch what you don't like and then complain that you didn't like it. Having said that, I think there's too much sport and reality television at the moment. Especially cricket - any amount is to much. But, I don't ever watch it ...

[Andy McGregor]

-snip-

All my agendas are very clearly stated.

-snip-

My objective, which I must admit I didn't state very clearly,

Can't you be consistent? Either 'all' your agendas are clear or they aren't

The heat must have addled your brain.

[JazzBug]

No. As I've no hidden agenda there was nothing to suck you into

I've sucked you into my hidden agenda now!!! ( evil laugh ).
Unfortunately i'm too dull whitted to make anything of it.

Nows the time to quit before i say something outragously offensive!

[Little Monkey]

Can't you be consistent? Either 'all' your agendas are clear or they aren't

The heat must have addled your brain.

Oh dear..... One has started talking to oneself. Very bad.

Concerned Monkey

[LMC]

This all about choice. And you don't have to look.

But you don't know if it will offend you until you HAVE looked - a perfectly innocuous thread title isn't (unlike TV program titles and guides) a clue to the offensive/obscene/libellous/popcorn-littered* nature of the thread content.

* delete as applicable

The post you chose as an example actually hails from a "personal attack" thread, so is not a good example of the principle you are trying to debate.

Oh dear..... One has started talking to oneself. Very bad.

Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands one

(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?

[Little Monkey]

Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands one
(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?

Oh dear, it seems to be contagious.....

Very Concerned Little Monkey

[Andy McGregor]

The post you chose as an example actually hails from a "personal attack" thread, so is not a good example of the principle you are trying to debate.

But that particular post was not relevant to the person we were debating. It was a dig at one the the debators - which is exactly the point I was making.

Well, one has to have someone to talk to who understands one

I just thought I'd point out my inconsistency before someone else.

(that's my excuse anyway)... oops, did I just say that out loud?

Don't worry, most of the pixies are near the fan and it's a bit noisy. Only the tropical pixies near the CD drive heard you.

[LMC]

There is a certain kind of post where the sub-text is something like (1) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I've read what's being said and don't think you should be saying it' or (2) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the way you're saying what you're saying' or even, (3) 'I've got nothing to say on this subject but I don't like the people that are saying what's being said'.

(NB: my numbering)

In a personal attack thread, the first and second reasons for posting are perfectly valid and reasonable IMO.

But that particular post was not relevant to the person we were debating. It was a dig at one the the debators - which is exactly the point I was making.

So it's OK for you to start a thread having a go at someone but not OK for someone else to have a go at you for having a go at someone else?

[Andy McGregor]

So it's OK for you to start a thread having a go at someone but not OK for someone else to have a go at you for having a go at someone else?

We were debating the existence of Fletch as a real person with her own opinion. Based on Fletch's entry onto the Forum it seemed a reasonable thread. Fletch was demonstrating that she was equipped to and prepared to stick up for herself. I'm sure she appreciated the support she got and enjoyed the light-hearted fisticuffs. Neither side of the debate needed a non-contributor to step in and tell them it was 'time gentlemen please'.

And, of course, people can say what they like about me. But they need to be prepared for a robust reaction

NOW, to get back with the programme - which means we aren't talking about Andy McGregor in particular here. There are wet blankets out there who seem to think they can close down a thread - why do they think it's their right to do so? They're acting like your dad. One of the things that makes me see red is when someone tells me to 'grow up'. And that is what these 'grown ups' are trying to do. What makes them think it's their place to do this?

Maybe someone else can take a trawl through some threads and come up with some examples of wet blankets trying to stifle heated debate - I can only remember the recent ones that people threw in my direction and quoting them will make NewKid think, quite understandably, that I've got a hidden agenda.

[Little Monkey]

They're acting like your dad.

Oh god, now I'm scared. My dad would fire up the flamethrower, whilst laughing in a very manic way, before throwing more petrol on the thread to make it burn better....

Or were you not referring to my dad??

Scared Monkey - got the fire blankets out just in case!

[Andy McGregor]

Oh god, now I'm scared. My dad would fire up the flamethrower, whilst laughing in a very manic way, before throwing more petrol on the thread to make it burn better....

Or were you not referring to my dad??

Scared Monkey - got the fire blankets out just in case!

Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla

[Little Monkey]

Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla

Yep, you got him spot on! Absolute maniac!

And of course I'm nothing like my father.... All shy, quiet and easily intimidated. And no temper whatsoever....

Shy Little Monkey

[Little Monkey]

Hey, LM, I like the sound of your dad. Definitely not a wet blanket. More of a mad gorilla

Incidentally, here's a photo of good ol' dad.... He's such a sweet, good natured guy. And it's easy to see where I get my good looks from!

Little Monkey

[El Salsero Gringo]

We were debating the existence of Fletch as a real person with her own opinion. Based on Fletch's entry onto the Forum it seemed a reasonable thread.

Not to anyone who hadn't taken their lunatic conspiracy theory pills that morning, it didn't.

How do you feel about people whose only contribution to a thread is to say how nasty, insulting and divisive it is?

[Dreadful Scathe]

How do you feel about people whose only contribution to a thread is to say how nasty, insulting and divisive it is?

Why? Do you think this thread is nasty, insulting and divisive ?