► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25776
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#1

Post by Foggy » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:06 pm

Sugar Magnolia wrote:
Foggy wrote:I admit, it's not really fair to put you in the FEMA camp because others insisted on insulting you. But then again, often life is not fair.
Hopefully, this won't land me in the FEMA camp myself, but I'm not understanding at all why he got sent here when it was regular members who attacked him. People say offensive things all the time to each other on here and they don't get sent here.

I guess I just don't understand why someone who followed the rules was "punished" while others who obviously didn't give a shit about the rules were left to break them whenever they wanted instead of being shut down immediately.

Life may not be fair, but it doesn't have to be hypocritical either.
A little history first:

Back when Justin and I ran the forum with realist's help, we'd get birthers who joined and tried to post a lot of birther lies. We'd try to bend over backwards to accommodate them - we didn't want to be an echo chamber - but it was always a problem because of the rule against insulting other members of the forum. Some of our members simply could not follow that rule. But they were people who were regulars since almost the beginning of the forum, and they were valuable members. One of them was ducktape, who has since passed away, and who is kind of a revered former member of the forum. Ducky had been everywhere and knew everything and was a wonderful person who always informed us of things that we didn't know. In person she was one of the friendliest and most talkative people I've ever met. But she was simply not going to refrain from insulting birthers and anyone else whose opinion she held in contempt. When someone joined that she didn't like, she became abusive, and nothing I did or said was ever going to get her to lighten up.

So when she broke the rule, what was I supposed to do, punish Ducky? She would have left the forum. There are others, I'm not going to name them because they're not dead. But you've seen it -- somebody posts something that offends people, and suddenly you see people insulting them even if they're members of the forum who haven't done any personal attacks. Read Jeffrey's last 10 posts or so and the replies to them, if you don't know what I'm talking about.

Yeah. It's really hard to enforce a rule when it's your own friends who are breaking the rule. So I invented the FEMA camp, long ago. I don't see the FEMA camp as a "punishment" because guests and everyone in the FEMA Staff & Visitors usergroup can read their posts, but you've seen Jeffrey disagree (for what I think is good reason) and now Sugar M. agrees with him. In fact, I often get people begging me to put people in the FEMA camp in order to "punish" them, when I just never thought it was a punishment.

But we still have the problem of flame wars. I will not allow flame wars on the forum. I've seen and been part of forums that allowed flame wars, and pretty soon all the good people left and there was nobody left but flaming assholes. I've seen entire pages of a thread with just two people taking turns insulting each other back and forth for 30 or more posts in a row. I've seen a guy tell a lady that she had to label all her shoes L and R to get them on the right feet, and that she wouldn't know a fact if it flew into her beard. :lol:

I'm pretty good at flaming myself, but it's not something I'm going to allow on the forum, and if people absolutely positively without question demand to be allowed to flame other members of the forum, WHICH THEY ARE GOING TO DO, then how do I handle that?

Let's take Jeffrey as an example. He wasn't insulting anyone personally. He was following the rules here, and the only thing he was doing wrong was, he was posting some thoughts that other people didn't like (maybe because they were or were not stupid thoughts), and so they started in on insulting him. I have a rule here against insulting other members of the forum, but some people are just too important to actually have to follow that rule, if they disagree with someone.

To be honest, I do insult people in the FEMA camp myself after I put them in the FEMA camp, but I could quit any time. Srsly. When Justin was here I went for months without insulting anyone, and I could do that again.

Of course, if someone new starts insulting other members (or the group as a whole), they go right into the FEMA camp. If they threaten us or post the same lie 50 times or more, I have banned people for life. I try to avoid censorship but there are things that I will not tolerate.

So what do I do when someone isn't breaking the rules but other people are flaming them and trying to start flame wars? I'm asking for advice from the boogle here. As I see it, my choices are:

1. Do nothing and allow flame wars on the forum. This will be the death of Fogbow and isn't really an option.

2. Discipline my own friends. Ban people I've met and shared meals with and spent time together. This will cost me lifelong friends and isn't really an option either.

3. Status quo: If people insist on flame wars against an individual, even one who is obeying the rules, I put them in the FEMA camp. They can still talk about any subject they want, and their posts are not deleted or edited. That isn't an optimal solution either, as shown by today's events. I have been persuaded to change my mind and I think Jeffrey and Sugar M. are right, it really IS like a punishment to only be able to post in the FEMA camp.

Is there a Number 4. here?

Howzabout group action? Maybe I should ask the rest of you to tell the offenders to back off? Maybe group pressure will achieve what having the same rule for more than eight years has not been able to achieve. Somehow I've got to get some people to actually think, "No, I can't do personal attacks against this person even if I strongly disagree with their opinions." Did you know you can ignore people?

Howzabout instant action? Maybe I just delete posts that are insulting on a personal level, without disciplining anybody or even announcing it -- no temporary bans, no restrictions on your ability to post, or anything like that, just ZOT your damn post is gone.

Howzabout, somebody give me a creative idea. When I implemented the FEMA camp (actually, originally it was called "under the bridge" where the trolls lived, and was applied only to trolls and other unsavory characters), it was quite popular. But maybe it's time to lose it?


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15325
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#2

Post by Suranis » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:25 pm

Well, if it helps, I'm learning Necromancy.

Image

Image


"The devil...the prowde spirite...cannot endure to be mocked.” - Thomas Moore

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 9027
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#3

Post by Sugar Magnolia » Sat Sep 16, 2017 4:33 pm

Zapping the posts seems reasonable to me, as would one of those big red exclamation point things you do with some sort of generic warning to the flaming poster, directly calling out the offender.

As far as not calling out "friends" or regular posters, why not? If wifehorn was doing it, would you ignore it? Personally, I tend to call people out MORE quickly if I know and trust them. It's a respect thing, and if the respect is not mutual, why do you care if they stick around or not? If we can't trust each other not to attack, or not trust you to manage the board fairly, then where do we go from there? Maybe the rule should be "Respect the rules or I have no obligation to protect your feelings." If we lose the ability to trust each other, the board is gone anyway.

That whole respect thing is why I posted my original comment to begin with. I respect you, and the rules and the other posters enough to speak up with what I expected to be an unpopular opinion. Like it or not, we have a tendency, just as any group does, to take sides with or make allowances for the 'cool kids' even though they may not be right. I didn't agree with a lot of Jeffrey's comments but some of the responses were uncalled for and so was sending him to the camp.



User avatar
Estiveo
Posts: 6985
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: Trouble's Howse

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#4

Post by Estiveo » Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:01 pm

I agree with Sugar. The FEMA camp has its place for true trolls and whack-a-loons, who have become rare lately. Jeffery, while I think his opinions are on the nutty side (SovCit Lite) doesn't belong in the camp.


Image Image Image Image Image

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 16079
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#5

Post by RTH10260 » Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:05 pm

:yeah:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 23795
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#6

Post by bob » Sat Sep 16, 2017 5:45 pm

Foggy wrote:Howzabout instant action? Maybe I just delete posts that are insulting on a personal level, without disciplining anybody or even announcing it -- no temporary bans, no restrictions on your ability to post, or anything like that, just ZOT your damn post is gone.
I like that, other than it creates work for the mods.

Can you impose foe-block on someone? (And no "click to display post" option.) Like, "hey, bob, you clearly can't play well with Stern. You two are now mutually blocked from seeing each other postings."


Imagex5 Imagex2 Imagex3 Imagex2

noblepa
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Network Engineer

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#7

Post by noblepa » Sat Sep 16, 2017 6:39 pm

Foggy wrote: Howzabout instant action? Maybe I just delete posts that are insulting on a personal level, without disciplining anybody or even announcing it -- no temporary bans, no restrictions on your ability to post, or anything like that, just ZOT your damn post is gone.
I like this option. It "punishes" the offenders, whether they are friends or not.

One of the things that I have always liked about this forum was the openness. All are welcome to post ideas here. Posters are not banned because their ideas may be disagreeable. This is the very definition of free speech.

Foggy, I understand and sympathize with your dilemma when it is a long-time poster or a friend who is doing the insulting, but I think that, if this forum is to survive as a place where ALL ideas can be discussed with civility, you must be firm, even with your friends. Otherwise the forum will get a reputation for allowing free speech, only for friends or people we agree with. That is exactly what we criticize other forums for.

So, yeah, zap the offending posts without regard to their source.



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25776
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#8

Post by Foggy » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:09 pm

bob wrote:Can you impose foe-block on someone? (And no "click to display post" option.) Like, "hey, bob, you clearly can't play well with Stern. You two are now mutually blocked from seeing each other postings."
No, I can't do that. And even if you don't "click to display post" sometimes you'll see things written by a "foe" if someone else quotes that person.

In any event, Jeffrey is out of FEMA camp, with apologies for the inconvenience (I put the apology on his YouTube, too also). Jemcanada, thanks for pointing out his YouTube, which got me thinking.

I'll mull on this more. If anyone else has suggestions, I'm reading.


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6982
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#9

Post by Slartibartfast » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:22 pm

Foggy wrote:
bob wrote:Can you impose foe-block on someone? (And no "click to display post" option.) Like, "hey, bob, you clearly can't play well with Stern. You two are now mutually blocked from seeing each other postings."
No, I can't do that. And even if you don't "click to display post" sometimes you'll see things written by a "foe" if someone else quotes that person.

In any event, Jeffrey is out of FEMA camp, with apologies for the inconvenience (I put the apology on his YouTube, too also). Jemcanada, thanks for pointing out his YouTube, which got me thinking.

I'll mull on this more. If anyone else has suggestions, I'm reading.
I gots some weighing in to do, buts I'm still writin...

On a personal note, kudos for apologizing to Jeffrey! You are a barnyard fowl and a gentleman.
:bunny: :happyfamily: :bunny: :kickface:

...

:oops:

:towel:


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25776
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#10

Post by Foggy » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:23 pm

noblepa wrote:One of the things that I have always liked about this forum was the openness. All are welcome to post ideas here. Posters are not banned because their ideas may be disagreeable. This is the very definition of free speech.
Thanks, noblepa. I do try to make this a place where you can express your honestly held opinions.

Tomorrow I'm going to take the forum offline for a couple hours. I have to upgrade to the current version of the software, and it's going to be a tricky one. Do not fret -- I will make full backups of everything first, so the worst that can happen is the board will work exactly the same as it is working now. Although it's had a couple glitches in the past week or so. I think those will be fixed when I upgrade.

Moar will be reviled. :mrgreen:


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43460
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#11

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:32 pm

The proof of the pudding is in the posting. (Sorry.) You've kept the site going for almost 9 years. It has high level discussions on almost every imaginable subject. Jeffrey was trolling as a nazi apologist in the guise of an advocate for free speech and mitior sensus. I told him so and put him on ignore. I didn't care what he did or said after that.

Don't change anything.
► Show Spoiler



User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 6729
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#12

Post by RoadScholar » Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:25 pm

It doesn't make things any easier that "insulting a member" resists clear definition. Obviously direct insults such as "are you mentally ill?" count. But when odious ideas are posted, is a tone of derision, sarcasm, or ridicule aimed at the idea tantamount to insulting the poster? Is it a matter of intensity? And is such a tone allowable if aimed at someone else's idea the poster is only repeating, but is insulting if it's his or her own idea? :think:


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 8964
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#13

Post by Mikedunford » Sat Sep 16, 2017 10:18 pm

My position on things like this has always been consistent. Foggy's house; Foggy's rules. I'll stay as long as I'm comfortable with the rules. If a time comes when I'm not comfortable with the rules, I leave.

That said, in the spirit of offering opinions:

As far as the personal insults thing goes, not only is it hard to define the term, I'm not entirely sure it's a fair rule on a forum that's populated by a significant minority of people who are trained to use words as weapons. I'm pretty sure that someone could go back through my posts and pick out more than a few that can't reasonably be read as objectively violating the personal insults rule, but which were completely belittling and almost certainly caused some emotional distress when read. I'm positive that others here have written posts of the same type. The "no personal insults" rule is a good starting point, but there's more to flamewar prevention than just that. Overall chemistry is key.


I believe that each era finds a improvement in law each year brings something new for the benefit of mankind.

--Clarence Earl Gideon

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 11161
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Here
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#14

Post by Whatever4 » Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:09 pm

For various reasons, I (and a few other veteran booglers) have drifted away from the board over the past few months. Thus I didn't get to see this kerfuffle in real time. In looking back, SOME OF THE BOOGLE WERE MEANIEHEADS. :fingerwag: :nope:

Be nicer.


"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (R-ME)

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 6729
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#15

Post by RoadScholar » Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:12 pm

When you sup with the devil, bring a long spoon.


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 4288
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#16

Post by MsDaisy » Sat Sep 16, 2017 11:17 pm

Mikedunford wrote:My position on things like this has always been consistent. Foggy's house; Foggy's rules. I'll stay as long as I'm comfortable with the rules. If a time comes when I'm not comfortable with the rules, I leave.

That said, in the spirit of offering opinions:

As far as the personal insults thing goes, not only is it hard to define the term, I'm not entirely sure it's a fair rule on a forum that's populated by a significant minority of people who are trained to use words as weapons. I'm pretty sure that someone could go back through my posts and pick out more than a few that can't reasonably be read as objectively violating the personal insults rule, but which were completely belittling and almost certainly caused some emotional distress when read. I'm positive that others here have written posts of the same type. The "no personal insults" rule is a good starting point, but there's more to flamewar prevention than just that. Overall chemistry is key.
I agree. Maybe following a 3 strike rule on the no personal insults would work. It’s true that we’ve all crossed a line or two over the history of this website one way or another. I personally don’t follow the FEMA thread much but have looked at it from time to time. We could lay down the ground rules for release into the public forum and advise them of the 3 strike rule, then all depends on the them. This would give them the chance to make their case and prove their worth at the same time, or show themselves as trolls once and for all. Either way, can’t hurt to try is my opinion.

Foggy, what say you? As Mike said, “your house your rules”.


Birfers are toast

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25776
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#17

Post by Foggy » Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:43 am

First, though, my house, my responsibility to perform necessary maintenance.

We'll be offline for a couple hours this morning. I'm going to get 'er done.

Then I can get back to the personal drama and stuff. :smoking:


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 4288
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#18

Post by MsDaisy » Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:35 am

Foggy wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:43 am
:snippity:
Then I can get back to the personal drama and stuff. :smoking:
:lol: You such a funny rooster Foggy.


Birfers are toast

User avatar
realist
Posts: 34374
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#19

Post by realist » Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:02 am

I suppose I'm a bad mod but having been very busy with life stuff recently I've somehow missed all the "Jeffrey" drama/relegation to FEMA camp/member insults, etc.

I did go back and read some of his posts and a few replies and also have no idea why he ended up in FEMA camp. And say what you will and continue convincing yourself all you wish but it is certainly a punishment, a punishment brought on by the favoring of "valuable members" who, for some reason, remained and remain so regardless of them violating your rules. Though you had zero problem discipline me at one point (undeservedly) and it sure wasn't just FEMA camp. So I suppose I did it for the "valuable member" nor "friend" categories.

It's well documented that you and I have disagreed about FEMA camp since it's institution but as previously stated, your forum. You are free to do as you wish with it.

The real problem with "revisiting" FEMA camp is that it's creation (as you admitted to above) came about because you (and you instructed mods) not to force "valuable members" and/or your (and our) "friends" because X, Y, or Z. Perhaps it's too late for that to change. So-called "valuable members," however have come and gone over the years and the forum still survives and thrives.

I certainly (as you know) disagree completely with FA camp but if it remains a viable solution, it should be the offenders relegated to it, not the offended by "valuable members" as has often happened.

Perhaps I'll come back and read more later in the next day or so when I have time, and further comment but that's kind of my overview of the subject at present.


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 25776
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#20

Post by Foggy » Sun Sep 17, 2017 11:09 am

Those are the reasons I'm rethinking the whole FEMA camp thing entirely. Moar later, I have to walk 4 miles now.


... and how does that make you feel?
What is it you are trying to say?
:think:

Grumpy Old Guy
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:24 am

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#21

Post by Grumpy Old Guy » Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:00 pm

Enjoy your walk.

Could you or the moderators send one or two personal messages then three strikes and the person is sentenced to FEMA for a few days.

Great site.



User avatar
Slartibartfast
Posts: 6982
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:52 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#22

Post by Slartibartfast » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:02 pm

A bit moar history: I was one of the people vocally calling for the creation of "Under the Bridge". In fact, if I remember correctly, I was the one that proposed the name. At the time, as Foggy said, the occasional birther would come trolling around the site, disrupting threads, usually talking about a single issue that was off-topic for the thread and refusing to engage in any honest dialogue. I compared it to the Native American practice of "counting coup" (stealing a small possession of the enemy or a lock of hair or touching them, etc.). After the inception of the quarantine idea, now and then we would get a birther who stopped by, got quickly thrown in (usually for insulting a member or for a member insulting them for their birther-like behavior). They would stay for a while, like a butterfly trapped in a jar, and spar with whomever deigned to engage them before ultimately realizing the pointlessness of it and wandering off (or flouncing off in a huff -- not very many could stick the landing though).

Anyway, the FEMA Camp was a workable solution to what, as Foggy pointed out, was a serious threat to peace on the board, but by no means the only one. That threat, having been ameliorated by the FEMA Camp, has now gone away -- or at least changed into people like Jeffery for whom the FEMA Camp solution doesn't seem quite appropriate. To me, that says that it probably needs to be changed or eliminated to solve our current problems (which Foggy carefully laid out), but, more importantly, it needs to be discussed like we are doing now. I'm going to speak my mind about this, and I tend to get pretty passionate and intense, but, in the end, I'm only giving Foggy my advice. And my vote of confidence in whatever decision he finally makes. I've always thought that Foggy knows what it means to be a community organizer. I hope everyone will participate in a vigorous and open dialogue about this -- in my opinion it's something we need.

Sugar Magnolia wrote:Zapping the posts seems reasonable to me, as would one of those big red exclamation point things you do with some sort of generic warning to the flaming poster, directly calling out the offender.

All of those (and more) are reasonable options, but we need to decide what we want to accomplish before try to figure out how to accomplish it. It sounds like some of Jeffery's posts are offensive, but others are fine and even a valuable contribution to some. Zapping or issuing a warning to the offensive posts might be an acceptable compromise, but it also involves work by Foggy or the mods and a policy regarding what is appropriate. It seems like there might be simpler solutions.

As far as not calling out "friends" or regular posters, why not? If wifehorn was doing it, would you ignore it? Personally, I tend to call people out MORE quickly if I know and trust them.

Sugar, I love you. :lovestruck:

Absolutely. One of the most important lessons I have learned in the last two years is that the people I can trust the most are those that have the courage and respect for me to tell me the honest truth, even the brutally honest truth, even when they know that I won't like hearing what they have to say. Moreover, I'm a scientist, so I actively try to prove myself wrong and I'm happy whenever it happens because I learn something. It follows, that if I respect someone else...


It's a respect thing, and if the respect is not mutual, why do you care if they stick around or not?

There's a fantasy series I like (it's a guilt pleasure so I'm not saying which one) where there is a tribe of people who's greeting is to exchange slaps. The harder you slap someone, the more respect you show for their strength. Of course the hero misunderstands and retaliates with a massive punch, winning the person's friendship by the bigly show of respect. I agree with you, but I would also suggest that it isn't easy to take a punch like that, especially if you don't have any practice. Sometimes you need to do a little work on building respect before you test it.

If we can't trust each other not to attack, or not trust you to manage the board fairly, then where do we go from there?

I think that by turning this around, it suggests where to go: we have to define what are considered attacks, so that there is a social contract to provide context in which we can trust each other and for Foggy to manage the board fairly. By discussing the matter and coming to a workable policy through a transparent process wherein all the stakeholders have a seat at the table and a voice in the process I think we can start to build this trust. Which, to my way of thinking about it, is the whole point of the journey: building trust with other people.

Maybe the rule should be "Respect the rules or I have no obligation to protect your feelings." If we lose the ability to trust each other, the board is gone anyway.

I think we need to determine what the rules are meant to accomplish -- if everyone understands that, then they will respect them and, again, an open process builds trust.

That whole respect thing is why I posted my original comment to begin with. I respect you, and the rules and the other posters enough to speak up with what I expected to be an unpopular opinion.

I've been sitting on some things because I've been worried about the response to unpopular honesty (given some of the responses I've received in the past). The thing that has been pushing me to voice these concerns is my respect for the boogle.

Like it or not, we have a tendency, just as any group does, to take sides with or make allowances for the 'cool kids' even though they may not be right.

It's more than that (and the "cool kids" is a moving and poorly defined target, in my opinion). Ultimately, I think whatever rules Foggy adopts should be applied to noob and :geezer: * equally. Too, also, I think Realist has a point (not to mention his showing of great respect to Foggy), the current "rules" are somewhat vague and subjective in their application. Which I think leads to Foggy's complaint: he does not like having to police his friends, which he must do because the rules, in my opinion, are not equipped to deal with our current situation. Actually, I think it is a credit to Foggy that we have gotten so far in such good shape with the rules as they are, but at some point you must either grow or atrophy and I think we are there.

* Please note that is :geezer: and not :sterngard:
:nope:
My question is this: Can a group of incredibly talented, highly intelligent people (who are skewed heavily towards the legal profession) go through a transparent process to come up with a set of rules that they are all willing to abide by which will keep the peace and allow the sort of robust discussion that we've come to expect on the Fogbow? If we can't, through an open and honest dialogue, come up with a set of rules that Foggy can adopt to keep the peace and foster honest debate without his policing his friends, then we are admitting that we are children who need him to act as our parent. Personally, I think finding Foggy a solution to this problem that allows him to focus on his role as Soup-Ream Richard Tater rather than acting like a nun with a ruler is a pretty small ask from the person who gave us all the Fogbow.

Who's with me?

p.s. Thoughts, I gots 'em, but I want this to be a Fogbow project, not a Slarti project so I'll wait to see if people agree with the basic idea before I share.


"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
---Sun Tzu (quoting Thomas Jefferson)
nam-myoho-renge-kyo---Thomas Jefferson (quoting Slartibartfast)

Jeffrey
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#23

Post by Jeffrey » Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:34 pm

There's no need to go through all that trouble. I will refrain from saying anything controversial outside of the FEMA camp thread. It's foggys forum and he should be able to treat friends preferentially over random internet people even if it's inconsistent with the posted rules.



User avatar
kate520
Posts: 14293
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#24

Post by kate520 » Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:49 pm

You got that right, Jeffrey. This is foggy’s Playpen, his rules...to break if that’s what he wants. We invite all kinds of jerks to come visit us. Most of them, like you, are one-note people, here mostly to troll, insisting way past the point of ‘ok, we get it, that’s how you feel’ that you’re right and everyone else is wrong. Over and over.

The alt rt has been breaking heads, bombing shit and taking over wildlife preserves, under various names and causes, for quite some now with not much pushback because most people lead actual lives, have jobs and such, and don’t really care how others live. But we’ve gotten to the point where they think no one cares and they can do what they want. Should we just let them?

If you don’t smell fascism in the air, Jeffrey, maybe you need some Vaporub.


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

Jeffrey
Posts: 273
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: ► ► FEMA Camp Revisited -- should I get rid of it?

#25

Post by Jeffrey » Fri Sep 29, 2017 1:52 pm

Well we got these guys in blue uniforms that step in to deal with the alt right when they cross the line into committing criminal acts.



Post Reply

Return to “FEMA Camp 7½”