'"You, however, seem to see affinities between posters as some sort of travesty of justice, except when it crops up in your own behavior, of course...Now what's the word for that? Hmmm I know I saw it here recently. It begins with an "H".
Would you care to point out where I have banned anyone from moderated threads I have posted? Would you care to point out where I have advocated for the removal of a poster who challenges my positions? Would you care to point out where I have hinted that other posters ideas should be ignored? Would you care to point out where I have ignored anyone else's point of view that doesn't validate my own? '
These two ideas have nothing to do with each other. Not wanting to talk to people, or ignoring them, is simply a choice one makes that goes back to affinities. The ignored person may desperately WANT to talk to the person ignoring them, but that's really irrelevant. There is no inherent right to talk to the people you want to talk to, if they do not want to talk to you. If you appeal to people, they will talk to you, if you do not appeal to them, they may not. I see absolutely no problem whatsoever with that. You are not able to hurl yourself at people who do not want to have anything to do with you in 3d- that's what restraining orders are for. Luckily, on the net, all you need is an ignore function.
I know you really have a problem with the banning thing. Again, it has nothing to do with the point I was making about treating people you like differently WHEN you post to them, from people you do not. That said, why on Earth wouldn't you ban people who are a waste of space in your universe? I grant you, we'll all find different people a waste of space, but I see no profit at all in talking to people who don't add anything to one's life. If you were banned from here, for example, you wouldn't have been sniping at me, while I was trying to ignore you, and I wouldn't be wasting my time writing this post. That's a better world, as far as I see it.
There are people I would not allow in my house, and the same kinds of people, I do want on my threads. This is Grainne's thread, and she can ban whoever she darn well feels like banning, and I've no doubt I'll be supportive of who she bans, because our tastes are similar. But, should she ban someone I do not think should be banned, I wouldn't whine about it, because this is her thread and she can do what she wants and she SHOULD (imo) do what she wants. I would never post somewhere I did not trust the moderator exactly because moderators have such power. That's why I post here, and not elsewhere. Maybe you should think about posting where you feel comfortable, so you don't whine so much.
"...you get very strange when talking to some people, but are as sycophantic as the very best sycophant when talking to others. But I would never put it that way.
"
This you just didn't understand- but maybe I worded it unclearly. What I meant was that what YOU see as sycophantic is just friendly. And when you do it, you don't call your own behavior sycophantic. I would not describe the behavior the way you do, because I don't see it that way. I have seen some sycophantic behavior on some other threads, but have not seen any here. |
