Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (346270)	1/23/2003 12:24:10 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Message 18478405 There is a difference between people in a group talking amongst themselves about their group, and angry people talking in a derogatory manner about members of the group. I would have thought that distinction was pretty obvious, but it might not be to you. Personal bugging is different than hate speech directed at a group. I really don't care very much what individuals get up to- especially when it's hard to apportion blame. On SI it takes two to fight- because one person can always put the other on ignore. If two people have an ongoing contretemps, it is because they want to.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (346270)	1/23/2003 12:37:28 AM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

<<Now: How is it your boyfriend got away with bloody murder and you have no problem with that but JLA should be hung? BRING BACK JLA!!!!>> This is shaping up like the Trent Lott thing. Decent and/or clever Republicans derided Lott for his remarks, they helped orchestrate his demise as Senate leader. The less decent and/or less clever Republicans stood up for Lott and immediately tried to shift the spotlight elsewhere, implying two wrongs make a right: "others have said bad things too, what about Byrd..." You know, every single Bush supporter here has taken the second approach. Luckily for his followers, the President is much wiser and/or more decent than his supporters who post here. Steve

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (346270)	1/23/2003 12:54:44 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Well said letter Lazarus. Although I have no idea about the Chris Hodkins conflict, Jill really did find a wonderful balance in the early days of SI. What amazes me is the way she would seem to be online 24 hours day solving conflicts the moment they popped up. Of course, there were a lot less political threads then, and the focus of civility was because of the importance of the stock threads. I argued a few years ago that management needed a two-tiered policy in regard to thread communications. Obviously, they didn't think it was a good idea. I believed the stock threads should be reserved for stock issues, and moderated closely, while the political threads (or former coffee shop threads), should be given more allowances. Many of the best stock threads have now been ruined by political discussions. Name-calling is just the tip of the ice-berg when it comes to lack of civility destroying these threads. Being overtly petulant, condescending, or pompous can be just as destructive as name calling imo. The solution seems to be the moderated thread concept. It appears SI no longer has the talent, financial capability, or costumer service attitude to effectively manage all these threads. Of course we should bring back JLA!