TexasCHLforum.com

Barbi Q wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Very well said and FWIW, I particularly agree with your observation about threads that go on ad nauseum. Those threads make me want to .

I was at a party last night. When I walked over to one group, they were talking about the football game next weekend. I wasn't interested so I moved on, and joined a different conversation instead.

I could have been rude and tried to pressure them to stop talking football, but I have better manners than that.

Well bless your heart; however, good manners speak for themself.

Thank you for making my point.

Abraham wrote:KaiserB,

"[this message and the information contained herein should be taken in jest] :)"

Is this exempting message supposed work like: "I am not a lawyer" after posting advice?

Well sometimes it does. I have found that when I try to be sarcastic or make a joke via email or on a forum some people read the message and think I am serious or off my rocker. So at the end of a post or email that is supposed to be humorous I put that disclaimer so everyone knows my smarmy comments were meant to be "funny" and not cynical or mean spirited.

I don't have a problem with conversations that go on ad nauseum on any given topic. At some point, I just drop out and quit reading that thread. I don't even mind it when someone starts an identical second thread on the exact same subject, and now we have two identical conversations that go on ad infinitum repeating the same echoes over and over again. And I keep my counsel to myself when a third person comes along, ignores the active thread list, and starts a third conversation, convinced that he is doing something original about the exact same subject as the two ongoing threads.

But when a fourth person comes along and does the same thing as the previous three, and now we have four concurrent threads about the exact same topic on the first page of the active threads list, the board begins to look like it is subject to an organized spamming effort.

The ONE time I used Mr. Horse-Flogger, it was exactly that scenario. The topic was Open Carry (but it could have been anything). I have nothing against it. In actually in favor of it if pursued correctly. I participated in the discussions myself. But when a fourth thread got started, it was too much — at least for me, and I lost patience. But Open Carry isn't the point. It could have been multiple active threads about the best way to feed and care for gerbils.

In other similar situations, someone has come along and and posted links to the concurrent threads and suggested that respondents might want to take the conversation to those threads. Nobody thinks twice when that happens. That is the spirit in which I posted Mr. Horse-Flogger. I suppose it could have been perceived as rude, but then so is spamming the board on a given subject.

Personally, it doesn't bother me when someone posts that icon. That's why it never would have occurred to me that it would bother someone else. I guess I'm an insensitive boor.

Hey folks, isn't this thread now????? I mean, well, you know . . .

MoJo wrote:Hey folks, isn't this thread now????? I mean, well, you know . . .

How WUDE!!!

TAM,

Nah, just predictable...

...I've learned from newbies and old-timers...unless a person's being hatefully critical of someone's opinion or mocking or ridiculing...I think the disagreements and diversities make the board worth reading...I've even changed my mind reading some discussions...and if I find it boring...it's on to the next thread...I don't figure I've got the right to be rude about other folks' conversations...if there's another thread running...it'd be simple to post that link without comment...most of us get enough criticism other places in our lives...if you wouldn't say it to their face...why post it ???


...oh, I just reread the whole thread...and I'm repeating myself...again...

The Annoyed Man wrote:That's why it never would have occurred to me that it would bother someone else. I guess I'm an insensitive boor.

TAM, when I was the Marine Corp, we defined TACT as:

The ability to tell someone to go to {very very far south} and have them be happy to be on their way.

Or as:

The ability to tell someone {which end of the horse they resemble} and having them thank you for it.

This type of tact is a quality that you possess in spades. I don't think you have anything to worry about in your use of the board's emoticons.

speedsix wrote:I think the disagreements and diversities make the board worth reading...I've even changed my mind reading some discussions...and if I find it boring...it's on to the next thread...

Yeah, that's what I was trying to convey earlier. I learn very little from the threads where every poster use the little dude. But the post where opposing views state their cases are the ones where I truly learn where I stand on a particular topic - and its not always where I thought I stood. Attempting to shut those down is a real travesty ...