Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

Serious issues with L&D Forum

Page 22 of 30 [ 473 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 ... 30  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

08 May 2016, 8:25 pm

I don't feel L &'D, in general, is a "swamp." I don't believe it should be suspended.

Yes, there is nastiness, which should be moderated appropriately.

But the nastiness is definitely less frequent than previously, because of this appropriate moderation.

It's great that we had a constructive discussion--but like most lengthly threads, it's turned into an ego-fest.

However, L & D, in toto, is a most constructive subforum, and a place where people could express concerns, and have them addresses.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

08 May 2016, 8:35 pm

Fnord wrote:
Well, I'll just re-iterate the opinion that sexist rants against an entire gender for showing no interest in the person posting the rant have no place in a forum dedicated to "Love and Dating".


Never made any posts about an entire gender. I've never said all women or all men. Anything besides all gender wouldn't be about the whole gender. I can't control how people with bad past or agenda reinterpret my posts.

Same as one who commits a crime can't blame a post on Facebook for them doing it. Others are responsible for how they feel, interpret, or act not me.

This word use and grammar policing is awful and undoes any attempt to fight real sexism.
It's the boy who cries Wolf.

Though I think most real sexism is gone if people have enough time to find sexism in everything and anything



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

08 May 2016, 8:41 pm

Astro77 wrote:
TheSpectrum wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Surely then someone can give me an example of a post expressing reality to which a woman objected.

You're really asking people to go through years of posts in the forums to prove your point for an argument unrelated to the topic? This is getting bonkers now, and I think I'll be leaving the thread for people who have more constructive things to say than us, or before it inevitably gets locked for outliving its purpose.

B19, I'm with you on that one. The thread should probably get locked now.


Isn't that kind of her point? If it takes that long to find just a couple of examples, then does his point have any merit? I'm not saying I agree with her, but if someone is going to make a claim, then they need to be able to back it up.



And yet the people claiming sexism say the same thing and can't provide any examples?


Most my posts are examples of women objecting to reality. I don't make stuff up, it really happens in my area and lots of other areas. Heck those same women say the same thing. So me saying what they say somehow is offensive 0.o

Lot of what happens is they take what I say assume it means something else, twist it to their agenda the attack me saying I'm sexist.

Half of the women here see my points too though.

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist. Can't get upset because reality disagrees with what you want it to be. I'd love reality to be all rainbows and cakes too but it isn't.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

08 May 2016, 8:44 pm

Amity wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Amity wrote:
I think moving the problem to the Haven is a bad idea, its atmosphere would change if it had to be moderated more strictly, which might have an indirect censoring effect on how other people post in that sub forum. How about a mod edit to the problem thread titles in L&D indicating that they are a reoccurring rant?


I like your mind, Amity; here I admit it now.

But I guess you already know that. :jester:


Flattery is nice thank you, but I like actions over words. :P

I think simple solutions can often be the best. Report the thread for being a reoccurring rant, isnt there a rule like that for PPR? Also to add, I think L&D, and actually the whole site is much better now than it was when I joined, but I think the slow but steady progress was achieved because the goal of having a functioning online community was something everyone was on board with. Love and dating are by their nature emotive topics, and as such are not always rational, I think thats quite normal.


So you wish for me and others to be banned?
3 warnings and you out.

3 warnings for your whole life. I'm. Not smart enough to work around a ban like kakaty



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

08 May 2016, 8:46 pm

Either we accept reality and thst people can have different experiences or censor anyone who experience lives in upfront of feminist agenda.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,060
Location: Adelaide, Australia

08 May 2016, 9:18 pm

androbot01 wrote:
Retro, my views about this are the same regardless of gender/preference/disability/lack of disability, etc.
So are mine, that's why my post used gender neutral terms.

I have seen both men and women come to L&D seeking advice on attracting a partner.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


Astro77
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 22 Aug 2015
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 114
Location: Ohio

08 May 2016, 10:27 pm

sly279 wrote:
Astro77 wrote:
TheSpectrum wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Surely then someone can give me an example of a post expressing reality to which a woman objected.

You're really asking people to go through years of posts in the forums to prove your point for an argument unrelated to the topic? This is getting bonkers now, and I think I'll be leaving the thread for people who have more constructive things to say than us, or before it inevitably gets locked for outliving its purpose.

B19, I'm with you on that one. The thread should probably get locked now.


Isn't that kind of her point? If it takes that long to find just a couple of examples, then does his point have any merit? I'm not saying I agree with her, but if someone is going to make a claim, then they need to be able to back it up.



And yet the people claiming sexism say the same thing and can't provide any examples?


Most my posts are examples of women objecting to reality. I don't make stuff up, it really happens in my area and lots of other areas. Heck those same women say the same thing. So me saying what they say somehow is offensive 0.o

Lot of what happens is they take what I say assume it means something else, twist it to their agenda the attack me saying I'm sexist.

Half of the women here see my points too though.

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist. Can't get upset because reality disagrees with what you want it to be. I'd love reality to be all rainbows and cakes too but it isn't.


When someone claims something is sexist then their proof is whatever they just took offense to. That causes problems because not everyone has the same definition of sexism. Nor does someone always understand how something can be construed as sexism because their intent wasn't to be sexist.

Yes, some women, (some men too) reject what your view of "reality" is. That's because you make assumptions as to why reality is this way for you. That includes assumptions about women. I think most people understand and accept that those assumptions are true for some women. But you paint with too broad of a brush and that's where people disagree. You are basically saying that this is reality, and most women are like this, it's fact. They are obviously going to get upset because that isn't how reality is for them. You then try and hide behind what your intentions were or that you didn't claim it was everyone that was like that. Which just furthers the problem. Really, if you just toned it down some, people wouldn't get as upset and wouldn't be as able to twist your words around.



Drawyer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,860
Location: Away

08 May 2016, 11:47 pm

While people are sleeping I'm talking to monkeys keeping this thread from unravelling.

Image


_________________
"Embrace the glorious mess that you are."


Last edited by Drawyer on 08 May 2016, 11:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

08 May 2016, 11:47 pm

Dox47 wrote:
B19 wrote:

FYI we don't moderate threads in which we participate - as in conflict of interest. I thought you would know that.


While I've been advocating for that policy longer than you've been a member, let alone a mod, last I checked it wasn't a rule, and it certainly doesn't stop you from grabbing another mod or just issuing a "cool it" post in a non mod capacity, rather than just publicly lamenting how awful we all are.


It's a convention not a rule, and if you want something reported, report it yourself, that's your choice. I'm not here to be an emissary for you or anyone else, and I think your comments about me are gratuitous.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,060
Location: Adelaide, Australia

09 May 2016, 12:05 am

Does anyone else find it ironic that the thread designed to reduce the amount o arguing on L&D has increased the amount of arguing on L&D?

I think it's a sign of the times.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


Drawyer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 May 2015
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,860
Location: Away

09 May 2016, 12:06 am

A sign of what times?


_________________
"Embrace the glorious mess that you are."


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

09 May 2016, 12:19 am

..



Last edited by sly279 on 09 May 2016, 12:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

09 May 2016, 12:22 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
Does anyone else find it ironic that the thread designed to reduce the amount o arguing on L&D has increased the amount of arguing on L&D?

I think it's a sign of the times.



It's a thread of accusations. It's witch trial. Of course it's going cause a war between the two sides.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,060
Location: Adelaide, Australia

09 May 2016, 12:31 am

Drawyer wrote:
A sign of what times?
The times they are a changin.

I think society is moving back towards conformity. It goes in cycles every few decades.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,045
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

09 May 2016, 12:34 am

Drawyer wrote:
A sign of what times?


Of the...

....


....the...

(looking left and righf)....


.... the Apocalypse.

They're coming.



314pe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Sep 2014
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,013

09 May 2016, 1:08 am

The bigger problem is that it's usually not about the essence of the topic, but the way it's written. It's not easy for aspies to be sensitive, especially on the most sensitive topic.