NationStates Jolt Archive

A General Forum poster called "Cannot think of a name" seems to be following me from thread to thread making derogatory comments and generally denigrating my age, my intellect and my posts. This one is only the latest in a series of about four or five: http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=402239&page=3&pp=15 post number 41.

is there some way to cause this to cease???

I'm trying to be fair here, and ignoring the broader context of the thread. I'm not a fan of drug use either, but here's my take.

Given that "Cannot think of a name" was an active participant in the thread before you entered it, I can't say that s/he could be truly "following you around". It's not a particularly polite post on his/her behalf, but it appears that you came into a thread whose topic was drug-glorification and made only anti-drug posts. From that perspective, it would appear that you are a hijacker, rather than s/he being a flamer.

If you have other examples, please provide links and I'll consider further. With just this one example, I see no need to follow up.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Moderator Team

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8350855&postcount=58
"Cannot think of a name" and "Eutrusca": The both of you need to clam down.

"Eutrusca": You were the first one to bring up cigarettes and the thread author did imply that he wanted to have a discussion other than the morality debate. So, your statement is sorta on-topc, but not quite.

"Cannot think of a name": While you are allowed to challenge the positions of other NationStates posters, you need to remember that some ways of going about it are better than other ways. You are bordering on flamebait.

I'm not issuing official warnings, yet, but I don't want this to escalate.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
I posted my comments before reading the entire thread. Cogitation's <posted then deleted> comments capture my revised sentiments exactly.

Same individual, different thread, different day, his first post, my thread, no provocation whatsoever:

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=401814&page=10&pp=15 post 149

As a pacifistic-pot smoking-'liberal' (if we accept Eutrusca as centrist), we naturally end up on the opposite ends of arguments most of the time. This hardly constitutes 'stalking.'

As Eutrusca is fond of saying, freedom of speech is not freedom from being offended. It works in all directions. I don't have a hidden agenda in anything I post and there is no subtext. I will tend towards sarcasm, and Cogitation's note is taken, but I do tend to use it where the language is matched, for example-Eutrusca's post here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8348637&postcount=53) or here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8348603&postcount=51) or here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8348563&postcount=48) or here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8348586&postcount=49) (I live in California and had stated so earlier in the thread, or at least that I was in range. Granted, this was a joke and I can take it as one, but given the circumstances...).

He is not afraid to use a condesending or sarcastic tone in his posts and so I work on the assumption that he can take it. I would not provoke someone who did not seem like they where 'game,' and the only other time I've gotten someone to do this was when I made a medication joke to someone I didn't know was on medication, and I appoligized to him. But in this case, I'm merely arguing in the tone set forth and feel this is a little unfounded.

Further, if he is concerned that I am out to get him, it would be best to try and not provoke me (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8351625&postcount=79), wouldn't you think?

As a side note, to do this I had to teach myself to make the posts thier own page-you click the number in the post and it opens as one making the post your angry about easier for the mods to find. I'll do it for the second post you listed of mine as part of your complaint, here (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8335434&postcount=149). In my defence of that particular comment, this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8334850&postcount=1) is the thread's prompt and this (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=401814&page=1&pp=15) is the thread it turned out to be. I accepted the rebuttal to my response and didn't make an issue out of it, I had said what I wanted and left the thread for it to be what the posters wanted it to be.

Again, regardless, I take Cogitation's suggestion to heart. I just felt that this complaint seemed excessive at best and hypocritical at worst and felt I needed to answer it.

The reason we have Moderators, of course, is the fact that people refuse to police themselves. Everybody wants to say "go to hell" but they can't be bothered to find the way to say it so you look forward to the trip. It's very sad, really.

It's easy to be provoked. It's not so easy to be better than the person provoking you. Whether you're better at rising above it, or simply better at returning it without providing more ammunition is irrelevant. Nobody wants to stifle debate or free speech, they just want to make sure people stay civil about it. Is that so hard?

Standard Disclaimer: I am not a Moderator. You don't know the power of the Dark Side.

The reason we have Moderators, of course, is the fact that people refuse to police themselves. Everybody wants to say "go to hell" but they can't be bothered to find the way to say it so you look forward to the trip. It's very sad, really.

It's easy to be provoked. It's not so easy to be better than the person provoking you. Whether you're better at rising above it, or simply better at returning it without providing more ammunition is irrelevant. Nobody wants to stifle debate or free speech, they just want to make sure people stay civil about it. Is that so hard?

Standard Disclaimer: I am not a Moderator. You don't know the power of the Dark Side.
I don't think I'm being all that uncivil, is the thing. I think Cogitation has called it, I have walked dangerously close to the line. I'm not chasing the guy down or being particularly mean. I like a casual tone and the occasional stab back and forth doesn't bother me. I can only go by the nature of the other peoples posts to see if that is on par. If the player conducts themselves in a tone where that is not seemingly acceptable based on how they treat other posters I try to step up.

I'm not trying to be 'just as bad,' and agree that's a craptacular policy. I don't think I'm even close yet, but that's another thing. I came to argue. I don't spend much time in social threads and I don't RP. I came to challenge ideas and have mine challenged in return. I can see what Cogitation and now you are saying and adjust (actually, doing the post history to get the examples I did I ran across a post I really, really wanted to respond to but under the circumstances decided not to), I really just thought that this accusation was a case of pot and kettle and a little unfounded considering the source. Not so much as an excuse for my style (though it is near impossible to not read it as an excuse.)

Check the history, though. I'm sure another set of eyes wouldn't hurt.

Standard Disclaimer: I am not a Moderator. You don't know the power of the Dark Side.


But I do.... I do.......

I've read and responded to posts by both Cannot think of a Name and Eutrusca before. Perhaps things got a little out of hand here; however, both posters usually have good points to make and to my recollection, in valuable ways.

I'm sure you two can continue to find ways to express yourselves without getting too heated.

As a non-Moderator but frequent reader, I really dig the both of you, despite your obvious differences in personality and moral/political viewpoints. Y'all rite reel gud, y'know?

So on behalf of those that lurk, reading your usually well-written posts, I ask that you both find a common ground or avoid each other...whatever it takes as long as you both keep contributing.

I don't think I'm being all that uncivil, is the thing.Consider that I didn't direct my comments to anyone in specific. Call it wishful thinking or what-have-you, my point is that if people were able to disagree without making it personal we wouldn't have to have Moderators. Without actually looking at the conversation in question (that would require me to care enough to look), the fact that Eutrusca chose to report you for alleged harrassment suggests to me that you need to work on your diplomacy skills. To borrow from my previous post, you succeeded at telling him to go to hell, but failed to make him look forward to the trip. It's all in the delivery.

Nobody's perfect. Well, almost nobody. Everyone likes to give that little twist to the knife that reminds your opponent that he's metaphorically bleeding his life's blood all over the debate floor. The problem lies in the fact that some people take it personally and cry foul. It helps to remember that when your opponent changes the subject (an infamous tactic for some), you've effectively won the debate whether or not they concede your victory. You can then figuratively add another notch to your belt before responding to the new topic.

Just some suggestions for civil discourse in an otherwise uncivil land.

Standard Disclaimer: Arrogant? Yes. Opinionated? Of course. Moderator? Never.

Any one can report to moderation wether the claim be justified or not. I wouldn't read too much into it. Eutrusca can dish it out pretty good. So I'm not exactly sure why he chose to complain, but he did. That doesn't make you guilty of any thing Cannot think of a name. I have read the posts in question and in my opinion (as a non-mod) you did nothing wrong. I could post many links to posts that Eutrusca has made that I could of complained about. But I don't like to come to moderation to complain at all. I'd rather just suck it up. It's after all no big deal to me. However it is ironic that Eutrusca would complain given the way he reacts to people when he loses a debate, but I have yet to see any one run here to complain about him. I guess it's his choice and his right to complain, that doesn't mean he's right.

You don't like Eutrusca, do you. :rolleyes:

You don't like Eutrusca, do you. :rolleyes:

Don't like? That's not really part of it. I have had pleasant exchanges with him on more than one occasion. He seems fine when he sticks to the spam and social threads. He does get quite insulting and down right flames people in debates when they disagree with him though. It's not a matter of like or dislike, it's just the way it is. I'm certainly not complaining about him. As stated, I don't complain to moderation when I get flamed.. I just suck it up, as does my husband. It feels all too high school. But to each their own. It's just my opinion.

As this has been reviewed and commented by three different moderators, it seems to have no further basis for existence.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/frisbeeteria/lock.gif