quote:
Originally posted by listener:
censorship? sck


Is this the government or a message board? Confused

And the kinds of "censorship" that is dangerous is the kind that involves curbing the flow of ideas. Curbing the flow of needlessly disruptive behavior is not censorship.
quote:
Originally posted by listener:
quote:
Curbing the flow of needlessly disruptive behavior is not censorship.


and who is the judge of what is "needlessly disruptive behavior"?


Civilized people who have social skills and don't believe name calling is the first recourse to disagreement.
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
Whatever happened to ignoring what you don't like and responding to what you do?? All of yinz are on Romulus's case but the fact is that he would have no fuel if yinz didn't constantly feed him.


Good point I am always surprised that he actually recieves responses in his threads.
quote:
Originally posted by listener:
quote:
Civilized people who have social skills and don't believe name calling is the first recourse to disagreement.


"Decent" or "civilized" language can be more offensive than name calling. Therefore, who will be the judge?


It isn't about being offensive or no offensive. It is about people being belligerent, disrespectful and using ad homs instead of responding to the topic at hand. Sometimes you can't help who you offend but you can help being disrespectful and disruptive.
quote:
Originally posted by ocatchings:
DAMMIT!!! Mad
I was going to submit "me" as the ultimate choice for moderator.

lol


Go ahead, throw your hat in the ring catch. I'll debate you! karate

I have some serious stuff I could say about this topic, but I've done that the last five times it came up. ohsnap
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
Whatever happened to ignoring what you don't like and responding to what you do?? All of yinz are on Romulus's case but the fact is that he would have no fuel if yinz didn't constantly feed him.


"Yinz"?! Razz


Isn't that Appalachian-speak for y'all? lol
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
quote:
Originally posted by Vox:
quote:
Originally posted by nuggyt:
Whatever happened to ignoring what you don't like and responding to what you do?? All of yinz are on Romulus's case but the fact is that he would have no fuel if yinz didn't constantly feed him.


"Yinz"?! Razz


Isn't that Appalachian-speak for y'all? lol


But I'm on ignore.
Outside of these "what's wrong with aa.org" threads, that's pretty much what I've been doing. I just did a search. The last time I had a flame-up with him, outside of this thread and the other threads about "disrespect," was on March 12, 2008, after he personally attacked me over a comment that had nothing to do with him.

Threads like this one are different, because for him to comment on a topic like this is just plain wrong. Unless he's apologizing for how disruptive he's been. But otherwise, my posting history over the last year at least, shows us that wise old saying verily doth ring true: Don't start none, won't be none.
quote:
Originally posted by ddouble:
quote:
Originally posted by ocatchings:
DAMMIT!!! Mad
I was going to submit "me" as the ultimate choice for moderator.

lol


Go ahead, throw your hat in the ring catch. I'll debate you! karate

I have some serious stuff I could say about this topic, but I've done that the last five times it came up. ohsnap


My fellow AA.orgers
I am seeking your vote, a vote for hope and change.
A vote for my oponent (DD) would be a vote for the status quo. I ask you, can AA.org deal with 8 more years of failed message board etiquette and policies?

No I say!
My opponent would have you believe that my lack of people skills and compassion for message boarders all over the world is a liability due to my former career. But I want you all to know that I will not sleep until this board is once again a place we can all be pround of for once in our adult lives.

Thank-you and God bless AA.org and the United States of America!

I will now kiss the babies now and accept under the table donations for my campaign.
hat
quote:
It isn't about being offensive or no offensive. It is about people being belligerent, disrespectful and using ad homs instead of responding to the topic at hand. Sometimes you can't help who you offend but you can help being disrespectful and disruptive.


I see...... But what is stopping you from walking away from a thread that you find to be boring, obnoxious or just plain repetitive? Why do you continue to follow it if you find it distasteful? And why do you believe it is your responsibility to pull the plug on posts that you do not approve of or dislike the direction it is heading in? Once again -whatever happen to just ignoring it or walking away?
quote:
Originally posted by Xeon:
quote:
It isn't about being offensive or no offensive. It is about people being belligerent, disrespectful and using ad homs instead of responding to the topic at hand. Sometimes you can't help who you offend but you can help being disrespectful and disruptive.


I see...... But what is stopping you from walking away from a thread that you find to be boring, obnoxious or just plain repetitive? Why do you continue to follow it if you find it distasteful? And why do you believe it is your responsibility to pull the plug on posts that you do not approve of or dislike the direction it is heading in? Once again -whatever happen to just ignoring it or walking away?


Passion, emotion flairs, they say something particularly offensive, these are not easy things to walk away from. And even if you do that doesn't absolve the belligerent member of responsibility for bringing the tone of discussion down.
quote:
Originally posted by EbonyRose:
So y'all just gonna IGNORE Rodney, huh?? Razz


No one is ignoring Rodney. The thing is, as I've said before, the current situation that's going down on AfricanAmerica.org is a sociological recession. As with the real economic recession that's going on the sociological recession AA.org is experiencing, AA.org isn't just going to bounce back from it's downturn overnight. It's going to take time for the proper groundwork to be applied so that the environment can improve over time.

People that call themselves still being angry over getting their feelings hurt because they stuck their noses into conversations where they shouldn't have stuck them in the first place and got as much, if not more, as they gave are still venting--pretending like they have a thick layer of skin and can take it but will cry and complain about being 'offended' at the drop of a hat the second an opporunity presents itself.

When they learn they can't expect people they've habitually and compulsively attacked to lay down and play dead for their benefit as well as realize that some people are simply not going to always express opinions they agree with the interactions will not only improve but the topics of discussion will broaden as the lurkers that are waiting for the smoke to clear will be more inclined to post. One of the best aspects about BlackTokyo before the discussion board closed down was if someone posted an uninteresting topic it was simply ignored. The members were rarely attacked each other, if at all, for having varying opinions on different topics. That isn't to say that there were no flamewars. They happened from time to time but for the most part the members simply ignored beefs between members. They didn't feel the need to add more fuel to the fire by involving themselves in a matter that was none of their business or gang attacking people because they have an unpopular opinion.

Yeah, yeah, I know. "This ain't BlackTokyo" but if you truly want the atmosphere to improve the aforementioned is an option to consider.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
.....I think the fear is that someone with clear alliances will get the job and discriminate against others.

Honestly, I just wish we could get folks to police themselves, to model good behavior for others, and to take the high road more often than not.


yeah thanks

"Wisdom Is A Woman Who Agrees!"
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
Romulus,

I propose that we, you and I ... but mostly you ... let this sh!t go. I could go back and cut and paste from each of those threads and conclusively dispute each and every one of your points as factually and/or intellectually dishonest.

But the fact is I have no interest in doing so ... it just ain't that important. [I][and no ... this is not some backhanded admission of that you have bested me] [/I] The fact is, anyone that has an interest, and a 8th grade reading comprehension level, can go to the threads and see what you said and what I said. And by doing so, would clearly see that you have cut and parsed, distorted and taken both of our remarks out of context, to the point of oblivion.

But in the end so what? The fact that you would engage 4 pages in a quest to show yourself to be the victim of some vast "you're picking on me" conspiracy speaks unflattering volumes about the person tagged Romulus. And quite frankly, you have done far more to reinforce my initial assessment of you as a fragile-egoed, insecure to the point of delusion, attention seeking, drama-junkie, than anything that I could done or would have thought of investing the time into doing.

So my proposal to you is that we move along. Cool?

If not, then STFU and pass the damned greens.




Son, the laws of socioelectronic physics do not apply to me. I am a proverbial dead man walking on AfricanAmerica.org by design not by error. These empty charges of my being "desperate" or "playing the victim" are pathetic and ineffective. Everybody hates me remember? And people that play the victim role or act out of desperation do so because they feel they have something to lose such as, in the case of being a member on this discussion board, social status and comradery. I have no desire for either considering, first of all, the necessity to facilitate healthy relationships is fulfilled with face-to-face, real world interactions. Secondly, one already has to abide by the sociological rules as mandated by society in order to maintain healthy relationships as it is, which means one either has to keep his or her thoughts and opinions to themselves or fabricate personality characteristics that would be more acceptable by the general populus in order to peacefully coexist. In that regard it isn't necessary to restrict my thoughts and opinions on a discussion board, particularly since the idea of joining a discussion board is the expression of thoughts and opinions.

With that being said, your feable attempts to lie, distort, redirect, deny, evade, deflect, deviate and distract are futile. You cannot deny, deflect or deviate from the truth, kweli4real. You were forced to concede to the person you chose to make your adversary and in every case you came out the loser. The person you conceded to was me and it's burning you to the core. The truth hurts and it's a jagged pill to swallow. In your arrogance and pomposity you challenged every idea I presented and you did so without any knowledge or evidence to support your opposing position. Furthermore, in your blind overconfidence you utilized uncalled for, excessive insults. Therefore, you suffered the consequences for your overbearing obnoxiousness, arrogance, insolence, and ignorance.

If it wasn't that serious, if it "ain't that important", then why did you waste over two years of your time trying to oppose every idea I presented? If it "ain't that important", why are you working so hard to defend yourself against what you consider to be intellectually dishonest? The fact is, you cannot wish away the truth. You cannot STFU the truth. No amount of support from other members can make the truth disappear. No amount of lying or distorting can lessen the blow to your ego. You can't deviate from the fact that you didn't know Florida state personnel have the right to use reasonable force to restrain students. You can't deny that you didn't know there were psychologists that had the credentials to write prescription for drugs. You can't distort the fact that not only do banks have a fudiciary responsibility to protect their customers' identity, they can also do engage in the act of restoring their customers' identity as some banks have been advertising that fact at least since 2005. You can't lie you way out of this, kweli4real.

The best you can do is simply stop contaminating future threads with obviously childish behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by kweli4real:

I could go back and cut and paste from each of those threads and conclusively dispute each and every one of your points as factually and/or intellectually dishonest.


So, you're denying every statement I quoted you as having said on the previous page?

You're saying I made up all of those statements I quoted you as having said?

A simple yes or no would suffice.

No one has to waste their time sifting through all of those threads. All you have to do is say that I lied--I made up all of those statements I'm charging you with having made.

It's easy. Just say it. Every single statement I quoted you as saying is a LIE.

Those statements never existed--right?

Except there's one little technicality. You can't erase the sections of your statements I quoted in the original threads you made those statements in.

I have nothing to hide. I invite everyone to look through the threads. That's why I posted LINKS so they can see for themselves. But as you said: "It ain't that serious." So why would you be worried?

No one would entertain the notion of looking through the threads anyway to find the truth because they all have faith in you, kweli4real, and your word is bond--right?


Just think. All of this can end if you end the unecessary attacks. None of this would have ever happened if you hadn't chosen first to be, as you said: "stupid" to begin with. If you don't have anything good to say just leave the thread alone. If the urge to challenge me overcomes you, then bring evidence to support your argument. At least ask for clarification first. Make it a learning experience instead of a pissing match. You'd be amazed at what you could learn.
So does that mean you're not gonna pass the greens? Roll Eyes giveup

quote:
Just think. All of this can end if you end the unecessary attacks. None of this would have ever happened if you hadn't chosen first to be, as you said: "stupid" to begin with. If you don't have anything good to say just leave the thread alone. If the urge to challenge me overcomes you, then bring evidence to support your argument. At least ask for clarification first. Make it a learning experience instead of a pissing match. You'd be amazed at what you could learn.


But just for the record ... No, nevermind. Just pass the greens.
quote:
OIC... Guilty as charged... at least in this thread. And point well taken, too.


I'm not trying to try or convict, especially not in our exchange here. Personally, I'm honest enough with myself to know that my message board time is both deep conversation *business* (whenever one can be had) and flame throwing *pleasure.* I prefer the former but I've come to accept the latter.


quote:
I like your overall suggestion, though.


All I'm doing is expressing my thoughts on the matter and trying to expand on my original post per your request. If anyone wants to accept those thoughts as a suggestion and then follow them, sobeit.
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
So does that mean you're not gonna pass the greens? Roll Eyes giveup

quote:
Just think. All of this can end if you end the unecessary attacks. None of this would have ever happened if you hadn't chosen first to be, as you said: "stupid" to begin with. If you don't have anything good to say just leave the thread alone. If the urge to challenge me overcomes you, then bring evidence to support your argument. At least ask for clarification first. Make it a learning experience instead of a pissing match. You'd be amazed at what you could learn.


But just for the record ... No, nevermind. Just pass the greens.



No thanks. I don't care for greens. However, I do have an insatiable appetite for the truth.


Pass THE TRUTH please.

Did you make the statements I quoted you as saying or not?

You can't even hide behind the distractors of 'what Romulus said' and 'what Romulus did' in order to make a lame attempt to redirect the attention away from your lack of integrity and ignorance and place it on me. The truth still stands.

You can't bluff your way out of this by pretending to stand behind the archives in hopes that no one will bother to actually see for themselves what a liar and a flim flam artist you are. Your defense is worthless considering I already provided multiple links to every thread I referred to where I shamed you for thinking you could challenge my knowledge without having any evidence or knowledge to support your opposing arguments. Sad--you didn't even have the common sense to understand that laws vary from state to state before you made the uninformed assertion that state personnel in Florida had the right to use reasonable force to restrain a child. That was right up your alley--you're a lawyer and you got owned by a "substitute teacher".


Everyone is witnessing your gross lack of integrity and ignorance right here in this very thread. Whether they want to admit to it or not is irrelevant. You're so mired in lying, deceiving, deflecting, distorting, exagerating, and denying, you can't even give a simple yes or no answer.


In fact, you can't give an answer at all. Just more empty, worthless, powerless, pointless insults. I've asked you simple questions and instead of giving a straight answer you ignore the questions and insert more distractors in the effort to bluff your way out of facing the truth.

Are the statements I quoted you as saying true or false?

You can't hide behind a false excuse like your words being taken out of context.

You either said: "There's no such animal as a psychologist that can write prescriptions" or you didn't.

You either said: "Not true" when I said state personnel have the right to use reasonable force to restrain children or you didn't.

You either said: "banks don't have fudiciary responsibility to restore their customers' identity" or you didn't.


You see, it doesn't matter what everyone else thinks. It doesn't matter what kind of false labels you assign to this issue--this isn't a beef, this isn't a flamewar. This is simply Romulus Burnett making kweli4real face the truth. It doesn't matter how much you lie. It doesn't matter how many times you ignore answering simple questions. What matters is you know you made yourself look like a fool for challenging my knowledge and coming out the loser every time.
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
If this isn't a example for the need of a banning.


How? Where are the insults? Do you see any insults in my exchange? Do you even see any off color words? Is it wrong to demand the truth? Tell me why you think this is an example of my needing to be banned? Because you don't appreciate someone you like being confronted with not having the ability to tell the truth? Tell me why you think this exchange is inappropriate?

Why weren't you present to demand that liediecryptor be banned after that long and exhausted exchange between him and Oshun Auset? Why weren't you present to demand that negrospiritual be banned after her long dispute with Rowe? Why weren't you present to demand that fabulous be banned after that long, drawn out flame war between her and ricardomath?

Where were you?

Why didn't you demand Whirling Moat to be banned after his exchange with khaliqua? Why? What say you?
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:
quote:
Originally posted by Afro Saxon:
If this isn't a example for the need of a banning.


How? Where are the insults? Do you see any insults in my exchange? Do you even see any off color words? Is it wrong to demand the truth? Tell me why you think this is an example of my needing to be banned? Because you don't appreciate someone you like being confronted with not having the ability to tell the truth? Tell me why you think this exchange is inappropriate?

Why weren't you present to demand that liediecryptor be banned after that long and exhausted exchange between him and Oshun Auset? Why weren't you present to demand that negrospiritual be banned after her long dispute with Rowe? Why weren't you present to demand that fabulous be banned after that long, drawn out flame war between her and ricardomath?

Where were you?

Why didn't you demand Whirling Moat to be banned after his exchange with khaliqua? Why? What say you?


I'm speaking more to a consistent pattern of behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:

Why weren't you present to demand that fabulous be banned after that long, drawn out flame war between her and ricardomath?


So you are my defender now, huh?

karate

Cool...I feel much better now with Ironhorse securely in my corner, looking out for me...

lol munch 20
quote:
No thanks. I don't care for greens. However, I do have an insatiable appetite for the truth.


Romulus, this is Proof and proof again of everything that I've said about you. I ask YOU to pass ME the greens and you respond:
quote:
I don't care for greens
i.e., making it again all about your fragile-egoed, insecure to the point of delusion, attention seeking, drama-junkie a$$. YOU ARE INSUFFERABLE IN YOUR DELUSION. Yes that was personal AND inflammatory ... run tell that.
Again, those that have an interest can read the thread, in its entirety, rather than your parsing cut and paste. They then can come to their own conclusion. I'm satisfied with that.

That entire post is/was merely a transparent attempt at baiting me back into your delusion, even after I've declared that I'm done with that topic.

Kweli wonders aloud ... shaking his head I'd bet in elementary school and maybe even today, Romulus got his a$$ beat on the regular because his attention seeking, "all about me" a$$ wouldn't just let someone walk away.

quote:
I think what we should do is end this thread and see what anyone takes with them from it when they post on regular topic discussion threads.


I agree ... I know how I will proceed. That's enough for me.
quote:
Originally posted by ricardomath:
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
I ask YOU to pass ME the greens and you respond:
quote:
I don't care for greens

lol 20

Cut it out KWELI... Don't you realize RB just made a "clerical error?"
20

Or no, wait, even better:

"You're being so dishonest and disruptive, Kweli4FAKE. Obviously, if I say I don't CARE for greens when you ask me to PASS them, I'm saying I'm passing them to you because I don't want any. I don't care for greens, so yes, I'll pass them.

This shows how blah blah blah... "
quote:
Originally posted by HonestBrother:
quote:
Originally posted by Yemaya:
DDouble, you sir, have my vote!!!! Big Grin


I like ddouble.

But (and no disrespect or malice intended) ... dddouble is not all that impartial ... he only plays one on a message board.


None taken.

The current "problem" is a result of the board being "laissez faire". Self-policing has been a failure. Until concrete standards are in place, this type of thread will keep cropping up.

In my opinion, a good moderator works to keep conversations flowing. Based on the Intelligent. Black. Community. mission of the board, I think a good moderator would do the following:

1)Monitor all "hot" threads; the portal page ID's topics getting the most views.

2)Take over responsibility for reviewing all reported posts.

3)Create a clear definition of flaming, baiting and other trolling tactics. This would be stickied at the top of each forum.

4)Create a corrective action sequence for members that violate 3). This would include warnings by PM, warnings within thread, temporary bans as well as permanent bans. This would be stickied at the top of each forum.

5)Move threads to The Big House, delete posts within or lock in original forum (on a temporary or permanent basis) based on how quickly it devolves vs. quality information within.

None of these would prevent healthy debate or discussion. Everyone would have a guideline of permissable behavior on this board.

Then the choice would be simple: follow the rules or find another board to frequent.

If "bias" is a potential worry, choose a willing member that you believe to be a good counter-balance to the other moderator(s). If no one else is willing to do this work for the board, then IMO, the worries about bias are over-inflated.

I enjoy AA.org in its totality enough to commit to the thankless task of moderation. I would hope there are other people here that share my opinion.


P.S. - Props to you catch! That was some funny stuff! beer

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post
×
×
×
×