Assinine PM

[Lex]

People will believe what they want to believe. About you, me and everyone in between.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

People will believe what they want to believe. About you, me and everyone in between.

That statement is a great truth. It explains a lot.

 

[Principessa]

I can't even bring myself to send nice PMs to people I don't know.

Same here!

oh he is a looker that Lex...mean people should leave him alone

So true. :smile:

Gee, I dunno...maybe it's to raise awareness in the general public that there's an obnoxious asshole in our midst, whilst simultaneously shielding oneself from further assholery by said person?

Nah, that would make too much sense.

I've done the same thing on more than one occassion. Guess I should stop...:redface:

Nothing in the PM was surprising to me except for the word "Negro". That caused me to pause for a second. If arliss was white then using the word Negro would have been questionable at the very least.

Arliss is Black which is why I suspect he was comfortable with the use of the word Negro.

 

[dolfette]

whatever the row was about, racial insults should always be exposed.

sending it in pm instead of posting it was a pathetic & cowardly thing to do.

who cares what they didn't agree on? that's not an issue.
using negro as an insult is the issue.

 

[B_Hickboy]

LPSG has become quite the drama mill as of late.

>_>

I'm glad I'm a member that no one notices or pays attention to. ^_^

Think again, mister.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

I am glad they consider me to be a little knat not worth even noticing.

 

[DaveyR]

Lex you were quite right to do as you wish with the PM. It's your property now so your decision.

 

[RideRocket]

Lex you were quite right to do as you wish with the PM. It's your property now so your decision.

That's a highly debateable issue. Who does the content around here belong to (both private and public posts)? The site owner can be legally prosecuted for the public content (pedophilia, nudity, etc), and that's why we have certain rules. But how far does that extend to private messages? You're still using the site to conduct your communication. Case in point, many employees have gotten into trouble for sending e-mails they thought were private to other employees - and I'm not talking about the mass distribution type e-mails.

 

[Matthew]

Abusive people hide behind "privacy" to escape consequences.

I say put 'em on blast.

 

[DaveyR]

That's a highly debateable issue. Who does the content around here belong to (both private and public posts)? The site owner can be legally prosecuted for the public content (pedophilia, nudity, etc), and that's why we have certain rules. But how far does that extend to private messages? You're still using the site to conduct your communication. Case in point, many employees have gotten into trouble for sending e-mails they thought were private to other employees - and I'm not talking about the mass distribution type e-mails.

Obviously if the subject of the PM was illegal or could cause legality issues for the site then that would make a difference. The PM Lex got does not fall into that category so he's quite right to do what he wants with it.

 

[RideRocket]

Obviously if the subject of the PM was illegal or could cause legality issues for the site then that would make a difference. The PM Lex got does not fall into that category so he's quite right to do what he wants with it.

I agree with what you just said (in the quote above), but my point was that people should be careful about what they consider 'their' property on a website.

 

[RideRocket]

.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I am glad they consider me to be a little knat not worth even noticing.

I don't know what a knat is, but you may be more visible than you assume.

 

[B_Hickboy]

Arliss just sent this to me:



Now I am pretty sure that I, as an adult can choose to like or dislike ANYone I may well choose.

Also--what does race have to do with it?

Don't bother sending another PM, as I have promptly put you in IGNORE.

No place for that shit around here. It won't fly. Bleeb me.

 

[RideRocket]

I don't know what a knat is, but you may be more visible than you assume.

Nothing like instilling calm in the masses with some 'big brother' tactics considering all the drama going around concerning members getting banned.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Nothing like instilling calm in the masses with some 'big brother' tactics considering all the drama going around concerning members getting banned.

O bollocks! Drama queen - Hick is about as 1984 as Buddy Holly!
Pshaw - I say, in your general direction.

On topic - arliss is a buffoon, he's about as funny as shingles.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

I don't know what a knat is, but you may be more visible than you assume.

The whole post was tongue-in-cheek. Nobody is completely invisible on here. A knat is a imaginary insect I just made up.

 

[RideRocket]

O bollocks! Drama queen - Hick is about as 1984 as Buddy Holly!
Pshaw - I say, in your general direction.

On topic - arliss is a buffoon, he's about as funny as shingles.

My point was that as a moderator he needs to be sensitive about his posts considering how the drama level has gone through the roof lately. When the site designated the first set of moderators just over a year ago, there was a lot of hoopla about what moderators were posting. People had issues with moderators getting personally involved in flaming sessions and abusing (or appearing too) their 'powers'.

Personally I don't give a rat's ass about what Hickboy posted.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

My point was that as a moderator he needs to be sensitive about his posts considering how the drama level has gone through the roof lately. When the site designated the first set of moderators just over a year ago, there was a lot of hoopla about what moderators were posting. People had issues with moderators getting personally involved in flaming sessions and abusing (or appearing too) their 'powers'.

Personally I don't give a rat's ass about what Hickboy posted.

Then why comment on it? It was a passing comment - mods are members first, mods second.
Why can't they have two hats? - assume they are not wearing the one with the big 'M' on it unless they state otherwise.

 

[RideRocket]

Then why comment on it? It was a passing comment - mods are members first, mods second.
Why can't they have two hats? - assume they are not wearing the one with the big 'M' on it unless they state otherwise.

Had you been here when we had all the drama I referenced a year ago, you would understand. They can have two hats, but a large percentage of the members won't look at them that way. Comments made by the mods will be scrutinized to the nth degree. That's part of the reason some former mods decided to no longer be mods.