Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lull Before World Champs - Keep It Civil

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by Speedfirst
    Originally posted by Marlow
    Originally posted by justblaze1011
    This is funny! These are the same cats
    Sorry, never played on the Track Shark forum. Liked the results page though.
    You would've enjoyed yourself, that I know.
    On the few occasions that I read some of the forum posts, I was very dissatisfied with the level of discourse. Much better than letsrun, of course.
    I wouldn't disagree with that, however by that same token ,there was some very insightful discourse, along with a little more levity, than what is displayed here.
    on the road

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Speedfirst
      there was some very insightful discourse, along with a little more levity, than what is displayed here.
      I agree with the former clause, but the latter one is just flat out incorrect. What do you think we keep Squackee around here for??!!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by justblaze1011
        Originally posted by bhall
        It applies to everyone- full stop.
        Hmmm? Yeah aight, we'll see!!
        People get banned all the time here. This predates the demise of track shark. If anything the rules have been very lax recently. Clearly the rules are starting to be applied more like they were before.

        Comment


        • #19
          People get banned all the time here. This predates the demise of track shark. If anything the rules have been very lax recently. Clearly the rules are starting to be applied more like they were before.
          Just the way I like it ... these posts were really getting over the top.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Marlow
            Originally posted by Speedfirst
            there was some very insightful discourse, along with a little more levity, than what is displayed here.
            I agree with the former clause, but the latter one is just flat out incorrect. What do you think we keep Squackee around here for??!!
            I'm speaking in general, with respect to the levity remark, I have experienced both forums and can say from my experience, as well as some remarks shared with me, from those who have experienced both.
            on the road

            Comment


            • #21
              To quote from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=levity
              levity
              1564, from L. levitas (gen. levitatis) "lightness, frivolity," from levis "light" in weight (see lever).
              From that point of view, I think that I prefer the good sense
              of humor showed by many of the ``original'' posters---and,
              obviously, discussions that provide me with knowledge
              and insight I did not previously have.

              Comment


              • #22
                Mr. imaginative, as you are conducting an experiment to find out how the human mind works, perhaps you may want to also accept humour which is less than perfect and wade through posts which are less instructive as well.
                Fire Impossible.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by imaginative
                  To quote from http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=levity
                  levity
                  1564, from L. levitas (gen. levitatis) "lightness, frivolity," from levis "light" in weight (see lever).
                  From that point of view, I think that I prefer the good sense
                  of humor showed by many of the ``original'' posters---and,
                  obviously, discussions that provide me with knowledge
                  and insight I did not previously have.
                  Then I suggest those are the post you view, and/or reply to, real simple solution.
                  on the road

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I posted on both TS and here even before TS's demise.

                    I enjoyed both forums.

                    The difference is that the posters here are snootier and you may be banned even without a direct warning.

                    On TS it was looser, there were more kid posters mixed in and a lot of the post didn't seem to be generated by people trying to impress each other with their knowledge (both track and otherwise) like here. That is, no one seemed to present themselves as better than other people like many of the regulars do here. Sometimes TS was over the top though.

                    Also on TS before people were banned (which seemed rare) you were given a direct warning.

                    Although I posted for years on TS I was never banned, but I've been banned here without a direct warning. So take the mods warning seriously.

                    I think I was banned for posting what I believe in a thread where people were posting what they believe. What I believe was formed by what "I believe" and so I believe that is why I was banned. It's okay to say that you are an Atheist and don't believe in God, but not okay to proclaim you do, I guess.

                    Now I just read what other people "believe" and keep what I "believe" to myself.

                    I'll be glad when the WC start.
                    The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                      The difference is that the posters here are snootier and you may be banned even without a direct warning.
                      If by 'snootier' you mean more civil and mature, then I agree. No one is banned here with a direct warning. That warning is written in the guidelines:

                      Above all, try to remain courteous, adhering to the old adage, "it's not what you say, it's how you say it." Insulting your fellow posters is a good way to get banned

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Marlow
                        Originally posted by TrackDaddy
                        The difference is that the posters here are snootier and you may be banned even without a direct warning.
                        If by 'snootier' you mean more civil and mature, then I agree. No one is banned here with a direct warning. That warning is written in the guidelines:

                        Above all, try to remain courteous, adhering to the old adage, "it's not what you say, it's how you say it." Insulting your fellow posters is a good way to get banned
                        No, my guess is when TD uses the word "snootier," he means "snootier," and your post is a perfect illustration of what he means.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by 2 cents
                          No, my guess is when TD uses the word "snootier," he means "snootier," and your post is a perfect illustration of what he means.
                          on-line definition of 'snooty'

                          1. Snobbishly aloof; haughty.
                          2. High-class; exclusive.
                          So my post was aloof (????), haughty (????)

                          OK, I must admit it MIGHT have been high-class or exclusive! :twisted: :roll: :wink:

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yes, your post was an illustration of arrogance, as you attempted to give a meaning to the word snooty which was not accurate in order to gratify your narcissism. That is all.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              That was entertaining. :lol:
                              The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by 2 cents
                                Yes, your post was an illustration of arrogance, as you attempted to give a meaning to the word snooty which was not accurate in order to gratify your narcissism. That is all.
                                Ha! What could be more arrogant than determining that someone else's posts are arrogant! You, sir, must be the ultimate arbiter of posting etiquette! But that would require civility . . . which now that I think of it, neither am I now, so thanks for that!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X