Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is harassment permitted on these boards?

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by lonewolf
    Originally posted by jazzcyclist
    [Lonewolf is probably as conservative as they come, but I find that he can discuss these topics in a way that stays within the bounds of board rules.
    Thank you, Jazz. I think.
    I am willing to grant otherwise intelligent people the right to be sincerely wrong in their opinions about certain taboo topics.
    Which, is not to say that I am not offended by gratuitous remarks contrary to my beliefs that are allowed to stand in this forum when I am certain that if I responded in kind I would be banned for life plus thirty. :x
    I know the feeling.
    The fool has said...there is no God. Psa 14

    Comment


    • #32
      [quote=Vince]
      Originally posted by kuha
      Originally posted by guruof track
      Originally posted by Marlow
      Originally posted by "bad hammy":2ayw5s7h
      This whole thread is pathetic . . .
      Gotta second that emotion.
      can we have a vote on the floor?

      I's have it in a unanimous vote.
      You have my vote. It began as a non-issue (everytime malmo plays the victim card we know we're headed down the rabbit hole to some alternative reality) and it's gone as far as it deserved to: nowhere.
      I find the comments revealing. Most are geared towards bashing Malmo just because he dared to post on the "things not ...." board acting as if they own the website. The only alternate reality is who the posters here think they are.[/quote:2ayw5s7h]

      Well, that's an interesting interpretation that I don't happen to share.

      1. For whatever reason, malmo has been banned from posting on this board--certainly not by me or any of the other posters, since we have no such right, but by gh. malmo posts here anyway.
      2. malmo made a private message public--and then complained about the public message board. I find that line of reasoning/behavior odd, distinctly ironic, and really somehow beside the point. If he has an issue with a pm, the wisest path (it seems to me) would be to resolve it with another pm.
      3. malmo has played what I call the "victim card" before, and I always find it amusing and a tad surreal--but perhaps that's just me.
      4. Has the original post (and question) triggered any genuinely interesting or informative commentary? If so, I've missed it.

      Comment


      • #33
        I must admit that I am late to the controversy. Who is Mr. malmo, and what is the turmoil about? I thought he was Swedish? Shouldn't he instead be posting on the Sweden-Finland match with his expertise?
        Fire Impossible.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by 3
          Who is Mr. malmo? I thought he was Swedish?
          Not Swedish, American.

          Comment


          • #35
            Garry has said that he's willing to allow some latitude on certain political subjects if the posters can stay within board rules. Unfortunately, as soon as BillVol started the Ted Kennedy thread, malmo did everything in his power to get the thread locked, which he eventually did. It's not his first post that drove the thread off the rails, but his second one.
            Originally posted by malmo
            The reckless disregard for another human being and you want to lionize the selfish SOB? Disgusting.
            I think he knew perfectly well what he was doing, spoiling it for the rest of us who were having a civil discussion.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by jazzcyclist
              Garry has said that he's willing to allow some latitude on certain political subjects if the posters can stay within board rules. Unfortunately, as soon as BillVol started the Ted Kennedy thread, malmo did everything in his power to get the thread locked, which he eventually did. It's not his first post that drove the thread off the rails, but his second one.
              Originally posted by malmo
              The reckless disregard for another human being and you want to lionize the selfish SOB? Disgusting.
              I think he knew perfectly well what he was doing, spoiling it for the rest of us who were having a civil discussion.
              Wrong. Reckless disregard for another human being aptly described Kennedy. Just because you disagree with it does not make it uncivil. .

              So what justifies your harassment? There is no justification for the harassement, nor for the subsequent baiting.

              Comment


              • #37
                Harassment and baiting only work with the complicity of the victim. If one ascribes no power (respect) to the harasser/baiter, then the offense cannot exist. That's why I'm surprised it happens so often. Why would the offendee even care what others of no value say??!! When I was in the Navy in the mid-70s, 'sexual harassment' as we understand it today was pandemic. The successful women just laughed it off as Neanderthal boys being Neanderthal boys. The women who took it seriously made themselves miserable. Nowadays harassment/bullying/hazing are rightfully verboten, but when it does raise its ugly head, it should be laughed at (assuming there are no other consequences for resisting the h/b/h), just as posters here could laugh it off too.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Marlow
                  Harassment and baiting only work with the complicity of the victim. If one ascribes no power (respect) to the harasser/baiter, then the offense cannot exist. That's why I'm surprised it happens so often. Why would the offendee even care what others of no value say??!! When I was in the Navy in the mid-70s, 'sexual harassment' as we understand it today was pandemic. The successful women just laughed it off as Neanderthal boys being Neanderthal boys. The women who took it seriously made themselves miserable. Nowadays harassment/bullying/hazing are rightfully verboten, but when it does raise its ugly head, it should be laughed at (assuming there are no other consequences for resisting the h/b/h), just as posters here could laugh it off too.
                  Are you saying that Garry is a little too quick to pull the trigger? I was perfectly willing to ignore malmo, but I knew that Garry wouldn't.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Marlow
                    If one ascribes no power (respect) to the harasser/baiter, then the offense cannot exist..
                    having a login ascribes you "power" even if your post count is 0

                    what offender did was intimidatory

                    i've had an occasional argument here, but never pm'ed antagonist ever

                    work it out publicly - detached observers will make the judgement of veracity/legitimacy...

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by eldrick
                      Originally posted by Marlow
                      If one ascribes no power (respect) to the harasser/baiter, then the offense cannot exist..
                      having a login ascribes you "power" even if your post count is 0

                      what offender did was intimidatory

                      i've had an occasional argument here, but never pm'ed antagonist ever

                      work it out publicly - detached observers will make the judgement of veracity/legitimacy...
                      Eldrick, your passion and knowledge of the sport is much appreciated. But with all due respect, many of your posts which are often part of very heated one-on-one arguments with others (including myself on a couple of occasions), would probably be more appropriate as pm's.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Well a lot of "regulars" are posting opinions, so here is mine:

                        Jazzcyclist, you were wrong to call Malmo what you did in a PM. You should have ignored him.

                        Malmo, you deserved what jazzcyclist called you even though he was wrong to do so. Additionally you were very, very wrong to publicly air his PM to you. You should be ashamed but I am quite sure you are not.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by jazzcyclist
                          But with all due respect, many of your posts which are often part of very heated one-on-one arguments with others (including myself on a couple of occasions), would probably be more appropriate as pm's.
                          pm's don't defuse

                          brinkmanship involved negates it

                          lesson is to argue better...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by eldrick
                            Originally posted by jazzcyclist
                            But with all due respect, many of your posts which are often part of very heated one-on-one arguments with others (including myself on a couple of occasions), would probably be more appropriate as pm's.
                            pm's don't defuse

                            brinkmanship involved negates it

                            lesson is to argue better...
                            Amen

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by dukehjsteve
                              Well a lot of "regulars" are posting opinions, so here is mine:

                              Jazzcyclist, you were wrong to call Malmo what you did in a PM. You should have ignored him.

                              Malmo, you deserved what jazzcyclist called you even though he was wrong to do so. Additionally you were very, very wrong to publicly air his PM to you. You should be ashamed but I am quite sure you are not.
                              Why is Malmo, "very, very wrong", but Jazzycyclist just "wrong"? The reason I ask is that I feel the exact opposite.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Vince
                                Why is Malmo, "very, very wrong", but Jazzycyclist just "wrong"? The reason I ask is that I feel the exact opposite.
                                Oh, so malmo was indeed wrong to post the PM.

                                I'll take that as a retraction of your previous statement:

                                Originally posted by Vince
                                It was the mechanism of these boards that enabled the harassment, and to be sure, the haranguer should also be banned. It's good to see Malmo expose it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X