Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:46 pm Post subject: Posts regarding the flavor of this Forum
I've seen comments in the forums and in PM's about keeping threads focused and on track, using old threads for appropriate postings instead of starting new ones.
Doesn't that make it more difficult for viewers to find the answers they seek, or to give the help they are trying to give? Maybe a thread should be started for discussions such as these for those that are interested?
Also, when you view a thread about one subject, maybe we should consider a new thread when our replies will go off topic. Just reread that reply before you post (or edit after like I did)
Just a thought,
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
...but couldn't you have posted that message to the old thread first?
Just posting "moved to..." is playing at Wally's job, if you ask me. That is censorship, playing policeman, or whatever you want to call it.
I agree the new thread is the best place and I bet Gary and the others do too, but it would be nice to be asked rather than told. Not even a PM.
Considering why the thread has gone "off course" in the first place, it's ironic almost past belief.
Just thought it right you should know how I feel,
Charlie.
Nothing you said in your PM Charlie wouldn't have been appropriate on the forum.
No, the moved to was in direct reference to my post above. I posted there first, then felt it was more appropriate to this thread, than where it was. It was, after all, my post, so how was it "playing at Wally's job" or policing or censorship when it was, in fact, my own post?
Charlie, as Gary said, you can't have it both ways. You invite your own censorship of your posts, as you stated in that original thread, but censor me for doing the same to my posts? Smacks of hypocrisy and a double standard.
As far as why the post went off course, Charlie, I agree, it's ironic beyond belief, but I think the reason why will be different depending on who is viewing that thread.
As far as asking? Wasn't that what the above post did? Ask if it wouldn't be more appropriate? Just because I didn't feel the need to PM everyone on this forum to "ask" and instead created a new thread to offer the suggestion, I am remiss?
I guess that's where I differ in opinion most, I have no problem posting publicly, and getting slammed on occasion, instead of doing a PM to criticize someone, however nicely it may be put. I've received a lot of PM's from you Charlie where you criticize me for doing just what you are doing now, and have been doing for a few weeks.
Like you said in a PM to me once Charlie, if you don't like what I post, ignore it, don't tell me what to write, or where to write it.
That's my 2 cents,
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
Just in case anyone missed it, Debs message was consisted of exactly the following words...
Quote:
moved to "About this Board" forum
Debs, I read this to mean "please stop posting here and use this new thread" (hence the reference to doing Wally's job), rather than "I have decided to move my post to a thread I have just started" (a suggestion that the new thread might be a better place for some posts - which I agreed in the PM).
Sorry I misunderstood.
Debs wrote:
You invite your own censorship of your posts, as you stated in that original thread, but censor me for doing the same to my posts? Smacks of hypocrisy and a double standard.
It would indeed, if that was what I was accusing you of. I was accusing you of telling the rest of us where to post any further posts, though now it seems that isn't what you meant. I actually agreed that the new thread was a good idea.
This is a communications nightmare. We just aren't hearing what the other is saying.
However, the manner with which you choose to publish a PM simply to make a private disagreement public is another matter altogether...
Aren't PMs meant to be (as the name implies)... "private" exchanges of views?
Debs wrote:
Nothing you said in your PM Charlie wouldn't have been appropriate on the forum.
It might be nice if I had a say in that!
Debs wrote:
I guess that's where I differ in opinion most, I have no problem posting publicly, and getting slammed on occasion, instead of doing a PM to criticize someone, however nicely it may be put.
"Getting slammed on occasion" is an occupational hazard of publishing. We all suffer it occasionally, whether we like it or not. But by publishing a PM in this way, I put it to you that you risk rendering the PM system as pratically useless...
Judging by the PMs I receive, I am sure the writers do not expect me to make them public, and I certainly never would. To be honest, I can hardly believe you have here, Debs. As far as I am concerned, without an assurance of confidentiality, the whole PM system is virtually worthless.
I class making PMs public alongside publishing the transcript of a private phone call. In other words completely unacceptable, without mutual agreement.
What do others think?
All the best,
Charlie. _________________ "Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx
I agree that PM would mean private, if the issues at hand hadn't already been played out in a public forum. Would my so-called "policing and censorous" comments have been better made to you in private? Why is it ok to be censorous in PM and not in public? That's the issue here Charlie, it's your double standard, not mine.
Personally, I have nothing to hide. I am sorry we apparently are misunderstanding each other too. That is certainly not my intent. I am not here to argue or get down on anyone. I am here to help, in whatever way I can.
But I can't help but take offense when you criticize me, be it public or private, about specific instances, when others on this board, including yourself, do the same thing you are criticising me for. You don't call them down publicly, as you have me. Whether you did privately, I don't know. You have critiqued my posts, publicly and privately, then turned around and did the very thing you jumped on me for. If that isn't a double standard what is?
That's my argument, or disagreement, or whatever you want to call it, in a nutshell. I have no qualms with your advice, or knowledge, regarding IM and have mentioned in various threads that I have learned from you, and appreciate what you offer.
I guess what I don't understand is, why is a double standard being applied to me? That's why I took your PM public. Because I was tired of it. That may be no excuse, for that I do apologize.
Debs
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
I am sorry we apparently are misunderstanding each other too. That is certainly not my intent. I am not here to argue or get down on anyone. I am here to help, in whatever way I can.
Yes, and you have done a good job of it - helping that is. I think you would win the most popular poster competition, on style as well as content.
The trouble is I'm a pedantic, confrontational so-and-so, and I have a tendency to be high on criticism, low on praise. Combine that with stubborn aggression and I sometimes overstep the mark. I'll try and tone it down a bit.
Debs wrote:
But I can't help but take offense when you criticize me, be it public or private, about specific instances
If it's any consolation I criticise everybody - with the exception of the young and the innocent. And there aren't many of those!
I have a naturally abrasive (agressive?) style of speaking, writing, living in general. It's just the way I am. It's certainly nothing against you. I see the world very differently at times, by the look of it, but that's all.
Debs wrote:
You don't call them down publicly, as you have me. Whether you did privately, I don't know.
I thought I did in public too, but I know I certainly do in private. Without naming names, there are a few people on this board that I blast regualrly via PM (over nothing much, usually) and they blast me back. But we don't harbour grudges, or beat each other up in public (much).
To be honest, I think some people actually enjoy that sort of sparring. The trick is to identify who they are.
Debs wrote:
You have critiqued my posts, publicly and privately, then turned around and did the very thing you jumped on me for. If that isn't a double standard what is?
I don't understand this double standard argument at all, but like I said, I think this is where PMs have a place. If you think I'm being hypocritical, tell me so in private. If you think so, others will think so, too. I don't want to look bad unnecessarily, anymore than anyone else does. I don't mind criticism. (Well I do, but not enough to stop pretending I don't.)
Debs wrote:
That's my argument, or disagreement, or whatever you want to call it, in a nutshell. I have no qualms with your advice, or knowledge, regarding IM and have mentioned in various threads that I have learned from you, and appreciate what you offer.
Same to you!
Excellent, now let's get back to the good old days...
All the best,
Charlie. _________________ "Before I speak, I have something important to say."
- Groucho Marx
I don't want to look bad unnecessarily, anymore than anyone else does. I don't mind criticism. (Well I do, but not enough to stop pretending I don't.)
You made me giggle! I appreciate your post Charlie, it means a lot to me to get this out. Believe it or not, I hate confrontation, and usually avoid it at all costs. My upbringing I guess. So I would have to say I am probably more sensitive to your style than others may be.
Not that I want you to change per se, you are after all, Charlie. But I do appreciate your making the extra effort to help me understand instead of just writing me off.
The good old days? sounds great, hmmm would make a great song too
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
If you believe in reincarnation, I would be willing to bet that you two were married in a past life!
Hmmm, I wouldn't imagine Romeo and Juliet, maybe Edith and Archie though?
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
Debs _________________ Learn how to turn keyphrases into quality, well-targeted articles your visitors and SE's will love with Gary Antosh's new ebook "Web Content Made Easy!"
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Your host: Allan Gardyne. Earning a good living from affiliate
programs since 1998.
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
