Posted by Lou Pilder on January 16, 2015, at 8:46:15
In reply to Lou's response- » SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on August 17, 2013, at 15:40:56
> > > > Thanks for going through the trouble to research and opine on some of the issues we are discussing here. Your post makes me sad and subdued.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Scott
> > >
> > >
> > > Jeez, I think you have a lot to be proud of over the years for your supportive contributions to this site Scott.
> >
> > Just in case there is any misunderstanding, I was sincere in my sentiments, Toph. I am always interested to know your perspecitives and respect your intellect and insights, even when we disagree.
> >
> > When I first started posting here in 1999, there was no active moderation - no warnings or posting blocks. Many people look back at this time with a nostalgic fondness as Psycho-Babble's golden age. There were occasional uncivil comments and vitriolic arguments. Peer pressure usually helped to moderate this, though. I remember feeling constrained and stifled by the Psycho-Babble guidelines of civil communication when they first appeared. I was very much against their institution. However, it wasn't very long before I saw the advantages of moderation such that everyone had the opportunity to feel safe and protected from overbearing personalities like mine. I then came to see the emergence of a moderation protocol that managed to crush any feelings of nurturing that Psycho-Babble had provided for. The moderation style created a situation wherein the Administration board became the main attraction of the website and a source of perpetual drama. Interestingly, when active moderation ceased, there was an inertia of sorts that facilitated a continued awareness of civility that helped the community to maintain civil communication. There was some degree of self-moderation of the website forums that persisted for a few years. Unfortunately, in this environment, it only takes one person to post material with impunity that challenges the health of the website. Such a situation can be rectified quite easily though. Since laisez-faire allows for, and effectively promotes, incivility in such people, it seems to me that active moderation is desirable, albeit to a lesser degree than was exercised previously.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
> >
> > Scott,
> you wrote,[...Unfortunately, in this environment, it only takes on person to post material with impunity that challenges the health of the website...].
> What you have posted about me here, and I could be thought to be the subject person here, could not only put me in a false light, but since that posts that you claim by me that {challenge the health of the website}, if there are any, I do not have the opportunity to post from my perspective to show the context of any post that you use to substantiate such a claim here.
> This could IMHO damage me and Jews throughout the world. For since the URLs used by you to make the claims here about me are not specified, they could, at least, be the ones from me concerning those from a Jewish perspective as revealed to me, or the one's from me asking over and over for posts that have statements that could arouse hatred toward the Jews to (redacted by respondent) . You see, your use of the ancient false charge against the Jews of harming the health of other people in a community, called {poisoning the well}, that Jew-haters used in the 1300s to persecute Jews and kill Jews saying that they brought the Black Plague to Europe that killed 50% of mankind there in a few years, saying the Jews poisoned the wells. That was impossible, for the Black Death was from a flea that dwelled in a rat that bit the people.
> It is also impossible for me to damage the health of this community, for I am following the prohibitions to me here by Mr Hsiung as other human beings could do. That does not challenge the health of this community, as for if it did, then all members posting here could have the potential to damage the health of the community. The damage to the health of the community is not a result of me posting as a member here under the same terms and conditions of others. What could damage the health of the community IMHO is the creation of two standards here, which is known as discrimination, that is agreed by Mr Hsiung to be an abuse of power by the leader of a community in the same camp as slavery, infanticide, genocide and segregation. All those things sponsored by a community can IMHHHHO lead to the challenge of the health of a community as history records. You write these things about me here that could induce hostile, disagreeable feeling or opinions toward me and decrease the respect, regard or confidence in which I am held. This could challenge my health and I would like readers to read the following post in the link concerning this situation that I find myself in so that you could have a better understanding of what is being tried here by members that could induce scapegoating and now, that I am challenging the health of the community. I say to you that are in concert with those here to (redacted by respondent) me, that you will (redacted by respondent), for even if you are swayed by those here to think of me as challenging the health of this community, remember the rat flea. This post will not go unchallenged to the world, for it stands as it is, it is what it is, it says what it says, it can be seen and is plainly visible.
> Lou
> > Here is the link to the post that I would like for you to read:
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20130702/msgs/1049210.html
>
>
Scott,
Would you be willing to continue this topic with me here? If you could, then I could have the opportunity to post responses to whatever you post here that IMO could prevent Jews from becoming victims of anti-Semitic violence that IMHO could be a result of readers thinking that what you have posted about me here is supportive.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1046456
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1075146.html