+- Punaweb Forum (https://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (https://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (https://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: The Bicker Board (/showthread.php?tid=23362)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
RE: The Bicker Board - randomq - 03-31-2026
Sounds like a lot of excuses for treating other people poorly.
RE: The Bicker Board - ironyak - 03-31-2026
HiloJulie - I would think there are numerous options available to have even the most contentious conversations without the need to insinuate or call someone a drunk or a being stoned or a bimbo, or a dog, or a chick, or, if the shoe was on the other foot, calling someone impotent, or a milquetoast, or a wimp, or yes, even I am guilty of doing, a schmuck.
So Rob tells us "Ya gotta talk in a few things in consideration of every post. Not everyone is you. At any given moment some will be happy, sad, ill, angry, hungry, drunk, stoned or simultaneously watching Sponge Bob."
Is Rob insinuating that some posters may be drunk or stoned? No he's stating it as a explicit possibility for everyone to consider, along with the other possibilities, given he lives in reality and has to deal with things as they are. Asking if this list of options applies to a poster isn't insinuating anything, it's asking, hey what's up with the too wild and crazy guise of your post? Like I said, Freud would have a field day with the fact that you take it so personally, along with most everything else it seems.
Of course people can agree to disagree, but as you've stated yourself, "you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."
MyManao - Ah, but by whose interpretation of decency, and for that matter censorship?
Whoever holds the power of course, because that's what it's largely about. There are words that would have got you pilloried, branded, or even killed throughout human history - the fact that people still want to protect people from being offended in the name of some self-determined decency standard is wild to me. To that I say, what a of bunch of nugatory bollocks, sard off you bescumbered and daft cumberworld! (Z'ounds! ;)
Note that advocating for free speech doesn't mean a toleration of all that is said - the point is to allow the speech to occur, which opens up learning opportunities where it can be discussed, dissected, critiqued, and ridiculed as needed. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence.
randomq - Sounds like a lot of excuses for treating other people poorly.
There is a long history involved here of trying to get across to some posters the previously existing and long-standing conventions of Punaweb. When they insist on being an ass to most everyone, even going out their way to troll people making the requests, then the push-back tends to take on new and verbally creative forms. I see the escalatory use of language as part of that effort to crack through some people's stubborn beliefs that they can do whatever the hell they want without consequence.
Again, be interested in your thoughts on how else a community, largely without a central authority figure, can deal with those that refuse to listen and learn to converse and work with others in a productive manner? Ceding Punaweb, or any other online community forum, to those that insist on being arrogant and belligerent trolls acting in bad faith and spreading lies and misinformation doesn't seem likely to result in healthy or productive online spaces.
RE: The Bicker Board - HiloJulie - 03-31-2026
Yak: So Rob tells us "Ya gotta talk in a few things in consideration of every post. Not everyone is you. At any given moment some will be happy, sad, ill, angry, hungry, drunk, stoned or simultaneously watching Sponge Bob."
Is Rob insinuating that some posters may be drunk or stoned? No he's stating it as a explicit possibility for everyone to consider, along with the other possibilities, given he lives in reality and has to deal with things as they are. Asking if this list of options applies to a poster isn't insinuating anything, it's asking, hey what's up with the too wild and crazy guise of your post? Like I said, Freud would have a field day with the fact that you take it so personally, along with most everything else it seems.
Of course people can agree to disagree, but as you've stated yourself, "you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts."
To answer the question as to if I am "happy, sad, ill, angry, hungry, drunk, stoned or simultaneously watching Sponge Bob," outside of being happy, I am none of those. Nor does it, or should it, become an automatic assumption every time someone posts something that you don't agree with. And I think you hanging your hat on what Rob once said as your justification to ask that of someone you may disagree with, is quite frankly, quite an insult to Rob.
Stating that I am supporting an oligarch pedophile by buying Starlink is YOUR opinion. It is not based upon a fact. Even if Elon Musk is an oligarch pedophile, just as my assertion that the American taxpayer must then be equally supporting an oligarch pedophile for sending 4 people to circle the moon is. And saying that the American taxpayer is doing so unwillingly, whereas I am willingly, is just an excuse used to justify your opinion.
As for stating that "what's up with the too wild and crazy guise of your post?" well, that is YOUR opinion, it is not a fact.
As for claiming "Freud would have a field day with the fact that you take it so personally, along with most everything else it seems", one can ask what is your qualification to know what Freud would say or do? Are you a degreed psychologist? If you are, then that changes the discussion, if you're not, well then, you just stated an opinion, not a fact.
Also, with respects for taking things too personally, well, that too is your opinion. When the discussion turns into a rebuttal of, or even asking if, or even remotely insinuating if one is drunk, stoned or the whole litany of name calling or personal attacks/insults, or racial/gender denigrating starts because one does not agree with another's opinions, well, I don't just sit back and have a nice big "belly laugh."
As for me saying, "you’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts," I believe in that 100%. Stating opinions as fact is what I have an issue with, which, is exactly what you are doing.
ETA: In as much as I can agree that Musk is the worst thing ever, but what about the 150,000 employees of all of the Musk's companies? What ways can one protest and hurt Musk as an individual, but I don't see the upside in hurting the employee just going to work every day and feeding their family as wise or beneficial to the common good, nor does it hurt Musk in any real material way.
RE: The Bicker Board - randomq - 04-01-2026
ironyak, I'll be honest, I've been skipping the longer posts when I see that they're just bickering. I can see arguing for the truth when people start posting "alternative facts" and allegations about things that matter. But if it's just an opinion or someone who won't admit when they are wrong, a try or two seems reasonable. Beyond that, just learn to ignore it, or block them, or whatever. It makes no sense to me whatsoever that MyManao and TomK, or MyManao and HiloJulie have these perpetual arguments in every thread. It also seems that people who might otherwise be aligned politically and have some productive discussions end up arguing over the most inane, ad hominem stuff.
I don't know how we're ever going to have a Punaweb meetup with attitudes like these. I would hope people would be more polite in person, but on here it seems like there are some pretty short fuses.
RE: The Bicker Board - HiloJulie - 04-01-2026
"But if it's just an opinion or someone who won't admit when they are wrong,..."
Ah, but who determines what is right or wrong? Now, obviously, someone saying the sun rises in the North, clearly that's wrong. Arguing that position is wrong. Nothing about someone saying that is right. It can't be backed up by facts. Saying I support an oligarch pedophile because I bought Starlink is one's opinion and does not make them right or me wrong, or vice versa, nor can it be backed up by fact.
"...or MyManao and HiloJulie have these perpetual arguments in every thread."
OK, I admit, I was wrong. (<-----------Note)
However, and being VERY clear, I NEVER once started one of those arguments. I was simply responding in a defense mode, of which I apologized for.
RE: The Bicker Board - Moderator 2 - 04-01-2026
someone saying the sun rises in the North
RE: The Bicker Board - randomq - 04-01-2026
That recommendation was from the perspective of the arguer. It doesn't really matter if the arguee was wrong, only that they would not admit it when the arguer thought they were. If, however, you do require a determination of right or wrong, I am happy to oblige.
RE: The Bicker Board - HiloJulie - 04-01-2026
Just to put a bit of context with respect to what some are calling my seeming "being offended in the name of some self-determined decency standard" comes from my 35 plus year profession.
A good write up from Stetson University entitled "WHAT WERE (WEREN’T) THEY THINKING?" about two very high-profile criminal cases where in each case the defense attorneys thought using sexist terms was a good thing. The write up also includes direct links to each case in addition to the opinions offered.
BRAIN-LESSONS-FEBRUARY-2023-WHAT-WERE-WERENT-THEY-THINKING.pdf
So please bear with me a bit longer as I learn and come to grips with the fact that some don't think much or care much about human decency and apparently, one could argue, is a "previously existing and long-standing conventions of Punaweb."
RE: The Bicker Board - ironyak - 04-01-2026
randomq - I'll be honest, I've been skipping the longer posts when I see that they're just bickering.
I get that, and figure it's the case for most people when presented with a wall of text. Often times such conversations end up being so nuanced and self-referential that only the two posters are able to keep track of the bouncing ball and maybe it's best to move it to DMs. But then on occasion someone chimes in about some point or the other showing there is some unknown audience playing along. Hard to know at any given moment who, if anyone, is getting something out of it all.
I can see arguing for the truth when people start posting "alternative facts" and allegations about things that matter.
As I think you're getting a sense of, there is a tendency amongst some posters to ignore basic realities and invent fictions that tell them what they want to hear, these made-up narratives that cast them as fighting the imagined evils of the world, or absolve them of personal responsibility for their choices. But when you point out there's no evidence to back up some wackadoodle claim, or that a basic fact of capitalism is that when you give money to a company you provide financial support to the company's owners, and they come back with "well, that's just like your opinion man", it seems like you either choose to try to emphasize the facts again, or go whatevs, ok boomer.
HiloJulie - Just to put a bit of context with respect to what some are calling my seeming "being offended in the name of some self-determined decency standard" comes from my 35 plus year profession. https://www2.stetson.edu/advocacy-resource-center/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/BRAIN-LESSONS-FEBRUARY-2023-WHAT-WERE-WERENT-THEY-THINKING.pdf]BRAIN-LESSONS-FEBRUARY-2023-WHAT-WERE-WERENT-THEY-THINKING.pdf
While it may be true that "the courtroom is not an old boys club", it is obviously true that Punaweb is not a courtroom, nor are posts here legal briefs, so your related expectations are misplaced. Also, your doc there isn't advocating for censoring the offensive language or rude gestures, rather trying to point out that they may not be effective and/or may negatively impact your audience. Ok, sometimes the point is to offend, rude language and gestures exist for a reason, see Carlin's 7 words routine, etc. But again, none of this supports your calls for a tech-based censorship regime.
So please bear with me a bit longer as I learn and come to grips with the fact that some don't think much or care much about human decency and apparently, one could argue, is a "previously existing and long-standing conventions of Punaweb."
Again, some don't think or care much about your definition of human decency, where bad words are a no no, but refusing to listen to community members about the number, tone, and lack of Hawai'i focus of your posts is entirely ok, as it serves your interests, everyone else be damned. Do you really want to be the most disliked member of Punaweb ever, whose permanent banning brings nothing but cheers and sighs of relief?
If so, keep it up then, keep it right up...
RE: The Bicker Board - HiloJulie - 04-01-2026
Yak: While it may be true that "the courtroom is not an old boys club", it is obviously true that Punaweb is not a courtroom, nor are posts here legal briefs, so your related expectations are misplaced. Also, your doc there isn't advocating for censoring the offensive language or rude gestures, rather trying to point out that they may not be effective and/or may negatively impact your audience. Ok, sometimes the point is to offend, rude language and gestures exist for a reason, see Carlin's 7 words routine, etc. But again, none of this supports your calls for a tech-based censorship regime.
Again, some don't think or care much about your definition of human decency, where bad words are a no no, but refusing to listen to community members about the number, tone, and lack of Hawai'i focus of your posts is entirely ok, as it serves your interests, everyone else be damned. Do you really want to be the most unliked member of Punaweb ever, whose permanent banning brings nothing but cheers and sighs of relief?
If so, keep it up then, keep it right up...
You know, Yak, you're right. (See, I am agreeing - so no argument, right?) Who else but you could claim the right of one to have free speech and no censorship when someone uses derogatory sexist, misogynistic or racial insults or terms while simultaneously calling for me to be censored for not adding in something about Puna or Hawaii? How can I possibly argue with that logic?
As for the perceived lack of my posts containing a reference to Puna/Hawaii, I made a new post it note and attached it to the corner of my screen, next to my post it note with all my passwords and bank account numbers on it, here in my Puna, Hawaii trailer park home, here in the Puna, Hawaii ghetto, that says, "Remember, toss in a Puna or Hawaii reference."
Further, I am also learning how to emulate your ability to sometimes toss in some irrelevant mention of Puna or Hawaii, and more or less shove it under Moderator 2's nose, when YOU make your non-Puna or non-Hawaii related posts, just so you can claim your post is Puna or Hawaii related! Something like this one:
Gotta remember those early lessons from watching Saturday morning cartoons with a bowl of Honeycombs, that the entire ocean can be out to get Moby, and Mighty Mightor isn't always around to help (pretty sure the clips below were taken from off the local coasts Mod2)
So, again, bear with me a little more, so I can learn to emulate all the other posters who always make sure each and every post is always Puna or Hawaii related as I make posts here on PunaWeb, in Puna, in Hawaii. I'd also like to suggest that maybe we should consider a change with these seemingly acceptable types of derogatory name calling to that of calling me a "Puna Bimbo", so we clear that Puna or Hawaii related hurdle.