Page 5 of 5

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:51 pm
by Nick
...It is a nice site, yes? And you can't be 'from' 4chan, whatever that means. If you're saying I visit it, then yes. And the Youtube raid was funny. I never saw it in reality, I just heard of it in The Histories.

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:25 pm
by Katrin
blackdog4444 wrote:KILL THE NAZI WITH FIRE! He's the spawn of all that is low! :x
Image

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:27 pm
by Nick
She mad.

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:40 am
by Earl
*sigh* I know that I said I wouldn't involve myself in this anymore, but here I go again.

Nick, you say that you are not a troll. Okay, I'll bite. I'll assume that you're not pulling my leg. Let's try to take this one step at a time. Perhaps I should say "one post at a time." In a sense, we have to start over.

I've posted at websites for only about a year and a month. I've learned the hard way that there often is the possibility of misunderstanding someone else. A good example is Katrin's post above. In her signature she quotes a really hateful comment from the Guestbook, and introduces it by saying "Best guestbook comment ever!:" So, naturally, you might assume that she agrees with the sentiment expressed by this individual. But, no, actually, she is being sarcastic when she says "Best guestbook comment ever!" In January a university football player named Andy became a member of this forum so he could start a topic of his own, which he entitled "Here for a civil debate." He did so upon my invitation after I noticed that he had been posting on the Guestbook webpage. He was not objecting to anyone not liking sports; he only wanted to object to the negative stereotype of football players as not being kind-hearted. There was no doubt that he was kind-hearted, because he had chosen nursing as a major and was involved in an overseas charity. To make a long story short, Andy was greeted with suspicion by some of the members, a few of whom gave him the cold shoulder. This caused a major split among us. Some of us were appalled at the way he was treated -- which included Skul (the forum Admin), me, and Katrin (whom you might have assumed from reading her signature hated all athletes and sports fans). Katrin was one of his defenders. The point that I'm making is that misunderstandings are likely to happen in board messaging.

Another point is that you need to recognize that each one of us (in other words, those of us who support this website) has his own point of view. I got irritated with you because you were saying that a single member (Fat Man) spoke for all of us and that we agreed with everything he says. I can tell you that even though he and I are friends, we also disagree with each other from time to time. Each one of us speaks for himself. I'm rather independent in my views. You need to avoid the tendency that many people have in all sorts of controversies to avoid building straw men so they can discredit those with whom they disagree.

You also need to make an effort to try to understand why people believe what they believe, instead of just telling yourself, well, I know they're wrong and I'm going to prove them wrong. Of course, this would be a good rule to follow in any sort of a controversy, not just this one. There is a fact that you must recognize. Some of the members here were subjected to physical violence (not just verbal bullying) when they were growing up. You have had your own experiences, but you cannot deny the reality of their own.

You must also recognize that most of the members are older than you, and a majority are adults. That means we have been around longer than you and have learned more about life than you have. I'm not meaning to be insulting when I say this: You may think you already know a great deal because you're now 14 years old, but you really don't know as much as you might think. When I was 14 years old, I knew that I was ignorant about a lot of things; and I was right!

Perhaps I'm being a sucker, but I really would like to have a civil exchange with you. But in order to do that, you need to be willing to listen to whomever you are speaking (because you might learn something you didn't know before), just as we need to patiently listen to what you have to say. This must be done without name-calling, or we will just have another "tit for tat" circus like we did today.

One more comment: If you had told me that you were only 14 years old, I might have cut you more slack. It would have made a difference in the tone that I took towards you.

I await your response ...

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:50 am
by Fat Man
OK, Nick.

Here at this forum we are a diverse group of people.

Yes, sometimes Earl and I may disagree on some issues, but I will always respect his opinion.

You came into this forum assuming that we all deserve the abuse that we had received in the past.

Never assume anything.

To assume means making an ass out of u and me!

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:58 am
by Earl
Nick, if you haven't already, please read my post that immediately precedes this post that Fat Man has just submitted here. If you have a particular response to what Fat Man has just said, I'll take it up with you here. There's only one problem: I'm not on the Internet 24 hours a day, and that's an understatement. I do have pressing responsibilities. So, please give me time to come back and respond to your post.

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:11 am
by Nick
Okay, I'll bite. I'm sorry for the namecalling. But I've only been doing it in a retaliatory nature.

I'll try to remember that you all have your own opinions from now on.

And perhaps if Fat Man chooses to be more mature, then I will listen to his opinion.

Re: So, uhhh...

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:24 am
by Earl
Fair enough.