Missing Communication and the subsequent piss party

[BigApplePi]

@Fukyo. I don't recall having responding to you much, but may I here with the hope of creating future understandings? A lot of things were raised in that thread which have misunderstandings. May I address them just to show how people can miscommunicate? They may appear to be small but sometimes either party can think them big. Both Jenny and Absurdity said things I'd like to have responded to but I had to take my dog to the vet and couldn't respond in time.

Okay. I'm about out of patience with this whole thing. [Xxxxx] is trying to register new accounts because of your consistent attempts to resurrect the topic of his banning and him in general.

I don't blame you one bit for being peeved at anyone who tries to make duplicate accounts. I assume the proper way is to contact a moderator and get permission or get denied permission if they want to do that.

In no way did I ask, suggest or even mention accounts to that poster. I am NOT responsible for what wayward people do unless I had thought of telling these people NOT to violate the rules. I never thought of taking on a policeman's role. Perhaps you are asking me to do that with wayward posters. If this poster is doing that, he should have talked to me first because the ONLY thing I'm talking to him about is his religion, not the Forum, not banning, not accounts. Period. I'm on your side here.

Later. Fukyo. You said, "resurrect the topic of ... banning." I just rechecked my posts on that thread. I found nothing I said about resurrection. I only brought up I was talking to somebody about religion. No resurrection.

Do not bring this issue over in new threads or they will be closed. Do not make further threads about this issue. If you want to make a thread "dialoguing with fundamentalists" do it

You mean threads or issues about that person? Agreed. I won't mention that person again unless a moderator gives the okay. "Dialoguing with fundamentalists" or born again Christians? That sounds like a possible thread, but at the moment I'm thinking even more generally about dialoging. This thread is about missing communications.

Each moderator can close a thread if he/she's judgement tells them that it's undesirable or lacks potential.

You made that call. It's just that Absurdity and Jenny said some things I wanted to respond to and it had little or nothing to do directly with that thread. It was an outgrowth of that thread and you know how INTP's are ... one thing leads to another leads to broader things. May I respond here ... with your permission? I have to ask you because I don't want you to think I'm bringing up reinstating banned posters because that's furthest from my mind.
============================================



@Absurdity. I wanted to see if I could respond to you because I know we speak different languages ... if I could put it that way.

BAP: What I'm after is the mystery of intransigent belief.

Something you apparently were not interested in pursuing until [Xxxxx] was banned, so pardon me if I am skeptical of your intentions, but there is a very clear pattern here.

You mean you think I brought up intransigent belief because he was banned? I am an INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe. I brought it up because it came up as an outgrowth. I see outgrowths everywhere. If you look you will see I post on every topic under the sun. INTP's behave that way. You say you are INTJ = Ni Te Fi Se. Not a single CF overlaps. My understanding is an INTJ is prone to see patterns. Ni. Is it possible the pattern you see is my Ne or my Ti exhibited as my unconscious Se? Do you see how I tend to go off on different topics while you hone in on something?

In the end I am after one thing only: theory. In this case I want to explain intransigent beliefs. I use Ti. I go after anything I can grab hold of: that's Ne. I have no pre-formed opinion. You do. You see a pattern to my behavior (Ni) and reasons to back it up Te). That's Ni Te. You have internal feelings about it (Fi) and evidence (Se). I talk to somebody (Fe) and collect data until I feel comfortable internally (Si). That means you and I have plenty of room for miscommunication.

Should I go to some thread on INTP's and INTJ's? I haven't because I'm here and I'd like to see your reaction. Do you still believe my intention was what you've suggested?

Absurdity, though I've suggested we have trouble communicating, we actually have something very much in common. I know this thing in common matters a lot to both of us. I just haven't gotten around to saying it. It matters irl too from what I've heard of you because you initiated a different thread about it. But this thread isn't the right place to comment. We may have something very valuable to exchange.
============================================



@Jennywocky,

JW: Seriously? You don't have to mention or talk about the guy to talk about "intransigent belief" as a concept. Just stop bringing him and his banning up and discuss the topic you claim you want to discuss in your own words.

Of course you are correct here. "intransigent belief" arose as an outgrowth of that thread. Should I have immediately have created a thread on that topic instead of mentioning it on that thread? Was that my mistake? You said I brought up "banning." Show me where. I didn't. "intransigent belief" came up out of the thread. I thought I could talk because I mistakenly thought someone had opened a closed thread. Perhaps no one knew how to get the psychology of such a person. I'm after that. One thing is a problem though. How does one talk about "intransigent beliefs" without examples? Suppose I wanted to talk about Hitler as many many have done. Some people find it rewarding to get a head start by looking directly at the person. Suppose we wanted to discuss art. What's wrong with starting by showing a painting and thinking inductively?

More of your post talks about jerks. I get it. There can be jerks on this Forum. But I didn't have that in mind today. I was interested in the psychology of "intransigent belief." Maybe I miss communicated?

Or maybe what you also said about "bad form." I shouldn't mention people because it brings out the worst in some. I'm after data. Others see emotion and judgments.

 

[Cavallier]

Re: Missing Communication

I'm closing this thread.

We were lenient with your thread directed at redbaron as he requested it stay open. You did not seek the approval of Fukyo or Absurdity and I doubt you asked Jenny for hers. Before starting threads discussing another member of this forum ask them first. Consider this a warning.

The things in this thread are things that need to be discussed in private unless you have already received the approval of the people listed above. PM's would be best. Keep in mind that a it is a person's prerogative to ignore your PM's.

 

[BigApplePi]

A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I would like permission to quote moderators exactly as they have spoken on this Forum, cut 'n paste. May I do so? Can any moderator answer to this or does one have to go one-by-one? If the latter, I hardly think this thread would have value. On the other hand can I go ahead without asking permission as they are just quotes? If I'm granted permission, I'm undecided as to whether to give the source as quotes may refer to closed threads. I suppose that doesn't make any difference.

May I ask the Forum, "What do you think of this quote?" as quoting and commenting on quotes are two different things.

I have a purpose behind this. You may ask me the purpose as long as you do not predetermine or assume my purpose is a bad one. This is a challenge, not an attack.

Note that this request is for moderators only. Quoting ordinary members would not work as members have said things causing bannings and should not be repeated ... or that is for a different thread?

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I doubt quoting mods verbatim will be their issue with you BAP. I think it's more to do with ruffling their feathers by bringing up issues they seem rather touchy about.

I thought locking your blog was a tad harsh.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I doubt quoting mods verbatim will be their issue with you BAP. I think it's more to do with ruffling their feathers by bringing up issues they seem rather touchy about.

I thought locking your blog was a tad harsh.

Banning my blog was apparently done because I thought out loud about other people. I have asked the banning moderator to unblock it on the condition I never talk about other people without permission.

A moderator is a moderator because they are able to handle things without getting their feathers ruffled. Or if they get their feathers ruffled they do not let that interfere with good judgments. Either that or one is to never to discuss controversial topics. Only nice ones else someone be offended.

BTW I remember in the past someone said I was "obsessed" with something. I never gave permission for anyone to say I was obsessed with anything. Whether true or not, it was an uncomplimentary judgment where I said nothing. I took that as permission for me to talk about other people, what they did or how they affected me, or if they said something positive. Sometimes people say good things and I like to give them credit. Now I'm prohibited.

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Now I'm prohibited.

Well now this is a problem isn't it?

Are they clamping down on you? Don't struggle.....

Guess you should have listened. Too late for "should haves".

I predict bitterness.

 

[The Void]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Permission for quoting? Why?

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Well now this is a problem isn't it?

Are they clamping down on you? Don't struggle.....

Guess you should have listened. Too late for "should haves".

I predict bitterness.

Not bitterness. Anger. I just saw a thread this morning called "Rant", but is it working?

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

They're essentially clipping the wings of a penguin and then slapping him with his own winglets.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Because feathers could be ruffled, but they could be preened.

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

They're essentially clipping the wings of a penguin and then slapping him with his own winglets.

Yeah I wouldn't go too far with that one.

Playing the victim won't work. He keeps acting as though he's powerless.

His classical version of defiance might be to stand on a bench and gather the masses around him while he speaks at great length of the injustices he has witnessed. Who will join the rebellion?

... too "brute force" for my taste.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Do I have permission to talk to you? About you? Say nastie things?

Edit: I cannot say who you are else that would be referring to you without permission.

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Oh, I know it's self-inflicted.

I just think that they should stop pissing about and either ban him once and for all or leave him be (I'm more for the latter).

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Do I have permission to talk to you? About you? Say nastie things?

Edit: I cannot say who you are else that would be referring to you without permission.

Whatever you gotta do bud. I don't care. I try to put that kind of stuff out of mind, being an inferior function and all.

Oh, I know it's self-inflicted.

I just think that they should stop pissing about and either ban him once and for all or leave him be (I'm more for the latter).

There seems to be many kinds of piss.

 

[pernoctator]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I would like permission to quote moderators exactly as they have spoken on this Forum, cut 'n paste. May I do so?

If they posted on a page that is not listed here, you may.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

You are another one. Do I have permission to talk to you? BTW you just talked about me. (You are fooling no one). Did I give you permission? No I didn't. Sounds to me like you are a victim yourself of my doing ... whoops. I didn't get your permission to say that.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Holy macro. Did you get permission from a moderator to say that ... or are you are moderator or bucking to be one?

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Reminds me of me, in the sixth grade, fifteen years ago, when I felt there was injustice due to inconsistency.

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

What I would like to know is if anyone has complained to the mods directly because of what BAP has said about them.

If the answer is "no", what is the fecking problem?

If the answer is "yes", then BAP has been a silly goose (and the person you spoke about has been a wimp). ^^ <---- least likely of the two

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I'm so sorry. If you want to discuss justice that is another thread. You still haven't given me permission to discuss your person, body, soul or frame of mind.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

BAP the involuntary drama queen and attention whore.

Imagine intpforum.com had all members making one million threads to beat on dead horses. The moderators would die from the workload, no one would get banned anymore. Hallelujah.

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I'm so sorry. If you want to discuss justice that is another thread. You still haven't given me permission to discuss your person, body, soul or frame of mind.

I will discuss whatever I want, wherever I want, whenever I want, and as long as nobody's rights are violated or major rules are overtly broken I will get away with it. ya dig?

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

In the future please use the word, "facking." No one is fooled here by attempts at disguises. We all know exactly what you meant to say but didn't say. Please place yourself on the list.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Linewalker BAP crossing two cliffs by means of rope. He did it yesterday, he will do it again. Everytime the cliffs get a bit higher, everytime BAP gets a little bit more tired. When will he fall? It's a dangerous rope to walk, when you're talking the talk.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I will discuss whatever I want, wherever I want, whenever I want, and as long as nobody's rights are violated or major rules are overtly broken I will get away with it. ya dig?

You haven't defined "rights" or "major rules." No need to, but consider that a warning.

So far I haven't heard from any moderator as to the OP of this thread. Do you think I should stop futile and idle chatting and wait?

 

[Minuend]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

To be honest, BAP, I think your behaviour deserves a ban. You have countless threads and debates and you are still arguing the same points, still at step 1. You use a lot of dirty tricks to attempt to silence moderators. If they ban you, it's because you questioned them. If the close your threads, it's because they were insulted. Etc

It's not.

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Unless it's slander or a pm, talking about other members without permission is allowed by the forum rules. (Unless the mods have just made up a new one without informing anyone)

Anyway... what about the time Fukyo posted a pm made by Lightspeed. Irrespective of whether you like the guy, Fukyo was never punished for that and it is against the rules.

 

[Base groove]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Unless it's slander or a pm, talking about other members without permission is allowed by the forum rules. (Unless the mods have just made up a new one without informing anyone)

Anyway... what about the time Fukyo posted a pm made by Lightspeed. Irrespective of whether you like the guy, Fukyo was never punished for that and it is against the rules.

I'm sure you know it is more complex than this. I'm also sure this isn't your real opinion it's just a counterpoint you consider to be potentially valid. I don't believe it is though. Here is a case of you overlooking context.

The rule was broken in the best interest of the forum and for the sake of transparency when a tough call had to be made. After the fact, everything was allowed to follow its natural course and it was decided that no harm was done.

Inverse phenomenon here. BAP doesn't have to break rules anymore to be out of line. He's pissed enough people off that he's generally cancerous and detrimental, especially when he persists in the same patterns of repetitious behavior, doubly so when there are clear overtones of anger or bitterness.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Imagine intpforum.com had all members making one million threads to beat on dead horses.

On a serious note (INTP's have a serious side) that is an excellent point. If the first thread to be closed had been turned around and real violations had been rectified, the relevant issues would have been closed and there would have been no need to close threads.

Think criminology: Do we punish or rehabilitate? Punishment is easy when angry but rehabilitation takes much more energy, skill, precedent and brains. INTPs excel at this. But when decisions are made out of emotion or to punish, you see what happens, happens.

 

[Jennywocky]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Reminds me of me, in the sixth grade, fifteen years ago, when I felt there was injustice due to inconsistency.

Sixth grade can be a rough ride.
Some of us never get past it.

 

[Latte]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

A baker once told me to get out of his store after I had loudly exclaimed his bread was shitty inside his store every day for 4 months.

My conclusion is that the baker doesn't like it when people talk in the store, but he lets other people talk in the store? So I come back in and ask him if people can or can not talk in the store in a way that implies that if the answer is that they can talk in the store, then what is the problem with me talking in the store?

Well, the baker didn't like that and told me to leave again, so I will go in and ask him tomorrow or maybe I'll ask him if he thinks it's problematic that people are inside the store, seeing as he wants me to leave all the time.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

The mods take their authority seriously. Opposition is usually met with hostility. Like it has been said many times, this is not a democracy.

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

I'm sure you know it is more complex than this. I'm also sure this isn't your real opinion it's just a counterpoint you consider to be potentially valid. I don't believe it is though. Here is a case of you overlooking context.

The rule was broken in the best interest of the forum and for the sake of transparency when a tough call had to be made. After the fact, everything was allowed to follow its natural course and it was decided that no harm was done.

Inverse phenomenon here. BAP doesn't have to break rules anymore to be out of line. He's pissed enough people off that he's generally cancerous and detrimental, especially when he persists in the same patterns of repetitious behavior, doubly so when there are clear overtones of anger or bitterness.

I'd be impressed if you'd read the thread where it was posted, but judging by your response I doubt you have. It wasn't broken in the best interest of the forum at all... It was posted purely to have a jibe at him.

• There is nothing wrong with BAP.
• If you don't like his blog, don't fucking read it...
• Similarly... if you don't like what he says, ignore him; It's not hard. Nobody forces you to read a forum post.

 

[Absurdity]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Have fun in Siberia, BAP.

Anyway... what about the time Fukyo posted a pm made by Lightspeed. Irrespective of whether you like the guy, Fukyo was never punished for that and it is against the rules.

Fukyo stated at the time that she was willing to accept the consequences of her actions, but no one seemed to think it was that unreasonable. In fact, no one cared, because lightspeed was clearly the one threatening greater damage to the forum. Even Ragnar later told the mods that he approved of all of our actions without reservation, and this is his forum.

Then again, I'm not supposed to take you seriously, so I won't.

 

[Hawkeye]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Special rules for some it seems. ^^

 

[Jennywocky]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

A baker once told me to get out of his store after I had loudly exclaimed his bread was shitty inside his store every day for 4 months.

My conclusion is that the baker doesn't like it when people talk in the store, but he lets other people talk in the store? So I come back in and ask him if people can or can not talk in the store in a way that implies that if the answer is that they can talk in the store, then what is the problem with me talking in the store?

Well, the baker didn't like that and told me to leave again, so I will go in and ask him tomorrow or maybe I'll ask him if he thinks it's problematic that people are inside the store, seeing as he wants me to leave all the time.

What a dilemma.

Maybe it would help if you ask the baker each time you say something if it's okay to say what you have said, while also asking him if it's okay for you to respond to what he responds to you with and to also repeat to others what he said to you just in case it's not.

It is important to be thorough, lest the bread end up half-baked.

 

[redbaron]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

A baker once told me to get out of his store after I had loudly exclaimed his bread was shitty inside his store every day for 4 months.

My conclusion is that the baker doesn't like it when people talk in the store, but he lets other people talk in the store? So I come back in and ask him if people can or can not talk in the store in a way that implies that if the answer is that they can talk in the store, then what is the problem with me talking in the store?

Well, the baker didn't like that and told me to leave again, so I will go in and ask him tomorrow or maybe I'll ask him if he thinks it's problematic that people are inside the store, seeing as he wants me to leave all the time.

I'm sure the baker would be happy to answer, provided you ask by next Thursday.

 

[Cavallier]

Re: A Direct Challenge to Moderators

Wow. That's a lot of angry pissyness followed by Hawkeye stiring the drama pot. I reiterate my stance on BAP:

You have stated before that we can discuss anything on this forum except for other members. After thinking about it for a while I've decided that it's perfectly fine to create threads discussing other members but only after seeking their approval. Otherwise you create an environment where every creature here can have their lives/personas/philosophy analyzed, probed, and subjected to the probing eye of the forum masses without providing them with the decency of choice on the matter.

Obviously we all ponder and to some extent analyze each other here but you seem incapable of distinguishing between that and crossing personal boundaries.

We are not here to teach you social skills BAP. Stop making a nuisance of yourself. If you can't tell that creating threads to openly, publically, discuss the minutia of a member's presence on this forum is obsessive and intrusive then you need to leave. You've been assigned to Siberia for a while to cool down.