VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Wed, Apr 21 2004, 22:42:44
Author: MKIceman
Subject: Re: Um... confused
In reply to: Heywood 's message, "Re: Um... confused" on Wed, Apr 21 2004, 22:13:37

>Mmm... not especially. You said you were leaving
>(digging up the post in the background here). As far
>as I remember, that post did not include a
>conditional, but I'll see in a second.

It stated "permanent lurking." Since you're fond of semantics, despite my open statements saying that I was breaking it, I'll bite.

Does "lurking" in our context not mean observation and posting on occasion? Or does that mean observation only?

>>Still, it's not debating the same things with the same
>>people, but making the same points to different
>>people.
>
>When you post that you are leaving and I then count
>ten posts from you afterward... you therefore have not
>left.

This statement does not address the statement it quotes. See above. Also, please do read those posts, or the first of them.

>> I would much rather hear your stance on those
>>points, for you have not addressed any of them and I
>>would rather see a resolution formed.
>
>Judging by your statements and others, I doubt that
>will happen.

Doubt what will happen? That you will address them, or that a resolution will be formed?

>Either way, you have pissed a lot of
>people off, and regardless of any "the Internet
>doesn't matter, you people don't matter, friendships
>don't matter, _insert verb here_", etc. if you wish to
>play in this playground, you do have to deal with us.

I never stated that the Internet, friendships, and people don't matter. In fact, Ilse and I -- in that original discussion -- resolved that exposure/experience of the medium (i.e., the Internet, in this case) does greatly impact the perception of criticism, a point that was proven by the various responses (or, rather, the way people, like you, responded).

Furthermore, I have already advocated in this thread my definition of friendship. I value my closest friends, and I would die for them, and they me.

Lastly, people are what make the Internet go 'round. If I didn't care about them, why would I be posting? Which people, you ask? The people who come to GAFF for GAFF. The people who write badfic but get flamed. Overall, people who deserve respect for their person -- their character -- not because of their language deficiencies or proficiencies, but because I don't know them and I haven't seen them disrespect "innocents" with intent.

Regarding having to "deal with" you, I'm not sure what that means. So far, I've seen your response to Ilse's and my discussion, my response to that, several others' many responses to that, and continual -- save for a few posts -- criticism of my views. And I'm still posting about it, apparently. At what point was I unwilling to "deal with" you? I think you are unwilling to "deal with" me, which is why you are avoiding the issue.

But that -- having to "deal with" anyone -- is the one thing that doesn't matter here, since free-speech means the option of writing whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want, and to whomever you want, and there is always the option to stop writing and/or reading. This is why I could never understand why many of the board regulars would argue with "trolls": the board is designed for them to rant, so they'll do it until they either accept criticism or get tired of ranting (i.e., after feeling satisfied that they accomplished their task of conveying their opinions and/or excuses). So no, no one has to "deal with" anyone, and you're deluding yourself if you think that upholding that statement can reconcile with upholding freedom of speech.

--Matt

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:





Forum timezone: GMT-3
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.