If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
The Seeker Complaints Department
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I have started this thread hopefully as an aid to everyone including,and primarily,myself.
JimV has made the following claim :
I think a little background is helpful.
There have been private conversations between the two of us (where he has made some admissions) that I would very much welcome being made public.
Politeness/etiquette on my part prevents me from doing this without JimV`s permission. If he gives it to me publically or privately then I will post them. The ball is in his court.
Back to his claim that he has received "enough complaints" from other users. This has me confused.
On signing up I observed the following rules for PandD.
So what are all these complaints about ?
As an offer to anyone who has complained to JimV, and others that have felt like it, this thread is for you.
My honesty has been questioned earlier today, so it seems like a matter of trust as well.
I will make a personal public promise NOT to take any action against anyone who wishes to post here.
Hopefully I will be able to assess my alleged faults and errors, and you will be able to get things off your chest.
JimV has made the following claim :
Please do seeker, as I'm now getting enough complaints about your postings from other users that make it clear if you don't change, you won't be posting here at the end of the week.
I think a little background is helpful.
There have been private conversations between the two of us (where he has made some admissions) that I would very much welcome being made public.
Politeness/etiquette on my part prevents me from doing this without JimV`s permission. If he gives it to me publically or privately then I will post them. The ball is in his court.
Back to his claim that he has received "enough complaints" from other users. This has me confused.
On signing up I observed the following rules for PandD.
1. Please respect the opinions of others. Just because you don’t agree, doesn’t give you the right to make personal attacks on that person.
2. Racist, hateful, defamatory or otherwise illegal posts are not suitable.
3. If you feel the need to post quotes from other sources or sites, please also publish the URL of where you found it.
4. However, please don’t publish links to inappropriate websites (hateful, defamatory, illegal etc).
5. If you want to post photos, make them small, or just post the link. Large photos will be deleted.
6. We will ban people who continually refuse to work within these rules. If you don’t like it, there are plenty of other places to have your say on the web.
So what are all these complaints about ?
As an offer to anyone who has complained to JimV, and others that have felt like it, this thread is for you.
My honesty has been questioned earlier today, so it seems like a matter of trust as well.
I will make a personal public promise NOT to take any action against anyone who wishes to post here.
Hopefully I will be able to assess my alleged faults and errors, and you will be able to get things off your chest.
0
Comments
But that's just my interpretation of the complaints everyone else seems to express. I'm not especially bothered, myself. If someone irritates me, I tend to just ignore them.
For example, if someone made a thread about the escalating violence in the war in Iraq, you would not tell us what you think off the violence there, you'd pick holes in someone's statement about legality or something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
You come across as looking for a row for the sake of it, rather than wanting a discussion on the topic.
You rarely appear to express opinions of your own, just attack the structure of others rather than being a bit more forgiving and looking at what they meant rather than being a pedant about the phrasing.
While I can see how you feel you don't break the 'rules' as such, you don't come across as being a good sport.
How very big of you, my mind is at rest now.
Stay, don't stay, what do we care? This place is about contributing not just picking holes, learn that and perhaps people (whoever sees the point in it) will stop complaining.
Seriously who are these fools, who complained, anyway?
So I'm sorry, but this really is going to have to be goodbye.
:yes:
Well I didn't make a complaint, I would rather just ignore you, but enough people have felt motivated enough to complain.
Your posts do a great deal to stifle debate and put new people off from coming onto the P&D forum. I know a few people who don't venture into the P&D forum because of certain posters.
Try giving your opinion and join in the debate because we want to try and encourage new posters to come into this forum and voice their opinions. It gets boring when its just the same handful of people posting all the time.
:thumb:
Sorry to who that offends, but I can't continue to watch thread after bloody thread go down the same plug hole.
Jim V: I'm fairly indifferent as to whether you ban seeker or not, since I very rarely read his posts. However, I appreciate the fact that since you have to read all the threads it must get pretty bloody boring and frustrating reading his same old pseudo-postmodernist-intellectual drivel over and over again. But you should be careful about banning people "arbitrarily." If you do ban him, at least add a clause into the rules about continual "derailing" of threads or something.
I dont get the connection?
I've thrown more than my fair share of threads off course (mostly spam but hey), where's the line in the sand drawn?
As for seeker, I thought he actually was Klintock. Ho hum.
You can be certain that if you haven't been contacted about derailing threads and appropriate postings styles then you haven't done anything wrong.
I'm afraid it's always going to be something that is approached on a case by case basis, and wouldn't be a problem enless it was regularly happening.
Sometimes seeker, like Klintock raises some valuable points (probably by accident, but so what?)
Its smacks of censorship, and whiolst I appreciate some posters need to be banned (the Site being a charity) I'm not sure boringness falls into that category, epsecially since some posters are alllowed to post here despite being much worse....
I agree that it would be better for people to ignore seeker INSTEAD of seeker being banned, but as you can't convince the many to do that, you'll have to do what you can about the one.
Reckon it's a good call Jim, even though its hard to be exact about why.
The difference in my opinion is that I actually knew a lot of Klintocks opinions on certain issues were. I think Klintock would do what many are suggesting Seeker should do, and actually grace us with his own opinion from time to time. Sure, it was a different opinion to what most other people had, but that was a good thing. I do think people who didn't like Seeker could've ignored him, but I can also understand why it must be frustrating to see every new person entering P&D faced with the same broad philosophical points, which in order to answer, require you to go through your entire world outlook regarding taxation and government.
I disagree with Ignore-ing (as opposed to ignoring) posters on principle. Even barring the possibility that Seeker might one day have made a good point, I would still have to endure the proxy annoyance of watching some newbie or other get dragged into a pointless slanging match with him/her (is it sexist of me to think it had to be a 'him'?). While we could discuss whether Seeker's posts amounted to 'personal attacks', I don't think there's any question that he evinced roughly zilch respect for the opinions of others. And if there's one trolling tactic that really gets on my tits, it's this 'I'm confused/perplexed/puzzled/just don't understand what the problem is' shtick.
The golden rule of message boards ought to be 'back up your argument/s' (that one should hold a view in the first place ought to be taken as read). Anyone who can't, or won't, do that, is circling the drain.
Edit: Exchange 'barring the possibility' with 'allowing for the possibility'...
The politics forum shouldn't just be for older members who want to discuss social studies A Level theories or whether society exists.
Personally I think those are the people we sometimes need to keep...
That's a very, very different thing from what you've mentioned.