# I'm annoyed



## MerricB (Oct 27, 2005)

Seeing the devolution of my latest Charles Ryan Speaks post, and its subsequent locking, I'm extremely annoyed.


----------



## Crothian (Oct 27, 2005)

there are just a few posters who goal it seems is to take threads and destroy them, iut is annoying


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Oct 27, 2005)

I'm just as annoyed. It drives me crazy that some people can't seem to accept that the sky is not, in fact, currently falling.

And in every thread you start that ends up going down, Merric, it seems like its the same people that bring it down.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 27, 2005)

Well, I know how you feel...but I did get back at them, in my own sweet fashion (referring to another thread, different subject, same closing premise)


----------



## Knight Otu (Oct 28, 2005)

As I was partially responsible, I apologize. It certainly wasn't my intention to get the thread closed.


----------



## Henry (Oct 28, 2005)

This seems as good a place as any...

You know what annoys me? That when someone who is a full-time employee from Wizards posts, or someone who has worked for them in the past, it's the mission of someone, and the specific individuals vary every time, to tear them down verbally. It's not enough to say, "I disagree," or "I'm not sure where you get that from" - it's accusations of lying, arrogance, stupidity, or even malicious conduct. 

What gets me almost as much as people who, being fed up with seeing these WotC employees attacked, start launching their own counter-attacks, which makes things twice as bad, causing threads to devolve. And it is never a strong demarcation; it's always a snide comment here, a blurted generalization there, and the next thing we mods know, it's yet another thread down the tubes.

And then we have the accusations of "moderator favoritism" - because we call down the Wotc detractors, we're "being corporate mouthpieces"; when we admonish the defenders, we're "condoning WotC-bashing." I swear I've heard it both.

And you know what? All we mods want is a civil thread. We want a place that WotC employees, 3rd party publishers, fans, can enjoy, share their thoughts, share a few laughs and discussions about their favorite hobby, without getting their verbal teeth knocked in. It's a wonder people like Charles, Ryan, Monte, Mike, and Chris P even come around here any more, when people want to dump on their character the second they utter an opinion contrary to popular opinion. Ladies and Gentlemen, if you disagree, say so! Tell them you think their statement is incorrect, and why! Read them the proving stats! No stats to back you up? Tell them your impassioned belief! If you feel tempted to slight someone's credentials, or their motivations, DON'T do it! It doesn't take impugning someone's person to disagree with their statements. 

To hell with favoritism, I want a good discussion!

That's what annoys me.


----------



## DaveMage (Oct 28, 2005)

Merric, please don't let it stop you from posting more of the same.

I know what happened today is annoying, but your posts like that *are* appreciated!

Otherwise, a "ditto" to what Henry said.


----------



## DungeonmasterCal (Oct 28, 2005)

I say the mods just delete or at least freeze the user accounts of people who do that the industry folks who visit here.  I'm all for iron handed tyranny.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 28, 2005)

Wow.  MerricB, I apologize.  I have a bug in my ear about how statistics are portrayed, and I tend to be blunt about it.  I picked the wrong crowd to be blunt in.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Oct 28, 2005)

I have to admit, I was also upset to see the thread get locked.  Even though I didn't post to it, I found it to be an interesting topic, and I was following the updates.  Even some of the earlier dissenting opinions that were polite were enlightening, but it was upsetting to see it come down to ad hominem insults. 

I want to thank Merric for posting the thread and Charles Ryan for responding, despite what happened to it in the end.


----------



## Psychic Warrior (Oct 28, 2005)

I don't blame you MerricB.  It seems it is some people's job around here to piss in the cornflakes of others.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Oct 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> And then we have the accusations of "moderator favoritism" ...




Yeah, it’s never a nice “thank you” is it? 

I pretty much agree with everything Henry says and would like to add, only in a generation about threads getting locked cause of arguments, that it takes two to tango and both sides are usually equally guilty.


----------



## William Ronald (Oct 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> This seems as good a place as any...
> 
> You know what annoys me? That when someone who is a full-time employee from Wizards posts, or someone who has worked for them in the past, it's the mission of someone, and the specific individuals vary every time, to tear them down verbally. It's not enough to say, "I disagree," or "I'm not sure where you get that from" - it's accusations of lying, arrogance, stupidity, or even malicious conduct.
> 
> ...





Henry, I concur with your analysis of the problem.  Perhaps it might be a good idea to put your remarks or something like it in the Rules post.

I have noticed a tendency of some posters to respond to some industry professionals with more than healthy skepticism.  It is one thing to ask for proof of a claim, and another to state or imply that someone is a corporate shill.  I think we have to give other posters -- whether they are new members or industry representatives the respect that we would ask for ourselves.  Do industry representatives have their own agendas and opinions?   Yes, but most of us have our own opinions and want to see various things from these boards and different companies.  However, I think we can still be civil while evaluating a claim from someone who posts on the boards.

It seems that we are having a rash of rudeness on the boards of late.  Maybe it is me, but it seems that we are seeing more closed threads.  I don't want people to feel uncomfortable about posting here.  The whole concept of these boards is to discuss a hobby that we love and related matters.  So, I think that keeping a civil atmosphere helps keep discussions on track.  Perhaps a good rule for posters here is to be considerate of each other.   I try NOT to say anything to others that I would not want anyone to say about me.  It doesn't matter if a poster is a company president or someone who has just started gaming.  There is still another human being looking at a thread, who might be hurt by someone else's comments.  

I think we have to also assume that when a person makes a statement that can be misinterpreted the best thing is to politely ask for some clarification.  (I have taken a few statistics courses, and I realize it is very easy to make any number of mistakes. Or to use a quote from Mark Twain that gets some laughs from some statistics professors I have known -- "There are lies, there are damn lies, and then there are statistics." )  


MerricB, don't let this upset you too much.  I doubt that there is a way to please everyone on the boards.  Some people may have issues with different companies and personalities.  I have seen the character of some people on these boards attacked in the past.  It seems that instead of shedding light on subjects that we are interested in, personal attacks and hostility to fellow posters leads to anger, frustration, and closed threads.  

While I respect our moderators, I don't envy their jobs.  I appreciate the efforts, and hope that we can maybe shed more light and less heat on the thigns we talk about on the boards.  (Perhaps we can discuss a few ways to tone down some of the disagreements.  As a long time member of the boards, I don't want anyone who posts at EN World to feel uncomfortable about posting here.)


----------



## diaglo (Oct 28, 2005)

wow... didn't expect it to go that far over the edge.

sorry if i had anything to do with it. i know Charles answered my question. and Turjan's.


diaglo "who is a scribe on the TSR forum" Ooi


----------



## Zenodotus of Ephesus (Oct 28, 2005)

MerricB said:
			
		

> I'm annoyed.





I'm anewshound!


----------



## Zenodotus of Ephesus (Oct 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> This seems as good a place as any...
> 
> You know what annoys me? That when someone who is a full-time employee from Wizards posts, or someone who has worked for them in the past, it's the mission of someone, and the specific individuals vary every time, to tear them down verbally. It's not enough to say, "I disagree," or "I'm not sure where you get that from" - it's accusations of lying, arrogance, stupidity, or even malicious conduct.
> 
> ...





Start handing out bans for that sort of bad behavior.  Three day bans, then one week bans, then one month bans, etc.  Bet it'll clear up fairly quickly and people with a real need to add their input will find a way to do it politely.  It's pretty obvious that something needs to change when mild-mannered folks like you (Henry) and the eternal optimist (MerricB) start yanking your hair out.


----------



## Henry (Oct 28, 2005)

Zenodotus of Ephesus said:
			
		

> Start handing out bans for that sort of bad behavior.




Oh, we do. That's where charges of favoritism come from. 

Often times, it's not a clear line that's crossed. As I said, it's a snide comment here, an over-reaching statement there, and it's a fine line to walk between making draconian statements very ten posts like a peacock, and letting insults slide. When you're checking in on a conversation over the course of a work day, in an hour's time you leave a well-mannered, yet slightly edgy, thread and come back to a knock-down drag out that, taking proper time to fix, would take two hours to edit, ban, warn, and steer back to topic. Sometimes, closing the thread is the only practical solution to a sticky problem. If we catch someone outright getting nasty, they're temp-banned, pure and simple, and the repeat offenders get perma-banned.

I'm about to start a policy of getting MUCH harsher on people insulting one another on WotC-related threads, even if it means I get the usual, "you mods are are playing favorites" comments all over again. I for one have a patience that's wearing thin with people skirting polite boundaries.

Thanks to everyone letting me preach to the choir for a minute.


----------



## Arnwyn (Oct 28, 2005)

I'm quite surprised that the usual suspects aren't called out more by the moderators. All I usually see is a weak/lame "guys, tone it down" or some other bit of weaksauce "warning".

The usual suspects need to be called out publicly by the moderators in the offending thread (along with specific quotes/examples when calling out names, to help mitigate [though impossible to avoid] any accusations of favoritism).

I don't think 'behind the scenes' does it, IMHO.

(Oh: Good work to the moderators, whatever you do!)


----------



## Tolen Mar (Oct 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> This seems as good a place as any...
> 
> You know what annoys me? That when someone who is a full-time employee from Wizards posts, or someone who has worked for them in the past, it's the mission of someone, and the specific individuals vary every time, to tear them down verbally. It's not enough to say, "I disagree," or "I'm not sure where you get that from" - it's accusations of lying, arrogance, stupidity, or even malicious conduct.
> 
> ...





Man, Henry, this should be stuck where more people can see it.  I dont normally come down this way myself...


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 28, 2005)

Yes, yes...you are.  



			
				Zenodotus of Ephesus said:
			
		

> I'm anewshound!


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 28, 2005)

*removing the mircophone, and the high stand*

-Okay, times up-  



			
				Henry said:
			
		

> Oh, we do. That's where charges of favoritism come from.
> 
> Often times, it's not a clear line that's crossed. As I said, it's a snide comment here, an over-reaching statement there, and it's a fine line to walk between making draconian statements very ten posts like a peacock, and letting insults slide. When you're checking in on a conversation over the course of a work day, in an hour's time you leave a well-mannered, yet slightly edgy, thread and come back to a knock-down drag out that, taking proper time to fix, would take two hours to edit, ban, warn, and steer back to topic. Sometimes, closing the thread is the only practical solution to a sticky problem. If we catch someone outright getting nasty, they're temp-banned, pure and simple, and the repeat offenders get perma-banned.
> 
> ...


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 28, 2005)

3? 1? How about 6 months? The look on their faces will be priceless, when they are told this, will be worth it. (Just imagine seeing it, by your mind inner eye)



			
				Zenodotus of Ephesus said:
			
		

> Start handing out bans for that sort of bad behavior.  Three day bans, then one week bans, then one month bans, etc.  Bet it'll clear up fairly quickly and people with a real need to add their input will find a way to do it politely.  It's pretty obvious that something needs to change when mild-mannered folks like you (Henry) and the eternal optimist (MerricB) start yanking your hair out.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 28, 2005)

Unfortunately, this is the wave of foolishness will rise time, and time again. And it can't be curtailed, unless you are willing to have a minute by minute moderation on the threads 24/7, 60mins/60secs in toll. It is just not possible. Deflecting the roughness, has become a necessary job, due to the means of free speech, which to some, have been taken for granted, literally.

It is truly, a privilege gift, that a lot of people has forgotten. Some people have better tolerance than others, and some don't...that the cheese of the problem, and that is not going away anytime soon.

And the main cultprit in this, is the internet...people can get to see more views of other folks, and it is not in the double digits, it is in the thousands...we are expose to a grander look, of what people are thinking, than ever before. Our minds has to filter a greater number of mindsets, beliefs, opinions, on a vaster scale...and man, it hurts!!!

The human mind is good, but not that great, to actually handle the massive influx, we see everyday on the internet...and that is where sometimes, people just go off in the deep end, example speaking of course.

So, in a nutshell...rules, guidelines, punishments, are a just metaphoric showing, on how to conduct one self, in a forum...the true reminders of the tolerance waving stick, should be the people who answer back to a possible flame in the pant, question...but we tend to forget that we have to police ourselves in this virtual world, cause, it is still, a unexplored country.

That is why, we have the guides (moderators), just to remind us, when we veer off course, once and a while.

And what is that old saying, I hear a lot..."_Check yourself, before you wreck yourself"_, does have its meaning...but again, people don't adhere to that, cause they get the blinder effect, when a topic pushes them pass their safety net (wait....do we have a safety net at all?)

As I made a reference here, about getting back at those, who will close a thread, I do not approve of that method, unless there is a way, not to ruffle feathers in the end. My method, my own, worked great...and the problem ended quietly as it came so noisely. Everyone has a way to do things, in their own fashion...but it when it comes a forum, there is a guideline, that all mods must follow, cause, it is the safety net for them.

I wish wholehearty, that people could follow that example...but I am not holding my breath.

Humans are just plain crazy...  



			
				William Ronald said:
			
		

> It seems that we are having a rash of rudeness on the boards of late. Maybe it is me, but it seems that we are seeing more closed threads. I don't want people to feel uncomfortable about posting here. The whole concept of these boards is to discuss a hobby that we love and related matters. So, I think that keeping a civil atmosphere helps keep discussions on track. Perhaps a good rule for posters here is to be considerate of each other. I try NOT to say anything to others that I would not want anyone to say about me. It doesn't matter if a poster is a company president or someone who has just started gaming. There is still another human being looking at a thread, who might be hurt by someone else's comments.


----------



## Staffan (Oct 28, 2005)

I'm also annoyed. I had a point to add about the math of the survey to the thread, and now it's closed. I'll add the point here - mods, if you feel this is trying to reopen the thread, feel free to edit it out of my post.

Summary: Old (1999) survey says "2% of US population between 12 and 35 years of age play D&D monthly, or 1.5 million." Now, Charles Ryan says "4.6 million play D&D monthly." Someone else says "That's 1.6% of the US population." Yet another person says "Wait. How can the percentage be lower but the number be greater?" Easy - the first is 2% of approximately 90 million, the second is 1.6% of 280 million.


----------



## diaglo (Oct 28, 2005)

Staffan said:
			
		

> I'm also annoyed. I had a point to add about the math of the survey to the thread, and now it's closed. I'll add the point here - mods, if you feel this is trying to reopen the thread, feel free to edit it out of my post.



i answered that first survey multiple times. and the newest ones too.


----------



## Jdvn1 (Oct 28, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> ...All we mods want is a civil thread. We want a place that WotC employees, 3rd party publishers, fans, can enjoy, share their thoughts, share a few laughs and discussions about their favorite hobby, without getting their verbal teeth knocked in.
> ...
> 
> To hell with favoritism, I want a good discussion!



Hear hear.


----------



## William Ronald (Oct 28, 2005)

Truth Seeker said:
			
		

> And what is that old saying, I hear a lot..."_Check yourself, before you wreck yourself"_, does have its meaning...but again, people don't adhere to that, cause they get the blinder effect, when a topic pushes them pass their safety net (wait....do we have a safety net at all?)
> 
> As I made a reference here, about getting back at those, who will close a thread, I do not approve of that method, unless there is a way, not to ruffle feathers in the end. My method, my own, worked great...and the problem ended quietly as it came so noisely. Everyone has a way to do things, in their own fashion...but it when it comes a forum, there is a guideline, that all mods must follow, cause, it is the safety net for them.
> 
> ...





Good advice.  I would rather NOT see a thread closed if it can be avoided.  However, I think that it might be a good idea to give warnings.  We all have some things that will drive us past the breaking point.  In which case, maybe the wisest thing to do is to step away from the computer and calm down.

As for human craziness, I suspect that we will have to put up with that here on the boards.  Part of the problem with setting up an example for people to follow is that we are flawed, and do have lapsses in judgement.  Yet we can still strive for high standards.  

I want good discussions here.  We may disagree on some issues, but we can at least try to respect each other.

So, in addition to moderating our own behavior, what can we do?  I will contact a moderator if I think it is needed.  So, perhaps we can try to look our for each other on the boards.  I think one thing that I have learned by being part of EN World is the diversity of gamers and views here.  I think I have become a better gamer because of it.  Indeed, I think we benefit from listening to others -- even when we strongly disagree.  Even if we don't change our opinions on an issue, we may learn why others have their views.


----------



## Steverooo (Oct 29, 2005)

MerricB said:
			
		

> Seeing the devolution of my latest Charles Ryan Speaks post, and its subsequent locking, I'm extremely annoyed.




Sorry, Merric!  I saw that thread, but missed the "devolution", and close...  Too bad it devolved, and was ended.

Poor Henry!  Poor Merric!  (Poor Charles, if he was here to see it!)


----------



## Cheiromancer (Oct 29, 2005)

On the positive side, it looks like the discussion with E. Gary Gygax can go on indefinitely without problems.  It's on part IX, and all the threads are very long and have many, many views.  Of course, Gary isn't "The Man" anymore, so perhaps that's why people are nice.

I have a question regarding thread moderation.  I have visited the boards over at giantitp (which discuss the Order of the Stick comics) and there is a note warning against "vigilante moderators" - people who take it on themselves to warn other people about various alleged infractions.  The real moderators don't like it when people take such initiative.

What are people's thoughts about that?  Is it a productive use of peer pressure when we gently remind someone that their remarks are out of line?  Or is it liable to make things worse, and so we should just stick to reporting posts?


----------



## Crothian (Oct 30, 2005)

I perfer to just report posts instead of trying to "vigilante moderate" as most problem people seem to igonre the actual mods a good portion of the time and I've seen them react badly to other posters trying to do it.


----------



## IronWolf (Oct 30, 2005)

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> "vigilante moderators"
> 
> What are people's thoughts about that?  Is it a productive use of peer pressure when we gently remind someone that their remarks are out of line?  Or is it liable to make things worse, and so we should just stick to reporting posts?




I think it would be much more likely to make things worse than have much chance of making thigns better.  I have found the report post option works quite well in most cases - whether it be to report spam or a thread that is quickly starting to derail.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 30, 2005)

The vigilante moderator thing works poorly if the person attempting it is on one of the sides of the argument, surely.

However, I think there's something to be said for self-policing.  It is one thing for moderators to keep things civil.  But I think their jobs go better if we, the populace, show support for the policies.  So a polite mention of "Folks, I think you ought to cool down before this thread gets closed or something" is appropriate and constructive.


----------



## William Ronald (Oct 30, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> The vigilante moderator thing works poorly if the person attempting it is on one of the sides of the argument, surely.
> 
> However, I think there's something to be said for self-policing.  It is one thing for moderators to keep things civil.  But I think their jobs go better if we, the populace, show support for the policies.  So a polite mention of "Folks, I think you ought to cool down before this thread gets closed or something" is appropriate and constructive.




I've often done this myself, as I have mentioned that I am worried about a thread being closed down.  (I don't know if it has had any effect.)  However, I will report a problem with a post to the moderators.  I think that most people do police themselves.  However, moderation like law enforcement can only work if the majority of the people support the policies.

Maybe we could have a thread sticked for new posters that shows examples of things that might close a thread?   Some examples might help people realize what are the types of problems that could cause a thread to be shut down.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 30, 2005)

William Ronald said:
			
		

> Maybe we could have a thread sticked for new posters that shows examples of things that might close a thread?   Some examples might help people realize what are the types of problems that could cause a thread to be shut down.




The Rules are already a permanent Announcement at the top of each forum, and they put it very clearly:

_"Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your discussions."_

I think that's about as far as we need to go, as we ought to treat the membership as intelligent human beings.


----------



## Mark CMG (Oct 30, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> The Rules are already a permanent Announcement at the top of each forum, and they put it very clearly:
> 
> _"Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your discussions."_
> 
> I think that's about as far as we need to go, as we ought to treat the membership as intelligent human beings.





_You Rules-Citers, and your kind, always say that . . ._


----------



## William Ronald (Oct 30, 2005)

Umbran said:
			
		

> The Rules are already a permanent Announcement at the top of each forum, and they put it very clearly:
> 
> _"Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your discussions."_
> 
> I think that's about as far as we need to go, as we ought to treat the membership as intelligent human beings.





Unfortunately, we do have people who seem to have forgotten about the rules, are unaware of the rules, or intentionally disregard the rules.

Perhaps a few fictitious examples might be useful for some of our posters.  Mind you, this is just an idea I am tossing out.  I don't think there ever will be  100 percent compliance with the rules.   I think most people here are intelligent people, but some do not seem to realize or care that their comments are hurting other people.


----------



## Umbran (Oct 30, 2005)

William Ronald said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, we do have people who seem to have forgotten about the rules, are unaware of the rules, or intentionally disregard the rules.




Fictitious examples will only help those who know about the rules, want to follow the rules, but don't understand them as they are currently stated.  Somehow, I expect that's a pretty small number of posters.

Folks should have been learning this stuff back in grade school.  Trying to teach them now implies that we think they're like kids, and they'll tend to act accordingly - they'll nitpick, whine, and look for loopholes to test boundaries.  

Have high expectations, and people will generally rise to meet them.  Make them think, and they'll think.  Evidence of this lies in the fact that, compared to most other places, we have relatively few such events, compared to other places on the internet.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Oct 31, 2005)

Henry said:
			
		

> I'm about to start a policy of getting MUCH harsher on people insulting one another on WotC-related threads, even if it means I get the usual, "you mods are are playing favorites" comments all over again. I for one have a patience that's wearing thin with people skirting polite boundaries.




I think you should. These are busy guys who take time out of their busy schedules to come here and answer fans' questions. Only to get told they're "full of ****" or "Lying bastards!" or crap like that.... That's wrong. You'd hate it if you got called either of the above. So do they. And why come to a board where you get that all the time.

I think the WOTC boards have heavily cracked down on harassing industry professionals.



> Thanks to everyone letting me preach to the choir for a minute.




Can we get an "AMEN, BRUTHA!!"?


----------



## Truth Seeker (Oct 31, 2005)

AMENNNNNNNNN!!!!!​


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 1, 2005)

I regret that the whole thing devoled into "calling someone a corporate shill is not an insult" and then pointing out in many ways how it could be. All that potential lost...


----------



## Odhanan (Nov 2, 2005)

I agree with you guys.



> You know what annoys me? That when someone who is a full-time employee from Wizards posts, or someone who has worked for them in the past, it's the mission of someone, and the specific individuals vary every time, to tear them down verbally. It's not enough to say, "I disagree," or "I'm not sure where you get that from" - it's accusations of lying, arrogance, stupidity, or even malicious conduct.




Man, you haven't seen the French-speaking forums where I related Charles' quote. I've had 95% of posts that were flaming and outright denunciating this as a corporate self-endorsment/plain lie. 

*SIGH*


----------



## Crothian (Nov 2, 2005)

You're a driod
I'm annoyed


----------



## diaglo (Nov 2, 2005)

Odhanan said:
			
		

> Man, you haven't seen the French-speaking forums where I related Charles' quote. I've had 95% of posts that were flaming and outright denunciating this as a corporate self-endorsment/plain lie.
> 
> *SIGH*



ou est linque?
edit: or   où est le lien ?


----------



## Cheiromancer (Nov 2, 2005)

I'm annoyed by the way that the Human Monks can take Improved Natural Attack? thread flamed out and had to be locked.  I was kinda rooting for it to get to 1000 posts.

Actually, I'm annoyed with the people who, despite being warned, continued to engage in inflammatory behavior.  I wish there were more ways of sanctioning antisocial behavior than banning someone from the forum.  If only you could ban people from certain threads, or certain forums.  Or limit the number of times they could post per day.  (If you can only post 1/day it is hard to get involved in a real flame war!).

But I would be surprised if the boards had that degree of functionality.   

[edit]Props to Pielorinho for his intervention in the Can the Faq be used to issue errata? thread.  It was rapidly going the way of the INA thread, but I think he saved it.  [/edit]


----------



## genshou (Nov 5, 2005)

When reading through Henry's post I was almost afraid that this thread ended up closed before I found it, as lucky as *MerricB* seems to be with that...

All the good threads get closed before I get there lately... not that I'd have posted in the threads in the first place of course; just that the grass is always greener and all that. 

Edit:


			
				Truth Seeker said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, this is the wave of foolishness will rise time, and time again. And it can't be curtailed, unless you are willing to have a minute by minute moderation on the threads 24/7, 60mins/60secs in toll. It is just not possible. Deflecting the roughness, has become a necessary job, due to the means of free speech, which to some, have been taken for granted, literally.
> 
> It is truly, a privilege gift, that a lot of people has forgotten. Some people have better tolerance than others, and some don't...that the cheese of the problem, and that is not going away anytime soon.



To *Truth Seeker*:

Remember, many people use the Freedom of Speech as a substitute for Freedom of Thought, which they seldom make use of.  Not much we can do about that except teach them to think before they "speak".  Teach them over and over again.

And as a corollary to what I wrote above the quote, *MerricB*, how many of the "trouble" members in your threads do you suppose will actually read this?  Hopefully at least ONE will.

And also, speaking of "1,000 posts"... one more... one more...


----------

