Agreed–while the dictionary definition of the two words are more-or-less equal, the modern connotation of them is not.
Says the person who gets away with writing this:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17615112&postcount=1166
in great debates.
I’m going to advise you against taking the thread in this direction. At best it’ll be unproductive, and at worst, it’ll get the thread shut down.
Of course they are credible. At what point did the dictionary stop becoming such a weak cite that your opinion is enough to impeach it?
I must be missing those threads.
And that makes no sense at all, as the post you’re upset about here has nothing to do with dictionary definitions or modern connotations.
Dude, seriously. I understand that this is an emotional issue for you, as it is for many. But I think you really need to take a few steps back.
.
Deleted–just read Marley’s comment
The dictionary describes how the dictionary writers saw the words used when the dictionary was written.
Or are you arguing that “network” can’t be a verb because it wasn’t back, say, in the '80s. Language changes. Dictionaries try to keep up.
OK so no warning for Shodan but a warning for Pjen. What was wrong with what Pjen said?
So, Israel defenders are not modded for calling another poster an asshole in Great Debates while another poster is issued a warning for making a statement that is not personal or directed at anyone and you think there is no chilling effect?
Unless you are a bit masochistic, why would you get involved in a debate where the otherside can hurl insults and you cannot. How could biased modding NOT have a chilling effect? or are you saying that modding like this does not happen in other Israel threads? I have been involved in at least 2 or 3 other threads where warnings went to Israel critics while the defenders of Israel were modded together with critics of Israel. I suspect that if you did a search of when Irael threads were moderated or when warnings were issued, you would find similarly peculiar modding from other moderators as well.
Israel is not an emotional issue for me at all.
The bias is upsetting and I was giving another example of that bias in action.
Full Definition of NETWORK
transitive verb
1: to cover with or as if with a network <a continent … so networked with navigable rivers and canals — Lamp>
2chiefly British : to distribute for broadcast on a television network; also : broadcast 3
3: to join (as computers) in a network
intransitive verb
: to engage in networking
— net·work·er -ˌwər-kər\ noun
How recent is this new definition of apologist that internet dictionaries haven’t picked it up yet?
But like I said, If its hurting people’s feelings i will stop using it. I think this is the first time anyone has complained of my use of the word.
Is it possible–only possible, mind–that emotion is biasing you as much as you claim it biases the moderation in these threads?
You’ve now asserted that the GD mods, in aggregate, are biased in favor of Israel. I do not believe this to be the case, but I absolutely grant it’s possible. However, I don’t think you’ve made a case that this is so. And I believe your emotion is biasing your opinion making you unable to objectively determine the presence of any such bias.
Sorry, not gonna play the “You have to do my homework for me because I yelled “Cite” game.”
I claimed it became a verb in the '80s, and dictionaries caught up after. And the general point is clearly “Dictionaries always play catch-up to current usage.” So…no.
You might be lucky and Samclem (who is scary-good at stuff like this) may choose to join in and help you.
If anything, the mods have (in the past) been “biased”* in favor of a wide range of opinions being allowed. Aldebaran was given much, MUCH more tolerance normal because of a wish for diversity of opinion. cite. Last paragraph.
*Loaded word, sorry, but it’s the word in play right now
Of course its possible. But I am presenting evidence.
How many more threads like this would it take to convince you? Or do you think that the thread is evenly modrated and an infinite number of threads like this would still be unconvincing?
What would convince you short of an admission of bias?
Damuri - you gotta step back and blow this thing off. Some posters are world class experts at rules lawyering, obfuscation and envelope pushing. Not that I’m bad at it myself - I’m just saying. And if one poster or another denies this, consider that conceded by myself in this forum.
You can’t reasonably complain about unbalanced moderation in borderline cases. It’s entirely possible -even likely- that some posters are simply better at staying on the correct side of the border than others. The best you can hope for is that blatant stuff gets dinged. The mods are trying hard to go beyond that standard, but it isn’t easy.
What are your options here?
I’d consider stone-cold sobriety in such threads. As well as iron clad discipline in attacking posts and not posters. Accusations of apologetics cut both ways after all. Admittedly (and speaking generally) the situation gets tricky when the rhetoric tinges on bigotry - I don’t have easy answers in that case. Another concern might be keeping Pjen off the ban-train. I dunno.
Ah: here’s another approach. Remember the core mission: fighting ignorance as opposed to mouthing off. Find cites and report them. Repeat as necessary: CTRL-c is your friend.
Dammit, Tam. I was on board until you took my Zoroastrianism away from me! To your tents, O Israel!
Seriously, Damuri, I do want you to stand back and think about what you’re saying. You are holding forth - against all opposition - that moderation is, in aggregate, bending the debate for Israel. You keep pointing to that thread and asking if it’s fair. Clearly, I think so, and I’ve been wrong and changed my mind before. I like to think I’m open-minded like that. Clearly, again, you disagree. But I can live with that.
Yeah, you’re probably right.
Fine, I think we will have to agree to disagree. I don’t think you are doing it intentionally nor do I think you are unique in doing this but I think it happens. The best way forward is probably to go back to not participating in Israel threads. Chilling effect +1.
Would this be a good time to say that I like what you did with the “just war” thread and ask you to close all but one Israel thread. Its just hard to keep track of WTF is going on.
On behalf of those of us who appreciate opium. We in.
Fenris was Mod Noted for excessive zeal, (although his post did (barely) stay within the bounds of attacking the post rather than the poster).
On the other hand, you have not been called on the fact that XT actually made a reference to the establishment of Israel and you switched it to the beginnings of Zionism. When read in the context of the moving thread, a demand for evidence that riots and pogroms preceded the creation of Israel was silly. Acting offended that you were mocked for making an absurd request does nothing to persuade me that you are actually looking at these threads without bias, yourself.
As to the Shodan posts: The first post is not the sort of thing we enjoy seeing, but it falls in the category of insulting people who are not posters. His second post was actionable, but I did not see it and it was not reported until you brought it up in this thread and we are not in the habit of taking action against posts that sat for nearly a week without causing more problems.
Pjen’s Warning was the culmination of multiple hostile posts in multiple threads.