I Vant To Be Alone

Great Debates
1

An interest point has arisen in the Pit and, without going into specifics, I’d like to get some posters’ feedback on something. Please give your honest answer to the following hypothetical:

If Poster A finds Poster B to be [aggravating/ a gasbag/totally ignorant/ a synchophant/ a one-trick pony/ whatever], and Poster B asks Poster A to simply ignore him or her and his/her vexing ways, is Poster A obliged by decency or politesse to grant that request and ignore the threads Poster B starts and the posts Poster B makes?

I am not talking about a troll, following someone around from forum to forum to snipe at him or her; I am talking about posters who simply do not get along or who have very divergent beliefs. Does Poster B have the right to “post in peace,” so to speak, if he or she so requests, even if the things he or she posts bug the mmmhmm out of Poster A? Or is Poster B’s request an unfair or unrealistic one, in that it forecloses Poster A’s ability to post in threads he chooses or rebut points if, when, and as he chooses?

I’d really like to get a sense of what others think of this as a general matter, not specific to any particular poster(s). I’m putting it here in GD because seems to have the potential to turn into a debate, great or not.

Thanks for the input. Please answer the question as posted – hypothetically – without citing to or “pulling in” specifics on various posters. This isn’t a witch hunt or a dogpile.

2

If poster A sees poster B consistently posting pure crap, I see no reason to expect poster A not to call him/her on it if poster A feels like it.

Poster B should feel free to ASK, but should not feel poster A has an obligation to comply, but may choose to.

3

I’d have to agree that there are no “gimmes” in Great Debates or General Questions. No one can have any reasonable expectation of being able to post something in GD or GQ without having to back it up, and another poster is certainly within her rights to ask for a cite or provide a factual refutation (with cite of her own) or point out a logical flaw in someone else’s argument (provided, of course, that this is done in a manner consistent with the rules which govern behavior in those forums).

I don’t really think anyone has any right to start or participate in a Pit thread and at the same time bar some other poster or posters from flaming back. I’d also have to say that if you express a Humble Opinion, in your own or someone else’s IMHO thread, any other poster has a right to record their Humble Opinion (again, in a manner consistent with the rules of that forum). If someone wants to talk about some particular book or movie in Cafe Society, I don’t see how they can bar some other poster from talking about that book or movie. I guess maybe someone could say “this MPSIMS thread is for me and my friends”, but even there, hey, this is a public board.

Naturally, none of this means anyone should go around “stalking” some other particularly disliked poster from forum to forum and thread to thread, obsessively pointing out their every misplaced comma. And of course a warning from a Moderator to cheese it is entirely different from some other poster whining “You keep pointing out my mistakes! You’re just picking on me! That’s not fair!”

4

Oh, man, I gotta go to the Pit and see if this is about me. :wink:

I recently gave an “enthusiastic” reply to an OP in the pit. Someone else replied, “If you don’t like (subject/poster), don’t read (subject/poster).” My thought was, “If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the BBQ Pit.”

It wasn’t the original poster who said “Ignore me”, but I figure that if you post in the Pit, it’s open season.

5

I don’t think poster B can reasonably ask to have his or her points stand ignored/unrefuted by a specific poster.
However, if the thread isn’t in the Pit, I think that Poster B is within his or her rights to ask to be treated with civility. This is sometimes lacking in GD, especially between posters with a long history of disagreement.

6

People who don’t want their points of view being debated should not post here.

People who habitually post vitriolic, unsupported rants cannot reasonably expect to avoid impassioned responses.

7

I was recently informed by someone that, in the future, I wasn’t to assume anything posted by that person was in any way meant to invite a response by me.

I simply replied that, if his posts necessitate a response, they’ll get one–whether invited or not.

8

I do believe I recognize the players referred to in your OP. I was disappointed to see the attempt by Poster ‘A’ to ‘ban’ further board conversation from Poster ‘B’. I hadn’t realized how personally ‘A’ was taking the verbal sparring when the protagonist was ‘B’, and until that thread, I quite enjoyed the match up.

That being said, ‘A’ was off base, absolutely. This isn’t 'A’s playground, and all posts ought to be fair game as long as common rules of civil debate are honored. I haven’t noticed in this particular case that they hadn’t been. This seemed a drastic response to a succession of ‘losses’ in various debate threads on this person’s part. There’ve been a couple similar situations the last few weeks with two antipathetic posters wishing to declare portions of this forum off limits. Isn’t gonna happen, shouldn’t happen.

9

Posts, by virtue of being posted on a discussion board, invite response.

The appropriateness of response is governed by moderators.

Posting and then expecting immunity from response is not fair to those wishing to respond. It is no different than putting one’s hands over one’s ears and repeating “I don’t hear you.”

10

It was recently asserted to me that we shouldn’t take it on ourselves as a group to determine what constitutes “fair play” in Great Debates. I was told that’s what the moderators are for (although I’m quite certain they haven’t the time to delve so deeply into our debate tactics; they have job enough policing jerk-like behavior). Why are we now, as a group, trying to determine what constitutes “reasonable” requests and/or arrangements between individual posters?

In the hypothetical, a preexisting animosity exists between two posters, one of whom makes a request of the other. Who the hell are the rest of us to determine proper obligations and “decency” in this case?

11

If poster A gets so wrapped up in vitriolic hatred of poster B that A’s responses to B’s posts cross over the line of acceptable posting practices, then by definition, no, A should stay away from B’s threads, and just back away if A finds B has posted to someone else’s thread.

If poster A can keep things under control and post responses to B’s posts that are within the character and boundaries of the given forum, then A is perfectly within his/her rights to post said response.

AKA Don’t be a jerk.

12

It’s a public board. Everything I post on here can be seen by anyone, and anyone who wants can respond to them. Equally, anyone here has the right not to respond to any posts of mine.

13

Can’t we call them poster S and poster S instead?

I don’t think there are any absolutes - only individuals. It’s up to individuals to find their own agreements and solutions.

Noone has the right to insist that anyone else never respond to them - if the moderators don’t object then noone else can really. However everyone has the right to request that someone else leave them alone. Then we’re back to individuals again.

pan

14

I will ignore poster B’s threads.

The posts I usually start before noticing who wrote them and if the content’s deserving, I’ll Zippo his ass.

Unless, of course, I happen to agree with the dumbass. :slight_smile:

15

Let me add:

The reason I do this is because their post will often be an integral part of the discussion or even lead the discussion in a different direction. How do you ignore that?

It’s kinda like the mods not wanting to edit out a person’s comments and probably the reason we cant go back and edit what we’ve said ourselves. Were you to go back and read it, it’d make no sense. Well, that’s what ignoring a poster’s comments in a thread might do to you… make you look blind or like a dumbass and my deck’s already stacked in that direction and I’ll be dammed if I’ll let someone put a tilde on that. :slight_smile:

16

KABBES –

Right. The question is whether, in the context of a message board, such a request is reasonable. Assuming that the other poster is not actively trolling.

Well, I’m me and you’re you and everyone else is everyone else. I pretty clearly asked for a “general opinion,” and so everyone holding an opinion on the issue has the right to air it. Unless your asking, who the hell are any of us to have opinions?

Thanks for the responses. To explain the thread more clearly:

I saw the request from Poster B to Poster A – “just ignore me and my posts totally” – and it was reasonably phrased, not raging or overwrought, just politely requested. And yet I personally did not find it to be a reasonable request. It seems to me that in any group conversation (but especially a message board), if you air your opinion you must accept that anyone in the group is liable to respond and, indeed, has every right to respond, so long as he or she does it civilly. So then I thought, maybe that’s just me. Maybe everyone else would think that was a very reasonable request – I mean, the world is wide, even on a message board, how hard is it to avoid one poster? If such a request were directed at me and I declined to honor it (which I probably would), maybe that would make me a big honkin’ bitch? Hence the posting of this question.

17

This happened to me. I found the request odd, as I think it’s a somewhat innapropriate request for a public forum, as well as something of an insult.

Rather than read anything inot it, I offered a compromise, which was immediately rebuffed.

From this I concluded the person wanted to have their cake and eat it too. While they felt free to suggest that I should censor my activities to deal with their personal problem, it wasn’t important enough to them that they alter their behavior.

I think if you want a private and exclusive discussion you should use email or start your own board.

18

**
I personally don’t think that there is a preexisting animosity, in the real case upon which this hypothetical is based.

One of the two people involved turns into “non-entities” posters who vehemently disagree with her (and, trust me, her positions invite and deserve vehement disagreement quite frequently). Literally, she does the “la-la-la-la, I am not listening to you,” 4-year-old routine.

In the Pit thread that inspired this thread, said poster told the poster by whom she wishes to be ignored (paraphrasing), “You don’t worry about countering my points. Plenty of other people will do it for you.”

Bullshit.

Not only does that in theory run counter to the entire purpose of a public message board, in practice it ain’t happening. In fact, posters that lean to an ideology supported by this poster frequently disappoint me, in that they are largely silent when she makes outrageous and unsupportable claims, then refuses to answer questions about them or back them up in any other way. While she’s doing this, she does continue to respond in these threads to any cheerleading or support that “her side” gives her.

It’s irritating, but I can dismiss it, given what I’ve come to know about who she is, how she operates, and what she has to offer, at least here. As I said, my greater disappointment is with those who share a lot of her ideology, but don’t seem to hold her to the same rigor they would someone with whom they more greatly disagree.

Read any 10 consecutive posts from Poster A. Evaluating what other people say here only to determine if it’s liberal enough to cheer or boo, and consistently adding nothing more to the conversation than your cheer or your boo, is about as counter to this message board’s inspiration as a person could get, IMO.

As for her “just forget I exist,” the poster to whom that was requested made her a counter-offer, which was “quit posting in political threads and driving me crazy, and it’s a deal,” which she instantly dismissed.

Perhaps she should examine the motivations for that instant dismissal. Perhaps it will provide her with some insight as to why her “just leave me alone” request would tend to provoke a similar instant dismissal from her “enemy.”

Bottom line: It’s a public message board. You can assure I don’t respond to you by not saying anything. Otherwise, all bets are off.

Milo, Enemy-Second Class (hey, we can’t all be as good as Poster B) and non-entity to Poster A

19

If Poster A is not resorting to ad hominem attacks, but sticks to logical and/or factual refutation, then tough titty to Poster B. If you can’t take the heat, then stay out of the kitchen.

20

Milo:

While I really do appreciate the support I think Jodi was smart to keep the OP generic.

If you come out and say “Poster B is a rotten poopy head!”

Then someone else will just show up and say “Liar! Poster B is the best. Poster A is the Poopy head!”

Then it’s all “you’re a poopy head.” “No, you are.” and then all intelligent conversation stops, and all the thoughtful posters go elsewhere.

I really think we’ve had enough of that, and I truly don’t want to be anybody’s enemy.