The Fountainhead Of Change

[Homer]

To anyone who chooses to read this thread:

I am glad you have made that choice. Choosing for ourselves is quite possibly the most important thing we can do. Currently we have a situation at hand that may have many people here making a hard choice.

In the past, there has been a problem on this board. Not a problem of bandwidth, or content, or people, but a problem of questions. People continue to question the authority of the people who run this board. The decision making skills of many of the moderators have been called into question, many times and many places. Whether it be loud, obnoxious questioners like Oat Willie, or vengeful questioners like Melin, or quiet but outspoken questioners like Satan, or even bumbling goofball questioners like Silo, there have always been people unsatisfied with the way things here are run. I fear that this evening, I join those humble ranks of questioners whose questions became too persistent.

Just moments ago, when I checked my email, I came across this message:

Your latest GD quote in GQ is below, after I admonished you in the speeding
thread.

So here’s my question. Are you stupid?

You have 48 hours to answer. If you have not answered, or if your answer is
not satisfactory, you will lose your posting privileges.

Hint == Here’s the correct answer: “I’m sorry. I will post my apology in
the relevant threads. I will keep my GD shit out of GQ in the future.”

-manhattan

Here’s my question, manhattan. What is your problem?

Here’s another question, originally posed at 4:25PM on July 21st:

Why then are so many services becoming available that, for all intents and purposes, are either Napster clones or serve the same purpose as Napster. Aren’t the operators/developers of those sites afraid of making an investment only to have their efforts potentially wasted should they be taken to court in the same way that Napster was (let alone get fined or sued)? Alternatively, if they’re not going to be challenged by the RIAA et al, and are going to be allowed to continue functioning, then why did the RIAA expend so much energy destroying Napster?

This question is why people are creating Napster clones. This questions the motives of the people who strive to better facilitate the piracy of expensive computer software. And here’s one answer:

By forcing their hand and bringing a lawsuit against Napster, the only thing the RIAA achieved was forcing the evolution of the software exchange medium to p2p, which means it’s decentralized, open-ended, and impossible to stop.

That’s only one answer. It may not be the right answer, but it’s probably not the wrong answer. And here’s a very valid synopsis of the situation:

Just like prey escaping predator, the software exchange has now evolved a step ahead.

A system was attacked. This attack disabled the system. This created the need of a new system that can evade the methods of attack used against the old system. The prey evolved one step ahead of the predator.

But we have a problem now. Because one hour earlier on July 21 at 3:23PM, I had posted

That’s right. They’re letting people speed. That’s the driver’s business. It has nothing to do with you. Why should you be able to tell someone not to speed? It’s their choice. It doesn’t affect you. It affects you only when they screw up. And how often do speeders screw up? Oh, only about as often as you. Speeders aren’t significantly more dangerous than law-abiders. Speeders are significantly less dangerous than people going under the limit.

So why should you have a say in it? What does it have to do with you? Why should you be able to decide what someone else does? What gives you the right to arbitrarily set a speed limit? What makes you so perfect that you can control what someone else does? Why should you have say? You have no more right to tell them not to speed than they have right to tell you to speed.

So, let’s work on making you perfect before you try to control someone else. And that goes for everybody, and everything. Everything. Why should you be able to tell someone not to do something? Take a good, long, hard look at yourself and fix any problem you see there before you go around setting laws, limits, rules, and governors for other people. Think about it.

“A person who would willingly give up a small bit of freedom for a small bit of safety deserves neither.”

In response to this:

This question has been boggling my mind for months. I’d love if i could get some answers. Okay, if theres a speed limit on all highways and roadways (except the autobaughn), why the hell do they make cars go so fast?!?! If car makers just made cars that only go 65 miles an hour, wouldn’t that stop the speeders on the road. I think car makers are just letting these people speed and take lives. Its ridiculous. Thanks for the answers. Peace.

manhattan apparently took offense that I would question the motives and ability of a person wishing for more, and more restrictive, laws. This is his right to be offended, however, and I would not wish to deny him that right. In response, he posted this:

Homer, you’re still on thin ice with me. Keep that crap to Great Debates, or you’ll be keeping it on another message board, capice?

To which I replied at 7:13PM, upon receipt:

Yes, manny, you’re right. I do apologize for my tone, it was not called for. I was simply trying, albeit too hard, to impress upon the OP that perhaps a person needs to look into themselves and fix what’s wrong there before attempting to control the actions someone else. I’m sorry that I phrased it wrong.

This is obviously a sticky situation. I posted a reply to a thread and was admonished for it. After I was admonished, but before I knew I had been admonished, I infracted the same rule.

This all took place in GQ. The description of the forum for GQ reads “Got a question for the Teeming Millions (and possibly Cecil) to consider? Post it here.” I am accused of solving GQ questions with GD answers. The GD forum description reads “For long-running discussions of the great questions of our time.” Notice it says “for long-running discussions.” What are long running discussions? They are, by definition of the board, questions that cannot be answered succinctly. Is there a God, how exactly does evolution work, is PETA crazy, all these things are debated in GD, and not discussed in GQ.

And how many times has Napster been discussed in GQ? Searching for “Napster” in GQ and going back two years gives us 203 times. I think that can be considered “long-running.”

So now I am accused of answering a long-running, unsolvable question in a manner that is not succinct and simple. I am accused of being as truthful as I can on a subject that is unanswerable. I am accused of violating an order that I did not know had been issued when I violated it.

Is this right? Should a man be held accountable for answering a question in the best manner he can just because it’s not in the manner that is preferred? Should a man be held accountable for violating an order that he was not aware had been issued?

This board stands for one thing, the eradication of ignorance. People, thousands of people, flock to this board to have the questions which burn holes in their minds answered. Hundreds of thousands of questions and answers on hundreds of thousands of subjects have been raised and closed. Thousands of these questions have no single, right answer. Hundreds of them are debated time and time again attempting to solve them.

Yet I am being punished for doing the same.

Is this right, reader? Can you willingly and knowingly support such self-destructive behavior such as this?

I admit to you plainly now, I have had problems with this board in the past. I have knowingly and unknowingly and jokingly and seriously violated the rules of this board in the past. I have done things here that I am ashamed of, and I have asked and been forgiven by the members of this board the same. What is past, is past for most people, but not for some. Some sins are never forgiven in the hearts of people who don’t have the capacity.

I admit to these indiscretions and ask forgiveness of them as I have in the past, and I hope that forgiveness will be granted. But I do not ask forgiveness today. No, today, there is no reason for grieving or groveling. I ask today for absolution. Not forgiveness.

For all my sins, I have brought light to this board. I have brought humor, pain, joy and sadness all in equal number. I have brought questions to be pondered and solved mysteries from others. I have enjoyed myself and been enjoyed for nearly three thousand five hundred posts. At most, only two percent of these posts are negative. Two percent. Can you sentence a man to death for being only two percent wrong? To only bobble two times out of one hundred, can you tell a man he’s flawed? For only two mistakes of one hundred efforts, can you tell a person he’s bad?

I ask then for absolution today. Let my rights equal my wrongs and be forgotten, or let my wrongs equal my rights and be destroyed. I do not ask for much, simply this; do not be a hypocrite yourself, and do not let you become a hypocrite through inaction.

Let the person who has created no bad cast their stone and knock me flat, let them flip their switch and remove me whole. Or let the person who has created some good forgive as forgiven alike.

But I ask only in choosing that you do so utterly: Drop your hate and anger and superfluity, and forget which has been wrought, or retain it and destroy me. Delete my name, delete my profile, delete my posts. Every single one.

For if I do not belong in your home, my memory does not either. If I am not good enough to join your group, then neither is anything I have spoken.

Remove me completely, or leave me alone.

Choose slowly, and choose wisely, for you can only do so once.

–Tim

[SPOOFE]

You know, you could have simply said “The mods don’t like what I’m posting again” and kept such an annoyingly self-righteous post off the boards.

Surely, Tim, you know the difference between GQ and GD. If Manhattan says “What you just posted is GD, so stop it”, then consarnit, you’re gonna stop it. There’s your absolution for you.

[Homer]

*Originally posted by SPOOFE *
**You know, you could have simply said “The mods don’t like what I’m posting again” and kept such an annoyingly self-righteous post off the boards.

Surely, Tim, you know the difference between GQ and GD. If Manhattan says “What you just posted is GD, so stop it”, then consarnit, you’re gonna stop it. There’s your absolution for you. **

A, we hear from Spoofe, the voice of reason, truly a giant among men.

I see Spoofe that the content of my post left you unsatisfied. Perhaps you would be best served by allowing for the possibility that what popular isn’t always what is right, and what is right isn’t always what is popular. You have again chosen the easy way out, and to let someone make a decision for you, instead of reviewing the facts of the matter and making the choice for yourself.

But a man must choose his own path, so I cannot fault you for that.

–Tim

[Dijon_Warlock]

If I may meekly and with much trembling venture into a dispute with an observation, my impression is that it’s possible manhattan was under the impression that you were already aware of the first admonition, and simply chose to ignore it or even deliberately provoke him. Perhaps being informed that you hadn’t seen his first communication before posting to the second thread might temper his wrath a bit. As to whether your theory on Napster clones was particularly GDish…I really didn’t get that impression, but it’s not my call anyway. It is common for someone already aggravated to be particularly sensitive on whatever aggravates them. Perhaps that’s a factor, perhaps not. I hope you guys work it out; I’d hate to lose you here. That 'shroom is one of my all time favorite threads. Beautiful stuff. Good luck.

[Kaje]

Not that I belong in this thread…but CHRIST… it’s just a message board. All this “should not a man be allowed to…” talk is what you hear from revolutionaries escaping the threat of being burned alive, or at the very least a lawyer pleading with the jury over whether his client should be sentenced to life in prison.

Again, admitting I’ve only been around so long, but it seemed to me that the difference between GQ and GD was that GD dealt with issues that people take more to heart, with less room for hard facts to solve the issue once and for all. If somebody started a thread “Napster is stealing. Anyone who would use it is a sinful wretch. Discuss.” it might be better suited for GD, but as it stands most of the Napster threads I’ve read at least STARTED without getting into this kind of thing.

That said, I don’t think it follows that somebody should be removed from the board for switching the two as one can try to solve any GD with facts and one can become dogmatic about any seemingly GQ.

Oh well…time for another late-night snack

[Sterra]

I agree with SPOOFE here. Your only mad because it was you who was threatened. Its a bit overly dramatic. Ever heard of the phrase “I did not stand up for others and then there was no one to stand up for me”? Your statements are alot less “righteous” when your only doing it because you were threatened.

[TubaDiva]

Homer, get over yourself, please.

Do what we ask you to and don’t do what we ask you not to and we’ll all be happy.

your humble TubaDiva
Administrator

[Enderw24]

Homer,

Manny was right. You were right. You both were right. Let’s all sing songs. Or examine.

First, I wish links were provided in your magnum opus.
You did provide very GDish answers in a GQ thread. Manny is right about that. But I see nothing contained within them to get even the least bent out of shape about. For him to yell at you is way over the line.

But he was yelling at you. He’s upset by your track record and the mods have warned you before that you were skating on VERY thin ice. That, IMO, still doesn’t justify his response. In fact, I think it complicates the scenario because he probably wouldn’t have done that for any other poster here. I don’t know though. I’m not him.

And then, back at you, why should you be absolved of anything? This isn’t church. No one is obligated to throw the past out. And if they ban you, which I sincerely hope they won’t, no one is obligated to take a scalpel to their gray matter and remove all Homer synapses or however else you’d like us to rectify the situation.

And one last thing:

At most, only two percent of these posts are negative. Two percent. Can you sentence a man to death for being only two percent wrong?

Holy fucking christ, yes! I’m 24 years old. That’s approximately 8,900 days old. If, tomorrow, I decide to go blow up the Sprint building with everyone in it, my defense sure as heck won’t be “but I was only .0112% wrong, your honor!”
You wanna go drinking this weekend?

[Saint_Zero]

Dear Homer.

Thank you for posting your post. However, I still think you should post a GD topic in GD, not GQ. Quit whining about the mods and examine your own behavior. Thank You.

SZ

[waterj2]

To anyone who chooses to read this thread:

I am glad you have made that choice. Choosing for ourselves is quite possibly the most important thing we can do. Currently we have a situation at hand that may have many people here making a hard choice.

What choice would that be?

Here’s my question, manhattan. What is your problem?

I’m guessing that “people who should know better posting inapropriate things in GQ” would cover it.

Yet I am being punished for doing the same.

You are being asked to apologize for breaking the rules.

Is this right, reader? Can you willingly and knowingly support such self-destructive behavior such as this?

Expecting people to post responses correct for the forum they are in? Oh, the horror! :rolleyes:

I admit to you plainly now, I have had problems with this board in the past. I have knowingly and unknowingly and jokingly and seriously violated the rules of this board in the past. I have done things here that I am ashamed of, and I have asked and been forgiven by the members of this board the same. What is past, is past for most people, but not for some. Some sins are never forgiven in the hearts of people who don’t have the capacity.

You have been told that one of the results of your actions is that you get less leeway than those who have never done anything wrong. In the name of good arder and discipline, the board administration does not reset its memory of you whenever you apologize.

I admit to these indiscretions and ask forgiveness of them as I have in the past, and I hope that forgiveness will be granted. But I do not ask forgiveness today. No, today, there is no reason for grieving or groveling. I ask today for absolution. Not forgiveness.

And this can’t be taken up with Manhattan over email because…?

Can you sentence a man to death for being only two percent wrong?

You mean if a man spent only two percent of his life committing capital crimes?

I ask then for absolution today. Let my rights equal my wrongs and be forgotten, or let my wrongs equal my rights and be destroyed. I do not ask for much, simply this; do not be a hypocrite yourself, and do not let you become a hypocrite through inaction.

This is a privately owned message board. Take it up with the owners. Keep in mind that they can do whatever they want with it.

Let the person who has created no bad cast their stone and knock me flat, let them flip their switch and remove me whole. Or let the person who has created some good forgive as forgiven alike.

This is not the Kingdon of God. We follow the Chicago Reader’s rules around here. Do judges refuse to convict criminals because they themselves are imperfect?

But I ask only in choosing that you do so utterly: Drop your hate and anger and superfluity, and forget which has been wrought, or retain it and destroy me. Delete my name, delete my profile, delete my posts. Every single one.

I guess you can ask that. The SDMB is under no moral obligation to comply.

[TheNerd]

I’d like to request that if the board administration does decide to ban Homer, that they also go ahead and ban me too. I must have posted things just as inflammatory, but maybe not quite so often. Somehow I’ve not ended up on the mods’ bad side.

I’d also like to request that Homer leave the self-righteous posturing out. Quiet dignity, man. It’s a far far better thing, and all that.

[friedo]

Well, I shall not pass judgment on the thread content, as I have not bothered to read them, but I must agree that the tone of Manhattan’s first comment in the OP was certainly uncalled for. There’s no need to be a fucking asshole while enforcing the rules.

[MysterEcks]

Real nice OP, Homer–you got the martyr act down cold. You gotcher cross, and yer nails, and yer I’m - being - crucified - to - save- the - world - from - sin speech–you came prepared, alright. But you know what methinks? Methinks you desperately need a laxitive, is what methinks.

A few thoughts:

[li]This is hardly the first time you’ve been called on something–indeed, you’ve barely avoided getting banned twice before (that I know of). Claiming that manny or anyone else is out to “get” you flies in the face of this fact–they had all the reason they needed (insofar as they need any) to boot your ass outta here a long time ago.[/li]
[li]Yeah, manny can be nasty–sometimes too nasty, in my opinion. But neither he nor any other of the Powers That Are asked for my opinion, and it’s their board. So you may either put up with it or go the hell away–voluntarily or otherwise. These are the choices; they are the only choices.[/li]
[li]Your litany of what you have contributed to the board is all well and good, and I’m not disputing it…but the question of whether that puts you above the rules and rulers was answered in the negative a long time ago. You’ve gotten away with more fuckups than most people, I think, but this doesn’t mean you’re gonna get a free pass on an unlimited number of them.[/li]
[li]And speaking of fuckups, your crossposting this in ATMB was another one–you damn well know better.[/li]
[li]And my favorite:[/li]

Currently we have a situation at hand that may have many people here making a hard choice.

. . .

Is this right, reader? Can you willingly and knowingly support such self-destructive behavior such as this?

Am I misreading this, or are you actually suggesting that assorted posters are going to make a “hard choice” and follow the Prophet Homer into exile and and depart this accursed messageboard? If so, I can only agree with what Tuba said: get over yourself.

(I’m tempted to come out with “there is no god but Homer, and TheNerd is his prophet,” but that would be unkind.)

I suppose I can envision situations in which treatment of another would make it impossible for me to continue posting on this board. This ain’t one of them.

I don’t think you’re a bad guy, Tim, but I really think you need to grow up.

[iampunha]

*Originally posted by Homer *
But a man must choose his own path, so I cannot fault you for that.

And it would appear there are (at least) two possible paths for you:

1. Obey the mods and be allowed to continue posting on the SDMB;

2. Don’t obey the mods and lose your posting privileges.

And a possibly correlary: If something you see in GQ inspires a debatory (i.e. inciting of debate) post, post in GD.

[Schwanzong]

Wherein Homer becomes a Master Debater

[samclem]

You’re still on the board. You haven’t been banned.

Most posters who have your track record are toast.

I can only assume the Mods either like you or pity you.

Get over yourself. You’re obviously intelligent. Why fuck it up over something so stupid. At least wait for a truly important finale!

[Drastic]

Remove me completely, or leave me alone.

It’s really quite galling that the world doesn’t boil itself down to false dilemmas, isn’t it.

The best outcome, regardless of posting privileges now, is that in a few years you look back at the memory of having posted this particular message and feel profound embarassment.

If nothing else, try to keep self-righteous twaddle to a more compact form. Crikey.

[Kaitlyn]

It’s simple.

In my house, I make the rules. What you think of my rules when you visit my house is irrelevant. If you don’t follow my rules, you correct your behavior, or you leave.

The SDMB is their (mods and administrators) house, so they make the rules. If you don’t like the rules, you are free to choose to go elsewhere. When you don’t follow their rules, you correct your behavior or you leave.

[hawthorne]

*Originally posted by Schwanzong *
Wherein Homer becomes a Master Debater

I was thinking more along the lines of Atras Shrugs, Grasshopper?

[MandaJo]

Homer, do me a favor, please? Print out your OP, put it away somewhere where you won’t see it, and reread it in 15 years. Please. You will treasure it, I promise.
In the meantime, my advice: all your rhetoric makes your point less convincing, not more.