So, is it my understanding, then, that what you really want is to change the way this board has run, successfully and relatively happily, for many more years than you have been a member? Why?
OK
I think the same could be said for all of us, and yet you are here, trying to get others to please you. 
In this case, I was giving you some advice on how to seem a little less snotty to other posters, which MIGHT help you make your case. Sorry you don’t find it helpful.
Nah, it was minor and I was wrong. I wouldn’t even be able to find it at this point.
I actually respect people that use clear logic to show me when I am wrong. I believe Quiddity might be immune to this failing of mine. 
Geez, Sarahfeena tries to gives some polite observations and look at the responce from* “Miss Goodness and Light”. *
Jim
Oh, okay. I was a bit perturbed – here I was thinking I was a Pit virgin, and all the time I’d had a swiving and forgotten it? :dubious: :eek: :mad:
The “off his meds” is a personal offhand shorthand for “there he goes again” when Good Lib loses control and Bad Lib lashes out, behavior which, whatever its genesis, is something he does have rational control over and is responsible for. Generally I don’t much care about him at this point, other than being exasperated when yet another perfectly good thread gets derailed by his antics. The rat patrol thing was so unexpected and so extremely vicious that my initial reaction was a punch-to-the-gut feeling, but by the time I’d finished reading it I was laughing. Which, yes, is unkind; I sincerely do believe that Lib has certain, shall we say, character flaws which are exacerbated by the Pit. I’m among those who believe it would be better for his mental health if he stayed out of here. But he’s a big boy and this is something that is within his rational control.
If anything, I am not hurt but disappointed that he continues to indulge his worst traits to the point where whatever positives he can bring to this board are too deeply overlaid with the negatives to matter worth a damn to me any more.
Sorry, but now I am picturing **Lib ** as Smeagol and Gollum.
Pay attention:
Dopers love to argue.
Dopers despise being lectured to.
You think you’re doing the first; you in fact are doing the second, and you are reaping the consequences.
Setting the bar really low tonight, eh? 
Oh, crap; me too; now I can see them fighting for control of the keyboard. :eek:
Somewhere in there is a passable joke involving “Limbo” and “the Pit,” which I am too lazy, and drunk, to make.
Didn’t say I was on the path. Nor that I’m buddhist. I said specifically that I am not.
Said that 1) people ought to be nicer to people and 2) disliking someone doesn’t mean you ought to try to hurt the person.
And I say that people, people who need people, are the luckiest people in the world.
And you seem to have missed the part where I agreed. That doesn’t appear to satisfy you so I asked what else you’d have me do.
Well perhaps that was what you inferred but I didn’t imply it. The point was there are tiresome things and one does them anyway.
‘bludgeoning’? Any reason you’re going for hyperbole?
To you, maybe. It wasn’t. Again with the imputing motive.
See, there’s this crazy fact that everybody is different and has a different opinion. And that your opinion is not mine.
You’re no fun at all I think I’d look great in a uniform; navy blue is a good colour on me.
In all earnestness, I submit to you that this behavior is expected in this forum, and therefore part of the unspoken contract of posting in this forum is that you may be subjected to this kind of treatment.
What you are doing is kind of like jumping into a boxing ring to stop the fight, because you think people shouldn’t hit each other. You may not like to watch it, but the appropriate response to that is to not watch it. The appropriate response is NOT to try to stop the fighters. They are there on their own free will & volition, knowing full well what the consequences are.
In all seriousness, these are very legitimate points. Too bad you had to make them in a fashion that got people’s backs up and insulted them. If you piss people off, they don’t listen to you.
Perhaps, then, you should seek some more information; you are not coming across as well-informed to mean on what it would me to be informed by Buddhism.
Daniel
So this is extreme posting? If I were to post one line and get roasted to bits by a couple dozen posters who attacked me personally, that’s just ducky?
Even though in this case all Liberal did was answer a question?
One of the things I’ve tried to do is get behind the whys of this - why do people think it’s ok to attack a person personally. Leave aside that the rules appear to not forbid it - why do it? That’s what I’m trying to get a handle on and I’m not finding answers.
Not please me, go easy on each other and, as a corollary, on themselves.
It’s two letters. An expression I use. No different to my mind from an emoticon. It’s not even close to :eek: or :rolleyes: . It’s just a kind of ‘I think you’ve missed something’.
To be fair to all, her intended points should actually have read: Juvenile vultures and rude, arrogant, obnoxious, annoying, militaristic, obsecenely nasty out of control athiests should be nicer to Liberal. Oh yeah, and you shouldn’t try to hurt other people and grow the fuck up and don’t behave like you’re in high school.
Sort of like saying, “Why can’t you be nicer, you fucking piece of shit?”
Reminds me very much of this gem from Liberal, as I took note of here.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more there are a lot of similarities between QG and Liberal.
I’ve asked a few questions: ‘why pile on?’ and ‘how is it ok to attack a person because you don’t like what the person does?’. I’ve expressed what I think about it and that I hadn’t seen any arguments that provided satisfactory answers to either.
Now, I may be nuts, but to me that’s not a ‘lecture’. I am interested in the whys of this and have participated by giving my thoughts on the answers I’ve gotten.