Catalogue of Abuse

[Desmond Shang]

As Prokofy and others have so often pointed out, you have to respond to griefing or it gets worse. It certainly does not "go away" simply because one ignores it.

Sometimes it does!

If this wasn't griefing, then I don't know what is:

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airc ... onley.html

...and it went away due to the incredible lack of response - read the article!

Ignoring is also a powerful parenting technique used to deal with toddlers. Never respond to a tantrum! The attention, yea, even the negative attention, just fosters more tantrums.

Forum drama... y'know if it is just ignored... it kinda dies. Hard to have an argument with nobody responding.

Now, how many of you will bet that *EVERYBODY* will ignore this post? grin

[Sudane Erato]

Now, how many of you will bet that *EVERYBODY* will ignore this post? grin

Well, I, at least, am in *complete* agreement!

Sudane.........................

[Cindy Ecksol]

In order to say that I think the ThePrincess acts like a troll, I have to name her.

Our point in taking the "ad hominem" pledge, Danton, is that arguments that do nothing but name a person, tag them, and then attack him/her on the basis of the tag alone are not particularly productive. What IS productive is to calmly detail the arguments made (or not) by a person and refute them with logic. No matter what you think of her "style" ThePrincess certainly has raised important points, and we would do well as a community to consider them rather than ignore them because of "who" is putting them forward and how.

And I say that the people who are supporting ThePrincess are making it easier for her to troll, and are therefore griefing themselves. She does not even have to defend herself, so many people are rushing forward to do that for her! It is thus entirely appropriate that I name those people also. And I therefore state that as far as they are supporting the trolling and griefing of ThePrincess, the following people are griefers themselves: Sonja, Cindy, MT, Bromo and Beathan.

Wow, that's sounding like QUITE a catalog of respected citizens, and I am proud to be included in such good company. I suppose I could come up with a list of people who are "supporting" someone else who looks like a "griefer" to me, but I have a better idea. Danton, if you'll just name two more people you think are "supporting" ThePrincess (not sure what "support" means, but I'll let you define it), we'd have enough to start our own faction. Or maybe there are a couple of volunteers out there? There's time enough between now and June to get organized if we start now....

Cindy
<thinking that all we need is a catchy name for our new faction...>

[cleopatraxigalia]

regarding abuse:

cutting and pasting chat is a breach of toss, and after a meeting is over and no longer recorded is not fair game..

also.............pats chat logs and comments are taken out of context.. and anyone knows that.........sorry anyone had to be subject to that by him.

what a sad thing that he still wants to create bad emotions here for people....

cut and paste that pat

( lets be postiive guys......................we have so much potential. If you disagree with someone.. talk to them and try to see their side.... aruge and learn about each other .. we have a melting pot of nations, races, cultures and socioeconomic class that would never find itself together in any other venue so lets embrace that and learn to know each otehr and stop fighting....... if you have an enemy engage in conversation with them and try to see their side.. pat IM me and stop this sillyness.. its not healthy for anyof us

hold hands and sing kumbaya

[cleopatraxigalia]

Danton,

I am just curious about this statement and where it stands on the ad hominom continuom:

or how ever you spell it..........

in the RA meeting Danton said he is opposed to my bil about volunteers because I wrote it............

i will add the exact words when i find them from RA transcripts.. but...........can someone explain this, and the IM i sent him was not harrasing but a conversation to find out why he thought that. Danton seems to say a lot about me that doesnt fit with what i think is true about me, my stance on things, my motivations, for example, so someone please explain this to me

thank you sonja for the wiki, it says a lot! may the wise understand

[Beathan]

TP --

Here is a link to a list of logical fallacies I compiled in college, which others have picked up and improved in the years since.

http://education.gsu.edu/spehar/FOCUS/E ... lacies.htm

It is quite good, if I can say so myself.

Beathan

[Danton Sideways]

My latest contribution to this debate can be found on my blog:

http://dantonsideways.blogspot.com/2008 ... -away.html

Comments are most welcome there.

Would Beathan consider this message to be a logical fallacy?

[Beathan]

Danton --

Not the post, but the continued grouping of me with NuCARE is a fallacy of Accident or Hasty Generalization (grouping me with NuCARE because I happen to share a common cause with them on one or two issues, despite the fact that I oppose them with equal frequency).

Beathan

[Justice Soothsayer]

Here is a link to a list of logical fallacies I compiled in college, which others have picked up and improved in the years since.

http://education.gsu.edu/spehar/FOCUS/E ... lacies.htm

It might save us all a lot of time if you could simply number these. That way we can just refer to them by number when referring to each others' posts, like this old joke:

A 22-year-old kid is sent to a maximum security prison for larceny. Benefiting from a cliché often found in prison stories, he ends up with an older, veteran cellmate who takes a liking to him and helps him get acclimated to prison life. The first night in the cell block, the kid hears something strange. Other prisoners are calling out numbers in the darkness.

"Sixteen!"

All the prisoners laugh, except for the new kid.

"Twenty-five!"

More laughter. And so on. The kid asks his cellmate to explain what everyone's laughing at.

"Well, at night, we've got nothing better to do than to tell jokes."

"But they're not jokes. They're just numbers."

"That's all you know. Thing is, we've all been here so long that we've heard all each other's jokes so often that we've memorized them. So rather than tell the whole joke again, we've numbered 'em all. Now we just remind each other of the joke by calling out the number."

"Huh. Can I try it?"

"Knock yourself out, kid."

So the kid calls out, "Eleven!"

Silence.

He tries again. "Twenty-two!"

There's just one half-hearted chuckle, and it dies quickly. The kid turns to his cellmate and says, "I don't get it. What's going wrong?"

The cellmate shakes his head. "Some people can tell a joke, and some can't."

[Beathan]

LOL --

Brilliant! That would save time.

Beathan

[Jon Seattle]

--------

[Cindy Ecksol]

I believe this qualifies as an example of the "straw man fallacy" -- check it out on Beathan's list. It's also a violation of the Terms of Service, as Jon has posted an out-of-context and edited transcript rather than the entire in-context conversation. I've asked him to remedy the problem, and hope I won't have to take further action.

Cindy

Our point in taking the "ad hominem" pledge, Danton, is that arguments that do nothing but name a person, tag them, and then attack him/her on the basis of the tag alone are not particularly productive. What IS productive is to calmly detail the arguments made (or not) by a person and refute them with logic.

Oh, I very much agree! Since you gave me permission to do what I wished with the transcript of the conversation, I would bring up a good example, when you were circulating and talking to a number of people within the CDS about Pat:
--------EDITED------

[Beathan]

Jon --

Skepticism of a leader's motives is not an ad hominem attack. It is legitimate to be skeptical of the motives of a person in power, especially when there is evidence of overt partisanship at the expense of the community and the functioning of government.

Cindy --

I don't think that this is a straw man. Rather, it is a case of special pleading (a CSDF speciality -- Lord knows, I've had my motives challenged enough, but I don't consider such questions to be illegitimate personal attacks) and of Ignoratio Elenchi (an attempt to prove that you wrongly attacked Pat from evidence that shows that you merely expressed sound and appropriate concerns about his behavior as LRA).

Beathan

[Justice Soothsayer]

In other words, #33, not #34.

[Jon Seattle]

-----