Thread: Ultimate Test of Civility ~ 2nd Amendment

Three-way circle jerk, you mean. I kind of agreed with both of them, remember.

Bill, this post is crazy! CRA-zy. Why you gotta put your finger in the eye of anyone who dares disagree with you? Have you been smoldering about this for since Thanksgiving?

BTW, I dig the new avatar. You look like Dennis Hopper. Another crazy SOB

Originally Posted by urleebird

I also think it is time for you and Ilija-the-Spirit-Guide to turn in your moderator caps if you are going to burden everyone with your own personal bias and insults. Moderators need to be neutral. Neither of you seem to be able to tell us what you think without insulting someone or bombarding us with stupidity. (Oh, please... ask me where) Neither of you are as smart as you think you are. Ilija is just young, educated, and ignorant. If he would actually listen instead of blab all the time, he may learn something eventually. He does have some good points... I think he has a good heart. I just don't want him in charge of ANYTHING! And I don't want to read him anymore.

Bill, just because we are moderators doesn't mean that we do not have the right to have personal opinions and that we're compelled to become robots without personalities. As long as we behave within the guidelines there are no conflicts of interest. We are not adding infractions or taking away access privileges from people whose political/legal/religious opinions we do not agree on.

Bill,

You stated, "Moderators need to be neutral." I don't have a vested interest in this thread. Topics like this are sure to stir the pot, but this is quickly becoming too much. I'm likely to draw fire for this but so be it.

You are a valuable member of the forums, and you've forgotten more about fixing razors than I know. You freely give advice to folks and create some real masterpieces.

It is possible to have an intellectual conversation and spirited debate without name-calling and insults at a personal level. This does nothing to support your case or further your cause. This applies to everyone involved in this thread.

Originally Posted by urleebird

• I can't believe you are so friggin' stupid.
• Maybe if I put it in bigger letters, you will catch on.
• What confrontation have you ever faced? My guess it was spitting at returning veterans from Vietnam at your local airport.
• I also think it is time for you and Ilija-the-Spirit-Guide to turn in your moderator caps if you are going to burden everyone with your own personal bias and insults.
• The way you think... you should not be allowed to interpret a single word of the Constitution. 35 years? So what... it takes some people longer to catch on than others.
• Where does it say that your word is the one that counts? You arrogant puke...
• I know when I have insulted someone... you are so into yourself, you may not know any better.

I am proud of who I am and what I do and the things I have accomplished and how I treat people. (bold is mine, not Bill's, added for emphasis)

I do think you are capable of treating your fellow members of the forum better than this. Like many others, I like reading a lot of stuff here even if I'm not commenting on it.

I don't agree with everyone's views, but let's disagree about things in a civil manner.

Originally Posted by urleebird

Let the debate begin... I promise to be nice on this thread

.........

Originally Posted by sensei_kyle

Bill,

You stated, "Moderators need to be neutral." I don't have a vested interest in this thread. Topics like this are sure to stir the pot, but this is quickly becoming too much. I'm likely to draw fire for this but so be it.

You are a valuable member of the forums, and you've forgotten more about fixing razors than I know. You freely give advice to folks and create some real masterpieces.

It is possible to have an intellectual conversation and spirited debate without name-calling and insults at a personal level. This does nothing to support your case or further your cause. This applies to everyone involved in this thread.




I do think you are capable of treating your fellow members of the forum better than this. Like many others, I like reading a lot of stuff here even if I'm not commenting on it.

I don't agree with everyone's views, but let's disagree about things in a civil manner.

Now go back and quote all the insults from those two that were directed specifically at me. It's OK if they do it? Why wasn't it too much when Lerch, through insinuation, basically said I had the heart of a murderer? Bullshit. Just because I put it in plain english, I'm out to lunch... I don't think so.

Originally Posted by xman

.........

They finally pushed my "fed up" buttons.

Originally Posted by FiReSTaRT

Bill, just because we are moderators doesn't mean that we do not have the right to have personal opinions and that we're compelled to become robots without personalities. As long as we behave within the guidelines there are no conflicts of interest. We are not adding infractions or taking away access privileges from people whose political/legal/religious opinions we do not agree on.

That's just it... neither you are behaving. I don't want to read what you say. Make it so I can block you two and I'll be happy.

Every person, regardless of how little you like him, moderator or member, has just as much right to be here and express their views as you. If you're going to have a debate, you have to listen to the other guy.

You're the one who's resurrecting this thread from 2.5 weeks ago. That's why I quoted you. Sorry you feel I singled you out.

If this is about the ultimate test of civility, let's demonstrate some.

Originally Posted by urleebird

I said that no one changes their mind on issues like these.

At the start of this thread I thought there were too many guns in this country and they should be further restricted. I usually vote for Democratic party candidates, and on many issues consider myself to be a liberal. However, after reading many of the posts here, and thinking about the opinions stated, I have changed my mind. I will probably never own a firearm, but if any other law abiding person wants to, then I don't think the people have given the government the right to not allow that person to own one. If enough people want to outlaw guns, then ammend the Constitution. Until that day, my opinion on this matter is now "Hey Government, mind your own business."

Originally Posted by dylandog

Three-way circle jerk, you mean. I kind of agreed with both of them, remember.

Bill, this post is crazy! CRA-zy. Why you gotta put your finger in the eye of anyone who dares disagree with you? Have you been smoldering about this for since Thanksgiving?

BTW, I dig the new avatar. You look like Dennis Hopper. Another crazy SOB

I know you did disagree. I don't mind when someone disagrees and I don't care if you decide to make it a three-way. I don't normally agree with you and I don't agree with Kees and I don't agree with Bruno, but you guys don't act like these two. I can respect your views because you present them as such... views.

The only person on this thread who deserves an apology is Kees because I actually do think he's smart... I just don't agree with just about every sentence he wrote. He just happened to write it in tandem with the other two and caught fire for it.

In regards to the finger in the eye, mine is up front. Both of them just try to be clever about it, or did you miss something? Here's what brought this whole thing back up for me. Go look at the thread on Freedom... I didn't even want to get involved in that conversation, but I knew the behavior was the same over there... find post #57. In it. Lerch says:

So give me a break with this utter nonsense. It's a religiously based, reactionary concept that's an embarrassment to true conservativism.

Who the hell is he to say something like that? That's not a personal attack? And that's why I called him an arrogant puke. He never changes. I guess calling him a puke is more of a personal attack than pretty much staying quiet over him saying that I am no better than a murderer and shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. That wasn't just a personal jab, it was an attack on my integrity and the heart of my soul.

Why, all of a sudden, did my latest post create a stir when the personal attacks from those two were flowing like a broken high pressure gas main in my direction? Now, I'm a bad guy because I say I don't like either of them and want to turn them off?

My whole point is I want to be able to shut them off like I could have for you or Bruno or Kees. (I haven't because you guys don't piss me off... I didn't say that because I think you care if I shut you off or not.) I can't shut them off because the system won't let me due to the moderator status. And if I can't change the channel, I'm gonna turn off the TV.

Without playing the whole blame game and getting caught up in the current drama, I think that the main point here is that Bill is upset because he doesnt have the ability to block people who are moderators the same as he can with every other user. I dont think he is saying that people shouldnt be able to say things that upset him, but that if they can say it he should have the ability to ignore those posts and the users. I have never wanted to block anyone, but I could see how it would upset me if I wanted to but couldnt. I suppose moderators, including myself, should probably keep this in mind while posting. God knows I am emotionally tied to this issue and very dedicated to my 2nd amendment rights, but perhaps I should have toned down my responses due to the extra responsibilities and priviledges I have as a moderator.

So, while I dont really have an answer for Bill as to what could be done about being unable to block a moderator or admin, I do understand why he would feel so frustrated about it.

Bill,

I, for one, hope you don't "turn off the TV." Just go get yourself a cold beer and a tasty snack during those annoying commercial interruptions.

Whatever Christie and Chuck are sellin', I ain't buyin' anyhow....



Scott