Thread: Ultimate Test of Civility ~ 2nd Amendment

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.

Bill, I told you on a number of occasions that you were being abusive to people instead of discussing issues. This response is typical. As a moderator, I could have deleted things you said or even had some action taken against you, but I didn't because I didn't want you to think that I was doing it because we disagreed. I respect disagreement, and I can argue all you want, but this is nothing but a personal attack, and it doesn't belong here.

I told you at the end of the thread (before your outburst) what I thought of the way you were treating people, and I did it in a controlled way. The delay in your response and it's extreme nature makes me wondeer about you. If you want to talk and argue facts and opinions, I'm happy to accomodate you, but I'm not going to get into a name calling contest.

I respect all people and all views. I won't block someone because I disagree with them.

I'm not going to do anything because I'm involved, but I hope some other moderator will give you the response you deserve and delete that last post.

We've had enough craziness, and I warned you quite few times here. I'm not going to encourage it anymore by responding to your outburst.

Originally Posted by JLStorm

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.

I know you're trying to be fair, but I think the simple answer is he doesn't have to read something, even if he can't block it.

Obviously, he's spent lots of time reading my posts in another thread, and nobody forced him to do that. He quoted one sentence out of context in a very long post, and took great offense to it as personal attack. But note, even in that quote I'm talking about issues and attacking issues and points of view with other facts. He obviously can't tell the difference between exchanging ideas, even in strong terms, and name calling. An attack on his belief becomes a personal affront.

I warned him any number of times about personal attacks and brow beating other posters, and I bent over backwards not to act against him as a moderator. Instead, I just took him on and his abusive posts as another member.

This business about blocking people is a red herring and an excuse to vent. Don't you see that?

Originally Posted by b0000urns

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."

That's interesting. I never had a negative point of view about bearing arms. My position is that it is a personal Constitutional right, but not an unlimited one. I have not said anything negative in this thread about the right to bear arms.

My main conflict with Bill came about because of the way he was treating posters, like Ilija, and one issue about a character in a movie being a murderer. I finally gave him some personal feedback at the end. This was in the form of his lack of civility, which is what the thread was all about.

Originally Posted by urleebird

They finally pushed my "fed up" buttons.

convenient

While we argue on and on about whether or not people should have access to firearms we engage in a fool's argument. In Canada we have more guns per capita than in the US but much less gun violence. It's cultural. How we deal with the powerful knowledge of destructive weapons has at least as much to do with guns in our society as how many there are. It's about how we educate our youth and our community on these important topics. 'America' has been doing badly on that front and that's why there are issues about guns. It's shown well in Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore's outstanding documentary.

X

The test of civility has failed. This thread is now closed.