Oh, and Bub, regarding the CH:

IMO, one of the things that really hurt the vibe of the CH, and is still hurting it - a vibe that overall I also miss - was that unjustified attacks started to be made directly against individual persons.

Sadly, that is the way things have often gone in general: instead of having a real discussion on a point where there is a real difference of opinion, it is easier to just attack the person who has the opposing view.  That one might actually learn something from the person with the opposing view is no longer even considered.

Simply stated, I think that the Coffee House just isn't nearly as friendly a place as it used to be.  That alone can serve as a reason for people's departure.

Jonbouy

Beagle

drewfx1

Jonbouy

Bub


If someone PM'd you and didn't address it with the person that actually offended them, then it's their own fault. We all have a right to be here, and if we are offended by something, we should address it with the person offending them. Not go crying to someone else and let it fester.

This has not been the same place for quite some time now. I keep coming here hoping it will get back to what it was, but I think it's too late. It's pretty clear it's not going to be the same place it was.

Gotta go stare out the window until the wife gets home. Makes for long days I tells ya.

I'm so with you here Bub, wasn't it a previous intervention of the moral police that killed off all the free flowing wit and repartee that used to constantly buzz around this place?

No.

It was people ridiculously overreacting to them.

My rememberance wasn't of of "moral police" in the sense of people being offended with threads being questioned.  it was simply what some "didn't like"
 
objections were (not an exhaustive list): 
too many "ya" and +1 responses
too many mash up threads
too many threads without a "real" subject (according to the one complaining)
too much "baffoonery"
 
there were many other complaints.  but the complaints were not based on anything "moral" - it was based on a perceived problem with the direction of the forum from a few individuals.  I could name them, but I have no wish to invoke that incantation.
 
those who would complain about the subjects I've listed above are not complaining about the morality of the forum.  they were just complaining that it wasn't what they wanted.

I guess I have to recheck my understanding of what 'morality' means then.
 
I'm thinking it is a code of conduct applied to a society in general, characterised by the fact that it changes over time and is never constant .

Sorry, I guess I was adding a perception of offensiveness?
 
none of the complaints at the time were directed at anything offensive, just "buffoonery" where, by the complainers, an atmosphere of cliquishness prevented people from wanting to post.

I'm offended by the whole pussification of America.
Everything is so watered down and protected and apologized for and homoginized and censored and lawyered up and just plain old hid from or not mentioned at all just because there happens to be some wimps present.
Nauseating.

Beagle


none of the complaints at the time were directed at anything offensive, just "buffoonery" where, by the complainers, an atmosphere of cliquishness prevented people from wanting to post. 

Have they updated their reasons for not wanting to post?

Don't really see them around here much. Was it something I said?

timidi


I'm offended by the whole pussification of America.
Everything is so watered down and protected and apologized for and homoginized and censored and lawyered up and just plain old hid from or not mentioned at all just because there happens to be some wimps present.
Nauseating.

Thank your lucky stars you live in a country which is still proud to fly it's own flag. In Britain, it is now considered "offensive" to fly the Union Jack, because apparently minorities are "offended" by it (although as I suspect, the vast majority of them aren't). 

drewfx1

Beagle


none of the complaints at the time were directed at anything offensive, just "buffoonery" where, by the complainers, an atmosphere of cliquishness prevented people from wanting to post. 

Have they updated their reasons for not wanting to post?

Don't really see them around here much. Was it something I said?

woohoo - you managed to offend someone Drewfx

Jonbouy, I actually largely agree with you, and on a personal level, it is Beagle's comment that I also most take to heart, and that I think is spot on.

On a personal note, it actually takes quite a lot before I actually get "offended".  I do sometimes think that the quicker one takes offense, the less secure one is with one's own beliefs/personality.

Regarding the change in the CH, it was more the personal attacks that I found/find troubling, particularly when so much of the initial vitriol was leveled (unjustly, IMO) directly against Bapu and Beagle.

Again, as stated in my last post, that one seemingly can no longer have a direct discussion over a point of real difference, without it degenerating into personal attacks is what I find so troubling.

Before the decline in the CH started, those sorts of personal attacks simply did not exist (at least as far as I knew), and it is the influx of those sorts of attacks, and the resulting loss of much of the "light banter among friends" that IMO have really negatively impacted the CH.

IMO, one of the things that really hurt the vibe of the CH, and is still hurting it - a vibe that overall I also miss - was that unjustified attacks started to be made directly against individual persons.

 
Who decides the justification for calling someone out or not?
 
If one talks like an ass I consider it my duty to express an opinion...I appreciate the favour being returned with as much frankness an honesty as I would give.
 
Being stuffed up with passive anger and tag-teaming behind the scenes isn't my style although I understand that others prefer that course of action.
 
If I have something to say I tend to say it, that is the justification so how can anyone say that is then unjustified.
 
It's unjustified if I'm lying, giving mis-information or otherwise being untrue to myself or just plainly insulting a person for the sake of it.  I tend to put points forward which relate to what has been posted rather than an individual themselves, sometimes those comments are based on experience of what a particular individual might post but not on the individual themselves.
 
So again we ask who is the arbitrator for 'unjustified'?  And I am engaging what you've have written here or am I unjustified for disagreeing with it? 

noldar12


Oh, and Bub, regarding the CH:

IMO, one of the things that really hurt the vibe of the CH, and is still hurting it - a vibe that overall I also miss - was that unjustified attacks started to be made directly against individual persons.

Sadly, that is the way things have often gone in general: instead of having a real discussion on a point where there is a real difference of opinion, it is easier to just attack the person who has the opposing view.  That one might actually learn something from the person with the opposing view is no longer even considered.

Simply stated, I think that the Coffee House just isn't nearly as friendly a place as it used to be.  That alone can serve as a reason for people's departure.

Sorry, I don't agree with you Jim - it has become fractious today but it is usually a pretty friendly place. 
There is still a core of people who frequent the CH that are fun and chatty and would welcome anyone to post and join in on any thread.
It's like anything though, there's always trouble if you look for it :)

It's like anything though, there's always trouble if you look for it :)

 
Trust Daryl to start a fight!!!