start a new thread to continue long dialogues, whenever we reach 99 posts

whoever was wanting to post #100 could do it

it would also imply that we should actually decamp to the new site together

And that the flatliners notified the threadnodists that it was about time for it.

Mav, inselpeter raises an issue far more important than "lenth", and his issue should not be hijacked.

I have a problem. I did not know if I should write a personal message or if I should bring it in the open. As uncomfortable as this is, I want to say this in the open because it concerns the Board.

I am extremely uncomfortable with the numerous recent posts written up by one of our longstanding contributors, expressing strong political opinions. I am sure he feels totally justified.

I am not saying he is wrong, nor am I saying he is right. I simply feel that this Board is not the place to be voicing these thoughts or to vent so much.

I think that one of the reasons that this Board thrives with so many divergent personalities is that we have, by and large, decided to keep our pet hates to ourselves, unless they are word-related. I hope that everybody will see the advantages of continuing such a practice.

General: as a first-personal step, *I will try not to be prolix. ;)

**

While this thread is no more mine than anyone's, as its originator I would like to suggest that the tone be kept as cordial as possible. I am not one to brush disagreements under the carpet, but I do believe in resolutions to them, where advisable. I cannot claim it my unbroken practice, but I do think it best to keep communication open and respectful. A degree of care--something all of us generally show--is advisable. Almost anything of value that can be said here can be said with neither anger nor censor. For myself, it has not always been easy being here, but I can say the trend has been the ups. -- Concerns of all kinds, large and small, have a place here.

***

I have found that standing on one's head is easier south of the Equator.

Good night.

Max, thank you. Please be so good as to consider the post amended to replace "one" with "at least one". I had said, accurately, that I am upset by the particular posts from one such member. But you are quite right that question raised is more general.)

It would seem that the greater the number, the greater the problem (if any) posed thereby. Max, I would be most interested in your views on that problem.

K:

I plead guilty to having posted many things with political opinions in the last ten days or so. In asking for a lenient sentence I will say only that so far as I can remember I was always responding to someone, never once starting a thread or subthread.

I don't think, though, that I have brought forth a pet hate to share with or perhaps more accurately inflict upon the citizens of this little community. If I have, I apologize unreservedly.

TEd

Lord have mercy, you-all: this is old ground. Are we now reduced to disagreeing about how we disagree? I think I've said this before, but.    It is my belief that the attack on the 11th warrants negating, for the time being, my previous opposition to having political posts on a language bulletin board. There is a thread in Miscellany especially for that purpose, now (hint). I will say again that I have been nothing but impressed by the courtesy and consideration shown by all, right up to this very post.

Jackie, you're quite right that this is the same "old ground" you so eloquently re-introduced in your "personal plea" thread. The recent events may make it all the more important that for our political threads, we all be re-sensitized to the concerns you expressed there.

I too have no objection, in these extraordinary times, to "political" posts as such. I pray they be expressed with civility that brings us together, not with a vehemence that drives us apart.

TEd, I personally have had no problem with your posts, probably because in large part I happen to agree with them. But I fear that some of my own posts may have been so expressed as to offend at least some others on the board. and for that I too apologize.

TEd, I personally have had no problem with your posts, probably because at least some part I happen to disagree with them.

.. but then if you can't have a good argument with friends, then who can you argue with ...

From what I've been reading in the US and world press there are plenty of conflicting views in there now, I don't feel personally responsible for pointing out a few points of view from other parts of the world any more.

I don't feel personally responsible for pointing out a few points of view from other parts of the world any more.

Thanks, Jo. :-) Love you!

2 brief points, Keiva:

1. My suggestion was a simple, practical issue of housekeeping - I suggested we keep threads below a 100 postings for quicker access.

2. I would suggest everything talked of by so many people here is intrinsically bound into the weft and warp of language; but if you don't like my views, you can avoid the thread entirely, or you can deal with it. Censorship is not an option in your power, thank goodness.

I second both notions.

There have been opinions very contrary to mine expressed, but a situation of this magnitude does tend to cause an equally large reaction.

i have tried to be open and listen, and rather than disagree, or comment, to simple voice my own opinion, in a neutral way.

i see peoples reactions growning out of there experiences. since we each have unique experiences, each opinion, is valuable. my contributions, i hope, do for others, as their opinions do for me.. give me a glimpse of a different way of thinking, which i can consider, explore, accept or reject.

but just hearing the opinions, even if i ultimately reject the perspective, is valuable.

i do believe the pen is a mighty septor than the sword, the war we must fight, must be one of words, maybe even more than one of arms. this forum, dedicated to words, has a vital part of remaking the world, as a safer, better place.

A few days ago I posted something to the effect that I felt like we were losing the board, as we have known it. [and was roundly castigated for that by some] I had vowed not to post again on the subject; but hell, I break resolutions all the time and here is an open opportunity staring me in the face.

Actually, there have been some rather nasty sentiments expressed here of late (although nothing prolonged). We have seen the return of an old political operative from Jerusalem. We have seen strangers pop in with patriotic pronouncements. We have seen old hands and members and such post almost exclusively on the Topic for ten days. This was once a refuge from the ol' day-to-day; now it sometimes seems like just another flame war, but with more civilized language.

Am I overstating the case? Overreacting? As someone stated above, we've been here before (although not with as much provocation). But people are paying less heed to the unwritten (and written) guidelines. We haven't been able to limit the venue. We haven't been able to close off long threads (there's always that one last point that has to be made threadnodically). We have reverted to using the easy oaths and (perhaps worse) shibboleths. So is that it? Are we become just another board?

tsuwm, while I concede you have a point - fings ain't wot they use ter be - I think you have to concede that these are unusual times.

For several of us here, the Board is a refuge from the day-to-day. It allows us to express our real opinions, not those expected by those we deal with on a day-to-day basis.

Most of us (including the "political operative from Jerusalem") actually like being able to express our opinions on something like the attacks on the US here. This will inevitably lead to disagreements politically, but what the hell, that's life, Jim, and just as we know it.

Yes, there has been a deemphasis on language per se, but it is quietly dying down. Two or three threads in I&A out of all the threads on the Board are all that seem to be devoted to it (not including this one).

We are the unfortunate victims of that old Chinese curse, "May you live in interesting times". We are. I have to admit that, politically again, I disagree with some of the opinions expressed here. Violently, I guess, in some cases. But I respect the people expressing them, including (making all kinds of assumptions here) the one who Keiva was jumping all over, inappropriately, I thought. It could have been me, after all.

The majority of us are still dealing with language in the other fora as "business as usual". This is a good thing, and proves that we've not all, overnight, become nothing but political opportunists!

The way I see it is a bit like going to work. Lets say that alongside our busy lives we all have a part time job contributing to an on-line dictionary, we have an office in a large building and we can go whenever it suits us. Sometimes we have more time, sometimes we have less time to spend. Some of us meet lots of other people each day in the rest of our lives, some of us don't get to meet many other people.

Most days we wander in, give everyone a quick nod, pick up a cup of coffee and head off to our office to "work" on Q&A, Miscellany, whatever, whether seeing if there are any replies to our last post or looking out for new posts.

If we really want to chat we should perhaps arrange to meet a friend for lunch, sometimes we do, sometimes it spills over into the working day.

What happened last week is that we all turned up to work and met on the stairs, discovered that someone was missing and spent a while trying to find them. After that we've been so wrapped up in the outside world, I won't rehash the events of the week, that we have come back in to work but rarely made it past the coffee machine. Some people are better than others at ignoring the huddle round the coffee machine and getting back to work. Others aren't. Assuming things get back to what passes for normal, then most people will get back to work, if not, we'll deal with the problem when it happens.

Mav says, 2 brief points, Keiva:
1. My suggestion was ... we keep threads below a 100 postings.
Which I suggested, and again suggest, hijacks the issue i'peter raised.

2. Censorship is not an option in your power, thank goodness.
Fully agreed -- but civil self-restraint is within my power, thank goodness.
Is it within yours?
I did not feel, IMHO, that your above reply to me achieved that courtesy.

Edited to clarify reference, as of Troy rightly notes. Inselpeter's post, orignating this thread, said in part: In these times, especially, we need to be able to disagree clearly and strongly, but to avoid rancor.

jmh - Well done analogy... except... never mind, back to work. Now... where's my desk?

Keiva, inselpeter's post has touched you, and you keep noting that your feel his main (or one of his main points)is being highjacked.. for those, like me who aren't thinking as clear as we should/could be, could you cut and paste from his post, to bring us back to target? i am a flat moder, and as threads get woven, i sometimes focus on the whole, not the starting point.

and while mav singled you out, i think he was being generic in his critisms. censorship is not in your power, or my power -- ain't life great? i work hard not to hate people, but have no trouble hating ideas, and censorship is one that i hate.. i have put my money where my mouth is on this issue..

but i do understand the issue. i have been upset not with the content, as much as i have been upset with the tone of some of the posts. i have all but been accused of being a racist for not agreeing its ok to call some people names.. after all, it was argued, they deserved it.
i don't think we should ever be calling each other rude names. no one, ever deserves to be ridiculed, even if they are wrong.

i know i don't always get my tone right (tone fall somewhere below spelling, and just plain being able to make sense. and i sometimes fail there too) but we can try.

>you keep noting that your feel his main (or one of his main points)is being highjacked..

"objections as to tone and subject--among other things--"

-ron obvious

That's essentially what I meant, tsuwm; I added a clarifying edit above, phrasing it somewhat differently.

<<IP's main original point:

I value this group of people--the forum in general, the opportunity to exchange ideas and talk about language, a number of friendships here. Nerves have been frayed. In the interest of maintaining the quality of *other threads, I thought--given the extraordinary circumstances--it might be good to have a thread in which to discuss certain issues that had been arising in various threads in another place. The main point was to preserve the quality of the discussions in those *other threads and thereby protect the forum as a whole.

The next sentence is meant to clarify my own position, only, and is not otherwise directed at any member, either in support or in scolding (neither of which I consider to have a place here). I do not consider points of housekeeping beyond the legitimate scope of members' concerns nor do I consider myself qualified to offer any but my own opinion what might or might not qualify as a legitimate concern in this forum.

There are those here with whom I've had differences of one sort or another. There is *not *one here whose presence I do not value.

Tsuwm, I respectfully disagree. The last week has been so entirely out of the ordinary that talking about events cannot constitute talking about the day-to-day. That said, as to my own contributions I do understand that concentration on the Topic can have been disturbing, and my thanks--and implicit requests for indulgence (or visa versa?)--have been genuine. It has required a lot to think about anything *other than what happened here and transformed the neighborhood where I live. I have tried to restrict my remarks to designated threads.

I really don't think the board is lost. The membership responded to a crisis in many important ways. I don't think anyone has lost their interest in language or their acuity.

For myself, I had planned never to post here again. Someone wrote me at my regular email address and asked me to assure the community here I was well. I was touched by their concern and I am very glad for the friendship I have found here, and found here again.

Since it was meant as a pressure valve, I hope this thread dies quickly from lack need.

I think that one of the reasons that this Board thrives with so many divergent personalities is that we have, by and large, decided to keep our pet hates to ourselves, unless they are word-related. I hope that everybody will see the advantages of continuing such a practice. And later: [Max,] I would be most interested in your views on that problem.
Max: Sorry, Keiva, but I have nothing to add on the subject.

Max, the first two sentences are, verbatim, language you yourself authored several months ago, in a previous contentious context. I was frankly expecting that you'd reaffirm them. Have your views changed? or do you feel this is an instance of "circumstances alter cases"?

inselpeter respectfully disagrees The last week has been so entirely out of the ordinary that talking about events cannot constitute talking about the day-to-day.

you can certainly disagree with any and all of my bloated opinions, but you shan't restate my awad raison d'être . I (speaking personally now) don't come here to vent, except about pet peeves with language (and one notable exception for which I remain unabashedly ashamed). I reserve the other stuff for jackie and a couple of others in PMs.
nor have I said anything which could be construed as a demand to stop it (although we have a couple of newly minted prime examples that might warrant that). I was merely asked, you will recall, for my opinion on the substance and quality of discourse. and that's still what I think.

Helen, it was most graceful of you to say, "Keiva, while mav singled you out, I think he was being generic in his criticisms." But mav will want to speak for himself and make, as TEd and I have done, such apologies or clarifications as he deems appropriate.

I was merely asked, you will recall, for my opinion on the substance and quality of discourse. and that's still what I think.
Well, now that I've prepared this box to type in, I can't get my thoughts in any kind of order. Will you all kindly bear with me, as this will be mostly stream-of-consciousness?
tsuwm, you say you don't come here to vent, except about language. A laudable decision. I think most of the rest of us make that same decision--most of the time. As my sweet insel. said, nerves are frayed by what has happened, and is happening. Its enormity has led us first, to be so thankful that our two NYC members are safe, then into further discussion of events, and then on over into politics and sure enough, that has led to discord (surprise, surprise). Now, on the one hand, it has been a valuable education to me to learn how people in other parts of the world think, but despite my valuing that, the cost has now become too high for me.

tsuwm, I don't know whether or not you come to this board as a refuge. I do, and some others (thank you) have posted that they have. I would very much like to see it go back to being that. The defamatory ambush on my beloved friend came as such a shock, that I don't feel that I can tolerate any more of the public "did too/did not" types of posts that have been appearing: MY nerves are too frayed. So if anyone feels that they need to clarify/defend their position, I would very much appreciate it if you carried that on with whoever the appropriate party is in private.
This is really starting to get to me, you-all.

I...I...so much has happened here, in I & A   
I mean, and so much of it is so important, I really don't feel that I can actually suggest that anything further on The Topic be switched over to Miscellany, but...there is at least one thread on it there already, and...especially if folks would take care to mark their posts' subject titles, that would allow me and any others who wish, to avoid reading what we would prefer not to. If you have managed to wade through this ramble, I thank you for your patience.

[some time back]Assuming things get back to what passes for normal, then most people will get back to work, if not, we'll deal with the problem when it happens.

furthermoreover, and in the second place, we currently have the eight "top topics" in I&A spawned from The Topic, not to mention the first of the attempts to move one of these to miscellany (which failed, only to be tried a second time here, but meanwhile going strong there), not to mention a couple more politically bent threads (Ghengis(?) Khan and Lincoln)....

this is getting back to normal?! rhetorical question

this is getting back to normal?! rhetorical question

Around here? Sure, rhetorically speaking.

I don't feel that I can tolerate any more of the public "did too/did not" types of posts

Second that emotion. Jackie, thy will be done.

And may I propose that if one feels (s)he simply must say "did not" or the like, that in lieu of long contention (which may engender counter-contention), we invent a simple one-word term to be used for the purpose? For which term I acronymically proffer WEED, standing for We Each Edit Discord.

>we currently have the eight "top topics" in I&A spawned from The Topic

Surely this is capitalism in action, I thought that we were supposed to support the notion of a free market. Here we vote with our posts, rather than cash. If we don't want to talk about the fact that 7,000 poor souls have died and ways that it could have been avoided/could be avoided in the future, then I think we'd be a pretty sad bunch. Come un tsuwm, we're not all so single minded and able to brush world events out of our heads, part of me wants to try and the other part of me can't while the WTC still burns and people are left unburied. I respect the point of view of those who prefer to hide in a cupboard, only discuss the matter with those who agree with them or prefer to discuss the matter elsewhere which means that I support the idea that discussion should be restricted to clearly marked threads and without personal abuse, so I'll carry on in white for those who don't want to read.

I might have spoken too soon about press coverage of the event in the USA. I did think that coverage in the New York Times, from what I saw online, was quite broad ranging. From what I've read in the last couple of days, television coverage in the USA has stuck to pretty well on side of the argument. Mind you, I understand that foreign affairs, rarely get covered in the sound bites that pass for television reporting. It was described in one report as "unpatriotic" to do anything else, I'm interested to hear from anyone if that really is the case {PM me if you think differently}. It is a strange loop, the television stations pump out one sided rubbish and then justify it by citing "media-led" public opinion. It happens here too, although flag waving has been pretty well taken over by the ultra right wing hating everyone who isn't a white thug National Front, so the flags don't get too much of an airing.

I hope that the story that a US radio station wasn't allowed to play "Imagine" was just another myth. If not, then freedom of speech really is worth fighting for, even if we end up with a few disagreements, anything is better than the "Sound of Silence".

So maybe the on-line airing of the past few day is just another representation of the culture difference that exists between those of us who would prefer not to be divided by a common language. I'll try to keep quiet but I'm with Helen, I'd rather hear views that I don't agree with than people not talk about it.

creeps out the door to discuss "orientated" with Jackie

creeps out the door to discuss "orientated" with Jackie
Ahem--let me "assist" you in getting out that door, my friend, so you can listen up and listen good: there ain't no such word, d'you hear me? T'ain't so such, no how--not in "proper" English, anyway!
There, tsuwm, a good and proper rant about language--what didja think?

Very good Jackie! even tho' SADLY deluded!!

But my bitterness at Keiva's post does not die, and is also directly language related. You are right Keiva: I did not extend you that courtesy because you used an extremely offensive tone and terminology in your post. In the light of the events in which thousands of us have lost friends and relations and when thousands more seem set to do so, to use the word “hijack “ in relation to my posting a simple housekeeping suggestion was either grossly stupid or grossly insensitive or both. An obvious alternative (if you had actually wanted to achieve a different outcome rather than merely get on your hind legs) would have been, for example, to pm me with the suggestion there might be a more appropriate slot somewhere else for the post which so irritates you by its placement.

And this, too, is relevant here because it is about how we conduct our dialogues.

With deep apologies

Keiva: you used an extremely offensive tone and terminology in your post.

My dear maverick, I WEED you loud and clear.

I regret my use of any word which you perceived as offensive to your ears. And reciprocally, I trust.

regarding jackie's post

or in the words of last night's broken fortune cookie, "purloin not the perlocution with unintended illillocution."

[post deleted by keiva, as being YART]

This is my one and only post to this thread.

I've watched developments with some disquiet. There is an attempt to censor topics implicit in it and I find that objectionable for all kinds of reasons. Discussing the attacks on NYC/DC among friends is the natural thing to do, and that's happened here in a small number of threads. You may whinge about it not being in Miscellany, but as far as I'm concerned that's the only complaint that holds any water and not much of it at that. It's been noticeable that the number of posts to I&A has increased over the past week or so. But most of them have either been to this thread or to Wow's response thread.

Strident voices will be raised from time to time in any forum, and a little humour always goes a long way towards calming things down. There are probably as many political/social viewpoints about the attacks as there are active members on the Board. Air them, by all means, I say. But don't slag off others because they disagree with you. Disagree, but don't insult. And if I've given offense in that regard, then please accept my apologies; it wasn't intended. I have disagreed strongly with several of the viewpoints aired here, but I shrug and say "well, that's not the way I see it" and carry on.

And, as Max has chosen to do, if you don't want to be involved in the discussions, well, there's Q&A about Words, Wordplay and Fun and Miscellany to spend your time in. The vast majority of the Board, in fact!

Okay, it's time to do my duty as a member. I will make the best effort I can to bury the monster post. Here we go.