|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 8:39:07 PM
|
|
|
Agahnim
Posts: 221
Joined: 2/27/2008
Status: offline
|
I was kind of worried this might happen. This thread has drifted so far off topic that I doubt any of the members of my community who decide to join this forum will want this to be the place where they introduce themselves. I know at least one member from there has joined this board already, but he’s not posting in this thread.
Oh well, I guess the only thing that really matters is that they participate in the debates here in general.
quote:
Christians here constantly call neo-darwinism fantasy and so on.
I've had a post of mine deleted for making a generalization that included a reference to bronze age mysticism and superstition.
My post was deleted and considered disruptive and false teaching.
I would say in this context the three words, mysticism, fantasy and superstition, are effectively synonymous.
When used to describe Christianity they are deleted. When used to describe well established fields of scientific study they are allowed.
What is this if it's not a double standard? Watch and see if this post isn't deleted.
Have you reported the offending posts? The moderators can’t deal with TOS violations if they aren’t aware of them.
_____________________________
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." --Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 8:46:44 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
That's the language I used and then you quoted someone else but said to me that I better keep that language off these boards.
The word you can be singular or plural. I guess that's one of the ambiguities of the English language. In other languages, they normally distinguish between singular and plural when they say the word you.
quote:
I'm sure this is all just a simple matter of confusion or mistaken identity or whatever but please read more carefully and notice that I've used no language whatsoever that needs to be kept off this site.
I never said you did.
quote:
Now there's a quote floating around from where Estan quoted you and came to my defense. Those are not my words yet I am quoted as having said them. And they are very harsh. That's why I asked you to change it and you didn't change it enough. You don't need to warn me about my lauguage at all, and changing it to double quotes does not make it clear enough that that is not me talking.
I think people around here are smart enough to understand the context of the quote.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 8:57:57 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
That's the language I used and then you quoted someone else but said to me that I better keep that language off these boards.
The word you can be singular or plural. I guess that's one of the ambiguities of the English language. In other languages, they normally distinguish between singular and plural when they say the word you.
You mean the word you can be a direct object or an indirect object, more commonly refered to as "you understood" when it is an indirect object such as "Once you've paid you give your application to the attendant". It has nothing to do with singular or plural. But if you're suggesting that the subject of this imperative sentence is an understood You, then you are ignoring basic message forum etiquette. When you quoted Raptorman, made it look like you quoted me, and wrote "I SUGGEST YOU keep that kind of language out of here" you were addressing ME and me only. The first person who read it was Estan and he came to my defense because he took it exactly as you wrote it, which was as if it was directed at me.
You could have said "I suggest we all keep that kind of language out of here" if you meant to address the boards and there was no need to quote me or anyone else to do it because what you were refering to was language used on a different site altogether.
Here's your free message board etiquettle lesson.
Lesson 1. When you quote someone on a message board it is assumed that you are talking directly to them.
Lesson 2. When you go out of your way to insert the "{quote}ORIGINAL: wayward1" before words that are written by someone else it looks like you're trying to discredit me and have it mistakenly perceived that those are my words.
Lesson 3. When someone asks you to fix such a thing and kindly suggests he is sure it was an honest mistake, you fix it.
quote:
I never said you did.
And I never said you did. I said if you read more carefully you'll notice that I didn't. What you did was suggest that I not use such language, thereby implying that I had. Why back peddle now?
quote:
I think people around here are smart enough to understand the context of the quote.
I am respectfully requesting that you edit it. If you refuse I will report it to a moderator for removal. Even if they can understand it, you made it look like it was my writing by clicking quote and then inserting the code "{quote}ORIGINAL: wayward1" before SOMEONE ELSE'S words.
The potential exists for other members to skip the post where those words actually originated and see only your post where it still appears as though you quoted me as having said those words. You misquoted me and I politely asked you to fix it. Now I'm asking again, ever so slighly less politely. Next I will ask for help in having it removed. I have no problem with you. I said I thought it was an honest mistake. But your refusal to fix it is a problem.
< Message edited by wayward1 -- 8/4/2008 9:14:28 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:11:22 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
The potential exists for other members to skip the post where those words actually originated and see only your post where it still appears as though you quoted me as having said those words. You misquoted me and I politely asked you to fix it. Now I'm asking again, ever so slighly less politely. Next I will ask for help in having it removed. I have no problem with you. I said I thought it was an honest mistake. But your refusal to fix it is a problem.
And evolutionists call me paranoid.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:12:58 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
The potential exists for other members to skip the post where those words actually originated and see only your post where it still appears as though you quoted me as having said those words. You misquoted me and I politely asked you to fix it. Now I'm asking again, ever so slighly less politely. Next I will ask for help in having it removed. I have no problem with you. I said I thought it was an honest mistake. But your refusal to fix it is a problem.
And evolutionists call me paranoid.
Will you fix it or not?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:14:29 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
You mean the word you can be a direct object or an indirect object, more commonly refered to as "you understood" when it is an indirect object such as "Once you've paid you give your application to the attendant". It has nothing to do with singular or plural.
Edit, deleted something.
quote:
pronoun, possessive your or yours, objective you, plural you; noun, plural yous.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/you?r=75
edit:
Interesting, I always learned (in high school and college) that in English you can be singular and it can be plural and that there is no word that distinguishes the two. Since when was the word "yous" added to the dictionary?
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/4/2008 9:21:00 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:22:47 PM
|
|
|
HHV5
Posts: 159
Joined: 7/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
The potential exists for other members to skip the post where those words actually originated and see only your post where it still appears as though you quoted me as having said those words. You misquoted me and I politely asked you to fix it. Now I'm asking again, ever so slighly less politely. Next I will ask for help in having it removed. I have no problem with you. I said I thought it was an honest mistake. But your refusal to fix it is a problem.
And evolutionists call me paranoid.
Uh...Not wanting to be misquoted is paranoia?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:25:21 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
Here is what Websters says
Main Entry: you
quote:
1 : the one or ones being addressed —used as the pronoun of the second person singular or plural in any grammatical relation except that of a possessive <you may sit in that chair><you are my friends><can I pour you a cup of tea>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:26:06 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
You mean the word you can be a direct object or an indirect object, more commonly refered to as "you understood" when it is an indirect object such as "Once you've paid you give your application to the attendant". It has nothing to do with singular or plural.
edit by wayward1: Deleted the something you meant to delete so you wouldn't look like a meany.
quote:
pronoun, possessive your or yours, objective you, plural you; noun, plural yous.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/you?r=75
You can be singular and it can be plural. In many other languages, they make the distinction. In English, they do not (which I think they should).
If that is actually how you meant it, then that is simply atrocious usage. I would never have taken a plural you from this sentence "I suggest you keep that kind of language out of here" when the sentence immediately followed a quote. That's the way a dialogue is established in a thread. I quote you. You quote me. We are talking to each other. I could only assume you meant it as an indirect subject because to mean it as plural you would almost have to hold English as a second language, learned only recently. It would be like taking my usage of "you" in the previous sentence as a plural "you". It's just not possible.
Oh and my degree is in English.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:26:38 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HHV5
Uh...Not wanting to be misquoted is paranoia?
The context of the thread makes it clear that I wasn't referring to him specifically and I added double quotes. He's being paranoid for thinking that I misquoted him when I didn't. I "fixed" it (again).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:32:02 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
I would never have taken a plural you from this sentence "I suggest you keep that kind of language out of here" when the sentence immediately followed a quote.
I think that, given the context of the thread, that's how it should have been taken. Nevertheless, I "fixed" it again. I should have originally put it in double quotes, double quotes would indicate that it's not you who said it as long as you aren't in the second quote.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:32:12 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: HHV5
Uh...Not wanting to be misquoted is paranoia?
No it doesn't. I'm really sorry about all of this. I was completely out of line and it won't happen again. It is important to take care to not misquote someone either accidentally or otherwise and when they ask to have it fixed you really should just fix it. I mean "you plural", as in we all. Sorry guys.
Sweet, thanks. Oh and you didn't fix it again, you finally fixed it for the first time.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:34:38 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
I would never have taken a plural you from this sentence "I suggest you keep that kind of language out of here" when the sentence immediately followed a quote.
I think that, given the context of the thread, that's how it should have been taken.
Then you should study and remember my message board etiquette lessons until you commit them to memory. A dialogue is established between two people when one person quotes another and then places text immediately below that quote, period. That's what everyone is expecting. That's how Estan took it. That's how anyone with more than a few posts on boards will take it. With a little over 50,000 posts on boards I have a pretty good idea how it goes.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:41:58 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
Then you should study and remember my message board etiquette lessons until you commit them to memory.
Who are you to tell me what constitutes message board etiquette?
quote:
A dialogue is established between two people when one person quotes another and then places text immediately below that quote, period. That's what everyone is expecting. That's how Estan took it. That's how anyone with more than a few posts on boards will take it. With a little over 50,000 posts on boards I have a pretty good idea how it goes.
Like I said, I should have originally put it in double quotes. It was fixed the first time. Estan knew you didn't say that and anyone else reading through these boards would have also known. You are making a mountain out of a molehill.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:49:47 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
No it doesn't. I'm really sorry about all of this. I was completely out of line and it won't happen again. It is important to take care to not misquote someone either accidentally or otherwise and when they ask to have it fixed you really should just fix it. I mean "you plural", as in we all. Sorry guys.
**Betta gets all paranoid because wayward1 misquoted him and demands that he changes that post***
(just kidding, most people here understand the context of this thread).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:55:34 PM
|
|
|
iluvatar
Posts: 1961
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
You mean the word you can be a direct object or an indirect object, more commonly refered to as "you understood" when it is an indirect object such as "Once you've paid you give your application to the attendant". It has nothing to do with singular or plural.
Edit, deleted something.
quote:
pronoun, possessive your or yours, objective you, plural you; noun, plural yous.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/you?r=75
edit:
Interesting, I always learned (in high school and college) that in English you can be singular and it can be plural and that there is no word that distinguishes the two. Since when was the word "yous" added to the dictionary?
Don't spend much time in NY, do you?
-Dan.
_____________________________
Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:57:29 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: iluvatar
Don't spend much time in NY, do you?
I live in California. Do they say "yous" in New York?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 9:59:13 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
No it doesn't. I'm really sorry about all of this. I was completely out of line and it won't happen again. It is important to take care to not misquote someone either accidentally or otherwise and when they ask to have it fixed you really should just fix it. I mean "you plural", as in we all. Sorry guys.
**Betta gets all paranoid because wayward1 misquoted him and demands that he changes that post***
(just kidding, most people here understand the context of this thread).
A misquote of harmless information is one thing. A misquote that contains defamatory and disruptive language is an entirely different thing, especially when you've already been warned a couple of times like I have. I appreciate that you fixed it, and as for who I am to tell you about board etiquette, I'm the guy that made you correct yours.
You still seem to not get it because you're still talking about the "context of the thread". You misquoted me. Then you directed a comment TO ME regarding the misquote. There is no amount of "thread context" that could make it clear to people that you were addressing every one instead of just me. Plain and simple. It is corrected now.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 10:04:05 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
...and as for who I am to tell you about board etiquette, I'm the guy that made you correct yours.
Congratulations, want a cookie?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 10:07:02 PM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
...and as for who I am to tell you about board etiquette, I'm the guy that made you correct yours.
Congratulations, want a cookie?
no thanks. I just had a snicker doodle my mom made.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 10:07:49 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
no thanks. I just had a snicker doodle my mom made.
Lol.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 10:43:47 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
Sweet, thanks. Oh and you didn't fix it again, you finally fixed it for the first time.
For the second time. It was fixed the fist time, just not to your satisfaction.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/4/2008 11:11:25 PM
|
|
|
Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1385
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
and there is a double standard... That's all I was really getting at.
This is coming from someone that thinks people are "lashing out" against him just because they disagree with him.
Even if there is a double standard, this is a privately funded Christian forum and, as such, we're allowed to have a double standard (but I do not encourage a double standard).
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 8/4/2008 11:17:40 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/5/2008 12:36:47 AM
|
|
|
wayward1
Posts: 231
Joined: 7/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bettawrekonize
quote:
ORIGINAL: wayward1
and there is a double standard... That's all I was really getting at.
This is coming from someone that thinks people are "lashing out" against him just because they disagree with him.
Oh the irony, and I repeatedly allow "lashing out" to go completely unmentioned from you lot. Otherwise nothing would get done. What I won't allow is defamation of my character.
quote:
Even if there is a double standard, this is a privately funded Christian forum and, as such, we're allowed to have a double standard.
Yeah no kidding. It's perfectly fine with me. It's so ridiculously telling though that I can't believe people here don't see what exactly it is telling of. Try finding a "privately funded" evolution forum where they censor some posts but not others. If you're not willing to hear everyone's opinions there can only be a few reasons. You're either afraid they'll convince you or afraid they're right and you don't want to be convinced. Free thinking websites would welcome creationists with open arms. They might take a few jabs but there are ignorant people everywhere. The point is there wouldn't be anything you could type on screen that would make them feel you were "teaching false things". They know the people there will judge correctly for themselves just what merit your post actually contains. Here you're not allowed to judge for yourself. In certain forums here the moderators swiftly remove anything that counters the "accepted truth" or could be perceived as "bearing false witness" to be sure none of the flock scurry off to the dark side where we decide for ourselves. Enjoy it though. I'm sure the protection is comforting.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Newcomers from DoD - 8/5/2008 12:45:05 AM
|
|
|
HHV5
Posts: 159
Joined: 7/20/2008
Status: offline
|
So the newcomers aren't coming?
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
