Lefty 0 #26 November 9, 2005 QuoteQuote Pearl Habour made them take off their blinkers and finally get involved.... couple of years too late, but hey... it wasn't their war, right? Maybe Roosevelt didn't feel like listening to people blame him for starting a war against an enemy that was not a threat because it did not overtly attack us first. Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ViperPilot 0 #27 November 9, 2005 Quoteobviously they are going to have to send in 3 times as many troops as any other country would use, just to make sure they can win by over whelming the opposition, due to lack of actual fighting skills once they get their arses kicked like in Vietnam, they would then run away like pussys and claim a nice victory Are you serious? Because I know the Marines can't handle anything sophisticated or basically anything that involves more than running, pushups and shooting an M4, but pussies, no way man. Those guys will fuck people up better than anyone else on this planet...well, right behind the Air Force anyways Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #28 November 9, 2005 Check out this pm i've just had from rdutch... what a nice fellow Edited to remove attack. Your one warning. And no, I don't care where the material came from; you chose to post it. i think i hit a nerve ________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #29 November 9, 2005 QuoteI understand that it's only about 30% of you that actually have Yank dads but don't know it. or know it and to proud to admit it.....Who's your daddy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #30 November 9, 2005 haha what a ehem nice chap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #31 November 9, 2005 It is a tacky note. Of course, you've never put anything into a forum that's designed to incite, have you? It is, however, considered to be beyond tacky to post private email. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #32 November 9, 2005 QuoteIt is a tacky note. Of course, you've never put anything into a forum that's designed to incite, have you? It is, however, considered to be beyond tacky to post private email. Wendy W. So, if i was abusive towards you in a pm, and then was all nice and sweet on the forum... you'd let me get away with that would you? You'd let others be fooled into thinking i was a decent guy, when you knew otherwise?________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #33 November 9, 2005 QuoteQuoteIt is a tacky note. Of course, you've never put anything into a forum that's designed to incite, have you? It is, however, considered to be beyond tacky to post private email. Wendy W. So, if i was abusive towards you in a pm, and then was all nice and sweet on the forum... you'd let me get away with that would you? You'd let others be fooled into thinking i was a decent guy, when you knew otherwise? YES, PMs are private, you really broke an 'unspoken' (except it's been spoken to frequently here) thing in this forum. No class. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #34 November 9, 2005 How much class does it take to start sending unsolicited, highly insulting and childish PM's to someone based on their comments in a thread to whcih you haven't even bothered to post? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #35 November 9, 2005 No, I think it'd be pretty easy to get you going in a forum so that people would get a first-hand look. I might ask for permission to post it. Otherwise, I'd probably ignore the note as not worth my attention. Anyway, I haven't seen him posting much on dz.com lately, and not in SC since June. You're hunting pretty hard, aren't you? Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #36 November 9, 2005 QuoteHow much class does it take to start sending unsolicited, highly insulting and childish PM's to someone based on their comments in a thread to whcih you haven't even bothered to post?Absolutely none. That's not the question, unfortunately. As I said -- I'd ask for permission to post it, and if it were denied, I'd probably try to get the perpetrator going so that he'd say something stupid. It usually works. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #37 November 9, 2005 QuoteHow much class does it take to start sending unsolicited, highly insulting and childish PM's to someone based on their comments in a thread to whcih you haven't even bothered to post? No class is my answer to your question. Why do you ask as I was talking about a COMPLETELY separate issue about posting a PM sent solely to a person? The solution to your issue is to block PMs from that person. The solution to my issue is to not publicly share anything sent privately. Edit: Think about the phrases "two wrongs don't make a right" etc. Why is it so hard to separate actions made by two separate people? Why do people think they are allowed to do something wrong just because someone else did something other wrong 'first'? This is the point. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rasmack 0 #38 November 9, 2005 QuoteWell....we did send a lot of troops to your Island back in the 40's. But that was only because your women were begging for more real men to be imported Actually your "real men" obviously couldn't handle the action. HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227 “I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.” - Not quite Oscar Wilde... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #39 November 9, 2005 I ask because I'm allowed to start side conversations. I don't have an issue, I didn't get the PM, nor did I post it. I don't think either act was brilliant but I personally think sending the PM in the first place is by far the worse 'crime'. One is a little infraction of nettiquet as payback for being abused. The other was an unprovoked and vicious attack that would earn the guy weeks sat in the corner were it done in public. In a way I'd be glad if PM's like this were given their place in public – it would show the world what childish pricks the authors were (not to say of course that this particular author is a childish prick – that would be a personal attack and as such prohibited). I do however find the whole situation highly amusing. Hence my laughter when the PM was posted. As for separating the issues - they are separately bad. They are also linked, being as they are one precipitated by the other. I don't see why on earth we are not allowed to comment on the first act (by some random decree of Rehmwa) and yet are perfectly entitled to discuss the second - nettiquet, in this thread supposedly about French Riots. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #40 November 9, 2005 Quote...It is, however, considered to be beyond tacky to post private email. Wendy, I was willing give "the artist" the benefit of the doubt until he did this....WAY beyond the pale showing no class whatsoever.... To say "ignore him" is wasted because so few can actually do it and continue to respond to his posts.... my LAST response and acknowledgement of his posting existence...My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #41 November 9, 2005 I might have been seriously tempted to post the email without attribution. It is eye-rollingly appalling. Identifying who it was from is simply unacceptable. As Rehmwa said, they're two separate issues, and unfortunately one doesn't make the other OK. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #42 November 9, 2005 I never said one did make the other ok - just committing the God-awful crime of thread drift (in this thread about French Riots). It seems crimes against Nettiquet are evidently considered to be the highest of crimes against society round here. At least initially he quoted the author as Jdutch - someone who doesn't appear to exist on here. Maybe he can avert continued scorn by editing his post? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rasmack 0 #43 November 9, 2005 Ehm... Isn't there a difference between e-mail and PMs? I use PMs for stuff that either noone else would care about, or stuff that the recipient would not like to see in public (Pssst. Wendy, you have mustard on your chin...HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227 “I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.” - Not quite Oscar Wilde... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #44 November 9, 2005 QuoteIsn't there a difference between e-mail and PMs I don't think it matters if there is - neither are properly appropriate for public consumption without the authors consent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #45 November 9, 2005 QuoteI personally think sending the PM in the first place is by far the worse 'crime'. One is a little infraction of nettiquet as payback for being abused. I see two things: - trying to decide which is worse: what's the point? they are both wrong and this type of thinking just results in petty squabbling. Both were wrong and pointless and childish. Unrelated, and really not up for comparison. - the word "payback". It's obvious you think the privacy violation is partially justified for reason of a childish 'payback' reason, also pointless and childish. - the word "nettiquet" if you want to belittle privacy as a pissy little thing, then we really will have a hard time in this discussion (random rambling deleted- nothing bad, just excess) I'm sure Ian is getting his money's worth here though - as that was the real point wasn't it? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #46 November 9, 2005 I agree both are bad. You wished to discuss the second act - you did. You are quite within your rights to do so. I wished to discuss the first act - I did. I am quite within my rights to do so. Don't attack me because I simply made a post about how bad I felt the PM was. (ie with argument as opposed to personal). Quotetrying to decide which is worse: what's the point? Notwithstanding the fact that one does not excuse the other I am quite capable of making up my own mind about which is worse. Judging levels of "worseness", fault and culpability and assisting with the decision of which attracts the greater scorn is a big part of my job, I'm quite comfortable with it. Two people guilty of crimes do not necessarily always get the same sentence. It is not my problem if you are not. Quotetrying to discuss them together is a distraction technique or the equivalent of two babies crying about who started it. I'm not distracting anyone. If you want to discuss the breach of nettiquet please feel free. I merely posted intimating that the PM was very poor class. It is just as much a valid topic as the breach of nettiquet which you wish to discuss. I don't care who started what - the acts, as you keep saying are separate. As such it's quite possible to have a conversation decrying the author of the PM for taking the action he did, quite separately from the disgusting breach of nettequet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #47 November 9, 2005 Quote- the word "payback". It's obvious you think the privacy violation is partially justified for reason of a childish 'payback' reason, also pointless and childish. (sorry I missed this bit above) No I don't think there is any valid justification for posting a PM. I am perfectly capable of seeing why the recipient thought it might be however and thus acknowledge that in my post. It’s like recognizing a suicide bombers motives without actually agreeing with them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #48 November 9, 2005 You're taking my posts pretty personally, I'll disengage as that wasn't the intent. Only clarification. Cheers ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #49 November 9, 2005 Quoteneither are properly appropriate for public consumption without the authors consent. I have to call bullshit. If I get an email asking me to buy a Swedish Penis Enlarger and I copy this email onto here including the address of the spammer, nobody would have an issue with that!!!! If rdutch decided out of the blue to feel the need to send him an email/pm basically calling him an asshole, I think it is more than fair game to be posted, just like SPAM. If they were in conversation and this was sent as part of a conversation, that is a different story. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr2mk1g 10 #50 November 9, 2005 nah man I'm just ranting - too much coffee at lunch. We really are fighting over nothing if you look at it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
