To use or not use Soap
-
I've been flamed about posting soap box material before too... Probably something very similar to what your posting actually... Here's how I look at it... Whats the lounge for then...it's for non-technical questions...generic implementation questions...and RDBMS theory or linear algebra, etc... Macro and micro evolution, etc...i've seen everything go here in the lounge... thats why I post whatever I want in the lounge...the soapbox...I dunno what it's purpose is...becuz all i'm looking for when I post a non-technical question is an answer...of which you don't get in the soapbox with only X number of posts... Besides the title says: The Lounge is a place where you can discuss anything that takes your fancy. So i'll do just that until it's changed to: The Lounge is a place where you can discuss almost anything that takes your fancy, except questions dealing with emotions...those go in the soapbox p.s-i'm to tired inorder to respond to the capital punishment thing...however i will say...I don't support it yet...but if someone was convicted of harming someone I knew personally...then i'd probably change my mind and want them to fry... Cheers :) It's frustrating being a genius and living the life of a moron!!!
Thanks for your answer Hockey. Changing the title is kind of like giving up on humanity. It's like saying "you cant behave, so we have to tighten up the rules a bit for the convenience of all". Maybe CP has grown out of proportions and could not anticipate that people could ever ask such stupid questions as mine at a programming site... ;-) I just hope that people always will be interested in discussing tough questions about humanity. And that the discussion can go on at all levels of the society. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
It is simply a common courtesy that we have established in this community. Rational discussions have taken place in the SoapBox. That some become irrational is not the reason why they are in the SoapBox. It is because the Lounge is a place to relax and discuss topics which don't put a bummer on your day. The death penalty is a depressing topic, one that after a long days hard-coding you don't want to have to stumble across inbetween a Trogdor cartoon and a cool Mac link. That is not to say the Lounge is for trivia. The kid sister rule is not just about language or topic either. It is about respecting the right that other people's children are not your's to soapbox at. So very simply, post your question in the Soapbox and you will get some good discussions. Ignore the flamers, they exist everywhere and are a fact of the net. So there is nothing disturbing or psychological about your experience, in fact it is kudos to the mental health of Loungers that we can all agree to keep topics like that in the SoapBox. Not often so many people agree. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
-
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
bjoernen wrote: But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. This topic might involve a discussion where the poster feels like supplying a link to things that don't exactly conform to the PG-rated criteria of the Lounge. And keep in mind that it isn't Code Project necessarily that keeps people "in line", as it were, in the Lounge. It's the members themselves that occasionally remind people when something is inappropriate in the lounge. Self-censorship works best, IMO, and while it can be a moving target, we pretty much all have an understanding of where the fuzzy gray line is. bjoernen wrote: So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? It's totally possible. I've started serious discussions on issues on politics. It all depends on how you phrase your post. Instead of expressing your own opinion, simply ask people for theirs, explaining why you want to know, so they know you're not trolling. You can express your own opinion of course, but it should be done in a manner that isn't insulting or demeaning and you might want to put some human factor in it by explaining how you've come about forming your opinions. I think you'll find that you get a lot of intelligent responses. You may not agree with them spiritually/emotionally, but it becomes a dialog, not a flame war. bjoernen wrote: Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? Are the pictures of Iraqi's being tortured kid-sister material that you'd post a link to in the lounge? No. Is a discussion on the methods of killing someone in a death penalty case kid sister material? I would say no. It isn't just the language/respect that makes something non-kid-sister material. It's the topic itself, often enough. Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
It is simply a common courtesy that we have established in this community. Rational discussions have taken place in the SoapBox. That some become irrational is not the reason why they are in the SoapBox. It is because the Lounge is a place to relax and discuss topics which don't put a bummer on your day. The death penalty is a depressing topic, one that after a long days hard-coding you don't want to have to stumble across inbetween a Trogdor cartoon and a cool Mac link. That is not to say the Lounge is for trivia. The kid sister rule is not just about language or topic either. It is about respecting the right that other people's children are not your's to soapbox at. So very simply, post your question in the Soapbox and you will get some good discussions. Ignore the flamers, they exist everywhere and are a fact of the net. So there is nothing disturbing or psychological about your experience, in fact it is kudos to the mental health of Loungers that we can all agree to keep topics like that in the SoapBox. Not often so many people agree. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
Paul Watson wrote: Rational discussions have taken place in the SoapBox. That some become irrational is not the reason why they are in the SoapBox. It is because the Lounge is a place to relax and discuss topics which don't put a bummer on your day. The death penalty is a depressing topic, one that after a long days hard-coding you don't want to have to stumble across inbetween a Trogdor cartoon and a cool Mac link. That is not to say the Lounge is for trivia. Is the issue really about the depressing topic? Isnt it rather that the question is troublesome and not easy to answer? It requires some thinking that is not very pleasant. So just skip it then! It's not for all people. Trogdor isn't for everyone either. Sorry for being stubborn, but I cant understand the mindset really. So the Lounge is for light, cheesy, trivial material that cant possibly offend anyone? Geeky Stuff Incorporated? Why would I not discuss the meaning of life with my 12 year old son? (which I by the way do) I thought the difference between the Lounge and the Soapbox was the general tone, not the subject. But I will accept your definition, since it seems to reflect the general opinion here. :-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
bjoernen wrote: But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. This topic might involve a discussion where the poster feels like supplying a link to things that don't exactly conform to the PG-rated criteria of the Lounge. And keep in mind that it isn't Code Project necessarily that keeps people "in line", as it were, in the Lounge. It's the members themselves that occasionally remind people when something is inappropriate in the lounge. Self-censorship works best, IMO, and while it can be a moving target, we pretty much all have an understanding of where the fuzzy gray line is. bjoernen wrote: So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? It's totally possible. I've started serious discussions on issues on politics. It all depends on how you phrase your post. Instead of expressing your own opinion, simply ask people for theirs, explaining why you want to know, so they know you're not trolling. You can express your own opinion of course, but it should be done in a manner that isn't insulting or demeaning and you might want to put some human factor in it by explaining how you've come about forming your opinions. I think you'll find that you get a lot of intelligent responses. You may not agree with them spiritually/emotionally, but it becomes a dialog, not a flame war. bjoernen wrote: Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? Are the pictures of Iraqi's being tortured kid-sister material that you'd post a link to in the lounge? No. Is a discussion on the methods of killing someone in a death penalty case kid sister material? I would say no. It isn't just the language/respect that makes something non-kid-sister material. It's the topic itself, often enough. Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
Marc Clifton wrote: This topic might involve a discussion where the poster feels like supplying a link to things that don't exactly conform to the PG-rated criteria of the Lounge. Is it my responsibility to anticipate what material other people may want to refer to? By using the Lounge for the topic I wanted to set the general tone of the discussion. Marc Clifton wrote: Instead of expressing your own opinion, simply ask people for theirs, explaining why you want to know, so they know you're not trolling. You are writing this in a general context, but I get the sense that you are referring to my original post about death penalty. Would you say that I am expressing an opinion there? Trolling? If, then please explain why. If not, why are you making this comment? FYI: It was an honest interest in the topic that made me write the post. And I totally respect both opinions. Marc Clifton wrote: Are the pictures of Iraqi's being tortured kid-sister material that you'd post a link to in the lounge? No. Is a discussion on the methods of killing someone in a death penalty case kid sister material? I would say no. It isn't just the language/respect that makes something non-kid-sister material. It's the topic itself, often enough. There you have it again. I just wanted to lift the discussion to the appropriate level. I dont find it meaningful to discuss methods of execution. The very reason that we even are discussing this is interesting in its own. Are CPians shallow? Afraid of conflicts? Unable to respond in a respectful way? Have trouble with explicit descriptions? Too easy-going? You tell me. If you dont think I'm trolling. ;-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
I think you're putting way too much thought into this. On CP you have 2 choices for non-technical discussions. Lounge and SoapBox. To the Lounge go light material, no swear words, easy on the controversy and philosophy (ie. small talk). Stop in, for a wuick break kind of stuff. To the SoapBox go opinions, metaphysics, "dirty" jokes, politics, religion and all topics that may bring about heated discourse. That's simply how this club is set up. Nothing deep behind the reasoning really, it just fell into place that way. I'd mention the anarchy of tossing about topics willy-nilly in the Lounge, but that touches on politics, so I'll reserve my comments. ;) BW
"Get up and open your eyes. Don't let yourself ever fall down.
Get through it and learn how to fly. I know you will find a way...
Today"
-Days of the New -
I think you're putting way too much thought into this. On CP you have 2 choices for non-technical discussions. Lounge and SoapBox. To the Lounge go light material, no swear words, easy on the controversy and philosophy (ie. small talk). Stop in, for a wuick break kind of stuff. To the SoapBox go opinions, metaphysics, "dirty" jokes, politics, religion and all topics that may bring about heated discourse. That's simply how this club is set up. Nothing deep behind the reasoning really, it just fell into place that way. I'd mention the anarchy of tossing about topics willy-nilly in the Lounge, but that touches on politics, so I'll reserve my comments. ;) BW
"Get up and open your eyes. Don't let yourself ever fall down.
Get through it and learn how to fly. I know you will find a way...
Today"
-Days of the NewNicely put. This is the way that I see the two forums also. Ant. I'm hard, yet soft.
I'm coloured, yet clear.
I'm fruity and sweet.
I'm jelly, what am I? Muse on it further, I shall return! - David Walliams (Little Britain) -
Marc Clifton wrote: This topic might involve a discussion where the poster feels like supplying a link to things that don't exactly conform to the PG-rated criteria of the Lounge. Is it my responsibility to anticipate what material other people may want to refer to? By using the Lounge for the topic I wanted to set the general tone of the discussion. Marc Clifton wrote: Instead of expressing your own opinion, simply ask people for theirs, explaining why you want to know, so they know you're not trolling. You are writing this in a general context, but I get the sense that you are referring to my original post about death penalty. Would you say that I am expressing an opinion there? Trolling? If, then please explain why. If not, why are you making this comment? FYI: It was an honest interest in the topic that made me write the post. And I totally respect both opinions. Marc Clifton wrote: Are the pictures of Iraqi's being tortured kid-sister material that you'd post a link to in the lounge? No. Is a discussion on the methods of killing someone in a death penalty case kid sister material? I would say no. It isn't just the language/respect that makes something non-kid-sister material. It's the topic itself, often enough. There you have it again. I just wanted to lift the discussion to the appropriate level. I dont find it meaningful to discuss methods of execution. The very reason that we even are discussing this is interesting in its own. Are CPians shallow? Afraid of conflicts? Unable to respond in a respectful way? Have trouble with explicit descriptions? Too easy-going? You tell me. If you dont think I'm trolling. ;-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
bjoernen wrote: Is it my responsibility to anticipate what material other people may want to refer to? Well, yes. As I said before, the lounge is very lightly moderated--in fact, the only moderation I've ever seen is for one of the admins to say that the post belongs in the SB, if others haven't said so already. bjoernen wrote: By using the Lounge for the topic I wanted to set the general tone of the discussion. I see. OK. Therefore the responses would have to be moderated as well. However, I think that would result in people not being able to express how they really feel/think about a topic. It doesn't have to be flames or bad language, etc. A person may have personal experience with the subject that ends up being inappropriate for the lounge. bjoernen wrote: but I get the sense that you are referring to my original post about death penalty. I meant in the general case. The death penalty, as a specific case, and as I mentioned before, is topic that can involve religion, politics, personal beliefs, etc., and those responses might be non-lounge appropriate. The same applies for the general case too, though. bjoernen wrote: I dont find it meaningful to discuss methods of execution. Well, you don't, but others may feel that it is critical to the discussion. By posting in the lounge, I would say that, while you get moderated responses, you also don't get all the opinions that people have on the subject, which may be very valid opinions. bjoernen wrote: Are CPians shallow? Sometimes. Usually not. People are people, and sometimes they will respond with humor, or with strong emotions, or sometimes they feel like a flippant response, and sometimes a very serious, well thought out response. If you make a post with as large a readership as CP has, you can expect a variety of responses. Diversity is wonderful, but it is something that takes a bit of consciousness to digest. bjoernen wrote: Afraid of conflicts? Hah! Are you kidding? Not that I've ever noticed. bjoernen wrote: Unable to respond in a respectful way? Respect is given for those that show respect. Whether on a CP forum or anywhere else. I'm not implying that you aren't being respectful, I'm just saying that it's a two way street. bjoernen wrote: Have trouble with explicit des
-
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
bjoernen wrote: I think this tells something disturbing about people. That we appreciate respect for our conventions? That most of this has been discussed and fought out in years past, and the "rules" as they are have been more or less agreed on? bjoernen wrote: Why would I not discuss the meaning of life with my 12 year old son? One man's mature, respectfum answer may be a grave insult to all important beliefs of another. There is a vast range of backgrounds and tastes here, and one of the reasons for this rule is to keep us from being at each others' throats all the time. bjoernen wrote: I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? I'm not your son. Maybe i feel like discussing deep, controversial stuff, maybe i don't - that's my decision, not yours. Chances are, if i'm reading The Lounge, i'm out for lighter fare. If you want to argue about it, take it to The Soapbox. ;)
You left me high and dry and changed me You lied to me and now i’m angry**...** -
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
I suggested that you move this to the Soapbox. I didn't demand that you move this there immediately or say that your post was offensive. I am sorry that you took this so hard. I simply thought that this topic belonged more in the Soapbox (that's just my opinion) that in the lounge. "One of the Georges," said Psmith, "I forget which, once said that a certain number of hours' sleep a day--I cannot recall for the moment how many--made a man something, which for the time being has slipped my memory."
-
It is simply a common courtesy that we have established in this community. Rational discussions have taken place in the SoapBox. That some become irrational is not the reason why they are in the SoapBox. It is because the Lounge is a place to relax and discuss topics which don't put a bummer on your day. The death penalty is a depressing topic, one that after a long days hard-coding you don't want to have to stumble across inbetween a Trogdor cartoon and a cool Mac link. That is not to say the Lounge is for trivia. The kid sister rule is not just about language or topic either. It is about respecting the right that other people's children are not your's to soapbox at. So very simply, post your question in the Soapbox and you will get some good discussions. Ignore the flamers, they exist everywhere and are a fact of the net. So there is nothing disturbing or psychological about your experience, in fact it is kudos to the mental health of Loungers that we can all agree to keep topics like that in the SoapBox. Not often so many people agree. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
my sentiments exactly. I work hard and when I go to read the lounge, I definitely don't want to read something that puts a bummer on my day.
-
I recently posted a question about death penalty, and the responses got me a bit puzzled. Or sad really. Not so much about the lack of interest, hey, I'm not too interested in the topic either. But just the fact that all people directed the question into the Soapbox. http://www.codeproject.com/lounge.asp?msg=1013188#xx1013188xx[^] I had hoped for serious opinions. So it is not possible to discuss this topic without bursting into flame wars? When I come think about it, why would I ever post something in the Soapbox? I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? Masochistic tendancies? A need to get back at all people in the world? Why would "kid sister" language/respect not be suitable for almost all topics we can come up with, including sex, politics, meaning of life, death penalty, etc? I think this tells something disturbing about people. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
You just need a better understanding of context. For example, simply asking whether the death penalty is just in a programmer community website is a non sequitur. However, if you asked "Is the death penalty justified for a copy-and-paste coder?" Your post would get rated a 5 and there would be a ton of positive responses. Matt Gerrans
-
bjoernen wrote: I think this tells something disturbing about people. That we appreciate respect for our conventions? That most of this has been discussed and fought out in years past, and the "rules" as they are have been more or less agreed on? bjoernen wrote: Why would I not discuss the meaning of life with my 12 year old son? One man's mature, respectfum answer may be a grave insult to all important beliefs of another. There is a vast range of backgrounds and tastes here, and one of the reasons for this rule is to keep us from being at each others' throats all the time. bjoernen wrote: I dont want anything but mature and respectful answers on any topic I can come up with. And people that cant live up to such simple rules, why are they discussing a topic to begin with? I'm not your son. Maybe i feel like discussing deep, controversial stuff, maybe i don't - that's my decision, not yours. Chances are, if i'm reading The Lounge, i'm out for lighter fare. If you want to argue about it, take it to The Soapbox. ;)
You left me high and dry and changed me You lied to me and now i’m angry**...**Shog9 wrote: Re: Just so you know, i'm deeply offended by your allegations... What allegations? I dont see a ;-), but I take this as a joke. :-) Shog9 wrote: That we appreciate respect for our conventions? That most of this has been discussed and fought out in years past, and the "rules" as they are have been more or less agreed on? "The Lounge is a place where you can discuss anything that takes your fancy. If you just want to laze about and discuss things that don't quite fit elsewhere, then this is the place. Posting Guideline: The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your kid sister to read then don't post it." Maybe it's a cultural difference that made me interpret the guidelines different from you guys, maybe it's something else. I dont really care that much to make a big deal out of it. But I still find it disturbing that people are offended by the topic. :-) Shog9 wrote: One man's mature, respectfum answer may be a grave insult to all important beliefs of another. Perhaps a slight exaggeration? ;-) So when are we all gonna learn something interesting about eachother, when we tiptoe around all the time? Shog9 wrote: Maybe i feel like discussing deep, controversial stuff, maybe i don't - that's my decision, not yours. What a suprise that this became such an issue. I'm not offended or excited or anything, I'm just surprised that people find certain topics to be so controvercial that they dont fit into a place like the Lounge. Honestly, I thought the main difference between the Lounge and the Soapbox was the tone, not the issues. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
I suggested that you move this to the Soapbox. I didn't demand that you move this there immediately or say that your post was offensive. I am sorry that you took this so hard. I simply thought that this topic belonged more in the Soapbox (that's just my opinion) that in the lounge. "One of the Georges," said Psmith, "I forget which, once said that a certain number of hours' sleep a day--I cannot recall for the moment how many--made a man something, which for the time being has slipped my memory."
Sorry I didn't get your reply so I dont know what you are talking about. I'm not taking anything here hard. I'm just suprised at the reactions and I find them disturbing. It's not about the specific people, it's about the general feel that controvercial subjects can't be displayed and discussed in an open forum of this type. Thats a disturbing fact about humans, if nothing else. I hope I dont sound offended, because I'm not. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
You just need a better understanding of context. For example, simply asking whether the death penalty is just in a programmer community website is a non sequitur. However, if you asked "Is the death penalty justified for a copy-and-paste coder?" Your post would get rated a 5 and there would be a ton of positive responses. Matt Gerrans
-
I think you're putting way too much thought into this. On CP you have 2 choices for non-technical discussions. Lounge and SoapBox. To the Lounge go light material, no swear words, easy on the controversy and philosophy (ie. small talk). Stop in, for a wuick break kind of stuff. To the SoapBox go opinions, metaphysics, "dirty" jokes, politics, religion and all topics that may bring about heated discourse. That's simply how this club is set up. Nothing deep behind the reasoning really, it just fell into place that way. I'd mention the anarchy of tossing about topics willy-nilly in the Lounge, but that touches on politics, so I'll reserve my comments. ;) BW
"Get up and open your eyes. Don't let yourself ever fall down.
Get through it and learn how to fly. I know you will find a way...
Today"
-Days of the NewOK, thanks friend. :-) I guess it has to be this way if it is in the general CPian spirit. I just hoped I could learn something, which I possibly not will in a flamewar in the Soapbox. But hey, Im probably expecting too much from a programmer's site. :-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
OK, thanks friend. :-) I guess it has to be this way if it is in the general CPian spirit. I just hoped I could learn something, which I possibly not will in a flamewar in the Soapbox. But hey, Im probably expecting too much from a programmer's site. :-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
bjoernen wrote: I just hoped I could learn something, You can. You have not given the discussion a chance in the Soapbox, and already judged us for not discussing it maturely because many felt it wouldn't do well in the Lounge. You aren't new around here, so I'm not sure why you feel this way. There are certainly heated, irrational threads in the SoapBox, but sprinkled throughout are some really thought-provoking and interesting viewpoints and discussions. By now you could have posted your question in a different forum, and quite possibly received the types of answers you were after. ON the other hand, maybe what you are looking for can't be found here. It's possible, but you won't know if you don't play along by the unwritten CP rules of engagement. BW
"Get up and open your eyes. Don't let yourself ever fall down.
Get through it and learn how to fly. I know you will find a way...
Today"
-Days of the New -
Shog9 wrote: Re: Just so you know, i'm deeply offended by your allegations... What allegations? I dont see a ;-), but I take this as a joke. :-) Shog9 wrote: That we appreciate respect for our conventions? That most of this has been discussed and fought out in years past, and the "rules" as they are have been more or less agreed on? "The Lounge is a place where you can discuss anything that takes your fancy. If you just want to laze about and discuss things that don't quite fit elsewhere, then this is the place. Posting Guideline: The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your kid sister to read then don't post it." Maybe it's a cultural difference that made me interpret the guidelines different from you guys, maybe it's something else. I dont really care that much to make a big deal out of it. But I still find it disturbing that people are offended by the topic. :-) Shog9 wrote: One man's mature, respectfum answer may be a grave insult to all important beliefs of another. Perhaps a slight exaggeration? ;-) So when are we all gonna learn something interesting about eachother, when we tiptoe around all the time? Shog9 wrote: Maybe i feel like discussing deep, controversial stuff, maybe i don't - that's my decision, not yours. What a suprise that this became such an issue. I'm not offended or excited or anything, I'm just surprised that people find certain topics to be so controvercial that they dont fit into a place like the Lounge. Honestly, I thought the main difference between the Lounge and the Soapbox was the tone, not the issues. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
bjoernen wrote: Honestly, I thought the main difference between the Lounge and the Soapbox was the tone, not the issues. Mostly true. Some issues have proven to nearly always incite a certain tone however, and so they tend to be encouraged to reside in The Soapbox. bjoernen wrote: What allegations? I dont see a ;), but I take this as a joke. Here's an extra one for next time: ;) ;)
You left me high and dry and changed me You lied to me and now i’m angry**...** -
bjoernen wrote: Is it my responsibility to anticipate what material other people may want to refer to? Well, yes. As I said before, the lounge is very lightly moderated--in fact, the only moderation I've ever seen is for one of the admins to say that the post belongs in the SB, if others haven't said so already. bjoernen wrote: By using the Lounge for the topic I wanted to set the general tone of the discussion. I see. OK. Therefore the responses would have to be moderated as well. However, I think that would result in people not being able to express how they really feel/think about a topic. It doesn't have to be flames or bad language, etc. A person may have personal experience with the subject that ends up being inappropriate for the lounge. bjoernen wrote: but I get the sense that you are referring to my original post about death penalty. I meant in the general case. The death penalty, as a specific case, and as I mentioned before, is topic that can involve religion, politics, personal beliefs, etc., and those responses might be non-lounge appropriate. The same applies for the general case too, though. bjoernen wrote: I dont find it meaningful to discuss methods of execution. Well, you don't, but others may feel that it is critical to the discussion. By posting in the lounge, I would say that, while you get moderated responses, you also don't get all the opinions that people have on the subject, which may be very valid opinions. bjoernen wrote: Are CPians shallow? Sometimes. Usually not. People are people, and sometimes they will respond with humor, or with strong emotions, or sometimes they feel like a flippant response, and sometimes a very serious, well thought out response. If you make a post with as large a readership as CP has, you can expect a variety of responses. Diversity is wonderful, but it is something that takes a bit of consciousness to digest. bjoernen wrote: Afraid of conflicts? Hah! Are you kidding? Not that I've ever noticed. bjoernen wrote: Unable to respond in a respectful way? Respect is given for those that show respect. Whether on a CP forum or anywhere else. I'm not implying that you aren't being respectful, I'm just saying that it's a two way street. bjoernen wrote: Have trouble with explicit des
How frustrating. CP ate my homework, err, my reply. A concentrated version will do for now: Marc Clifton wrote: What opinion are you forming about CPians? Is discussing a controvercial subject offensive in itself? I think some people here believes so. Thats disturbing about those individuals. The discussion about death penalty didn't even get started, and still you and others are speculating about the outcome, and why posters will not be able to express themselves. It's just speculation! Since everyone knew the rules of conduct for the Lounge, what is there to worry about? So it must be that the subject is offensive in itself. Sorry but I dont know any topic that is offensive in itself, as little as I know any topic that cant be joked about. I think you are taking yourselves too seriously. But dont worry, I dont feel angry and I hope no one else feels offended. I'm just here for the discussion and to learn. :-) Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden
-
bjoernen wrote: I just hoped I could learn something, You can. You have not given the discussion a chance in the Soapbox, and already judged us for not discussing it maturely because many felt it wouldn't do well in the Lounge. You aren't new around here, so I'm not sure why you feel this way. There are certainly heated, irrational threads in the SoapBox, but sprinkled throughout are some really thought-provoking and interesting viewpoints and discussions. By now you could have posted your question in a different forum, and quite possibly received the types of answers you were after. ON the other hand, maybe what you are looking for can't be found here. It's possible, but you won't know if you don't play along by the unwritten CP rules of engagement. BW
"Get up and open your eyes. Don't let yourself ever fall down.
Get through it and learn how to fly. I know you will find a way...
Today"
-Days of the NewThe topic of death penalty is not nearly as interesting as the outcome of this little discussion about Lounge conduct. People surprised me pretty much here, and I learned something. :-) BTW, I know that I can be challenging some times, but I never thought I was offensive. Am I offensive? From the posts I get feeling that people find me offensive. brianwelsch wrote: You have not given the discussion a chance in the Soapbox, and already judged us for not discussing it maturely because many felt it wouldn't do well in the Lounge. You aren't new around here, so I'm not sure why you feel this way. Not entierly true. I dont blame you for not discussing the topic. Zero replies would have been fine. Of course I respect that people have different tastes. I'm just reacting to the Soapbox label. Regards, Björn Morén Stockholm, Sweden