Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

Grypd · 2005-08-16 19:01:57

European countries do have a problem in there population demographics. Some countries have actually done something about this. The prime example is France which if anything is bucking the trend and has actually a growing population and this is put down to its 35 hour week and family friendly policies. The trouble being that it seems to make France very uncompetitive with the world.

In october Germany is going to the poles for there general election. The current administration is running far behind what is a more right wing party and this right wing parties main policies are primarily family based with the intention of making it easier to have a family and still have a career. Actually the plan is to loosen up the economic situation in Germany and to actually allow Germany to become the European powerhouse it once was.

The EU though has expanded and the newer states unlike the more staid original countries are places where population growth is reasonably high. The UK for example has used the higher free population of countries like Poland to supply the worker shortage the expanding economy of the UK has short. In the last 9 months over 1,032,000 Poles and other Eastern Europeans attracted by the high wages have moved to Britain and taken up Jobs. Though it is an economic migration very few of these people plan to actually stay instead they will spend a while here making savings while working then go home and use those to start buisnesses or get married.

We in the west do not need to "breed like rabbits" that would be totally unnecessary but that we should provide laws to allow people to work and still have a larger family. There should be tax breaks and benefits to having more than one child. Just making it seem to better for the country to have more children and to put this through education would be a start.

Immigration into a country is not a problem as long as that immigration is measured by the people coming in being able to be absorbed and accepted into that countries culture. Immigration is a good thing especially for the richer countries that can afford to hire the best brains and those immigrants naturally want to take there families with them. The current situation of these eastern EU countries having there young over working in the UK for example benefits both countries. The UK gets jobs done and with posts being filled wages do not have to go up to get people to fill the skills shortages, This boosts the UK economy and stabilises inflationry pressures making the UK more competitive and since they are working they are paying taxes into the national excheguer. Countries like Poland get there young on good wages and money flowing into Poland and with that an Economic boost. This is used to pay for goods and services in Poland and allows Poland to modernise its infrastructure and in the future getting trained people back. Though some will stay in the UK .

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-18 23:44:32

A very interesting post, Grypd.
Although I suspect there'd be some economists who could find problems with over 1 million East Europeans arriving in Britain for short-term employment. (What effect does it have on the housing market, for example?)

Personally, I don't have a problem with free movement of people between countries, as long as it's within reason. Even long-term migration is fine if a country's infrastructure and economy can take the short-term stresses which may occur in the first stages of such movement. i.e. "Everything in moderation".

Your post addresses the 'ordinary' difficulties involved in such transference of human resources, together with the 'ordinary' problems of how family-friendly you want your working week, etc.
-- There's no question of any fundamental changes and difficulties because the people you're talking about don't necessarily have strong religious beliefs which affect their whole view of government and everything else.
-- When hardline religious zealots are involved, and this includes creationists/evangelists as well as Muslims, the democratic way a country is run could quite conceivably be endangered if the population of such people reaches 50% of the total. That was my point.
-- I admit the point is hypothetical at present but there's nothing to say it won't become very real in coming decades and I was merely trying to find a viable way to avoid it. (And so far I haven't heard a solution I would describe as realistic.)

That's all!

Fledi · 2005-08-22 12:18:53

Current situation in Germany is a new Communist party has been founded and allied with the former East German Communists, together they're at 10% now in the polls.
This has changed the situation, what looked like a sky high victory for the conservative coalition before is now a very close game.
While both the traditional left and right wing parties are denying to work together with this new party it could result in a grand coalition of the two largest parties, namely the conservative Christian Democtrats and the Social Democrats.
Now some important reforms have already been done by Schroeder, but it was the refusal of his party to continue the reforms that caused him to go for early elections in the first place. I have some doubts that a grand coalition would be able to agree on coherent reforms, but we'll see.

The question about demographics came up only in recent months in Germany, the left wing answer to it was to go for more immigration to get enough people at working age into the country. But then a professor calculated we would need something like 200 million immigrants in the next half century to keep the percentage of working people high enough, so now a more family encouraging policy is now being discussed by all parties.

What I'm missing in all the election campaigns is to make technological progress an agenda. This shows most people are still not getting it, the root of the problems with the economy are the restrictive policies against technologies like genetics, nuclear power or the lack of investment in spaceflight. Some people here obviously are of the opinion that we can stay wealthy indefinitely just by producing expensive cars and this one is a big mistake.

Palomar · 2005-08-24 10:31:26

UK taking added measures

*Figures. The English gov't is being very civil, using kid gloves, are working to ensure that hateful people who'd gladly blow up anyone who disagrees with them aren't deported to nations which condone torture, and bending over backwards not to give any unnecessary offense...and yet they're damned. They're accused of promoting "Islamophobia" and inadvertently aiding and abetting "criminalization of thought."

The English gov't is being much more kind and fair to their opponents than their opponents would ever be if the shoe were on the other foot.

Let's rewind to Germany, 1938: Oppose Hitler and you're accused of being "Naziophobic" and promoting "criminalization of thought (being "unfair" to him)" while countering his anti-Semitic assertions and plans.

Give me a frickin' break. Same sentiment, same stupidity.

Of course today some people "deserve" preferential treatment more than others.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-27 23:06:11

Posted: Fri Aug 12, 2005 9:05 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clark:-
I think you've said it all, Clark. A fascinating and illuminating glimpse into your unusual psyche.
Thank you.

The above is what's left of my August 12th post.
Having become used to Clark consistently deleting the evidence of his anti-social behaviour in the past, I edited my "Thank you" note by placing a quote of his exact words in my own post, where he couldn't get to it and delete it quietly at a later date.
-- I've only just realized, and I'm stunned to see, that the quote in question - Clark's vile and foul-mouthed attack on me personally - has been expunged from the record! :?

You'll note my own post consists of nothing obscene, profane, or insulting. But Clark's post was all of those things and more, and gave a vividly clear indication of his patently trollish style. It was nothing I said which did this; it was Clark's own words which damned him.

Why, after I prevented Clark covering his tracks in his usual devious way, has an official of New Mars done it for him? :?:

If I posted the kind of stuff Clark has gotten away with here, I would fully expect to be banned from this site, or from any other respectable site in which I did likewise. But I accept the decision of the management not to ban Clark (as I undertook to do), even though I don't understand that decision.
-- But for the management to not only forgive a member his unforgivable and trollish tantrums, but then to assist him in covering his tracks, I find to be incomprehensible. :!:

Anyone care to explain their motives? - preferably without trying to equate any past post of mine with Clark's disgraceful behaviour here. That would be the ultimate insult based on moral relativism.
-- I have contributed to New Mars for nearly four years and have enjoyed a cordial relationship with almost everyone. I have a very long fuse and I've certainly never complained formally or informally about any other member in all that time.

But now I make an exception.
-- And I'll offer a few unsolicited and, no doubt, unwelcome words of wisdom while I'm at it: If you continue to allow low-grade sociopaths to take out their psychological problems on other members, and then go about covering their tracks for them, this website will descend into chaos.
-- You cannot water down standards to this degree and expect to retain any long-term semblance of order and civility.

[P.S. Please do not delete this post. It is a legitimate call for a re-evaluation of standards, expressed openly and in civil language before all members of New Mars. Thank you.]

clark · 2005-08-28 08:49:23

Off topic.

Josh Cryer · 2005-08-28 10:41:57

Shaun, let me ask you one thing, where is the precedent for banning someone here? There has been a total of one actual user who has ever been banned from this site, and he was a somewhat paranoid schitzoid spammer who went on and on about his vision of Mars (NovaMarsella iirc). And he only got banned after going on about harrassing the Zubrin's (yes, spammers have been banned before, but they don't count, as they're not actual 'users').

There have been several requests over the years to "clean up" NewMars, to start "policing" the forums and making *sure* "people behaved correctly." But it has never happened for one simple reason, it takes too much time. I've been asked to make sure certain posters don't "post too many articles" (SpaceNut's posting of space related news, for example, was "unacceptable" to some users), a policy which if I inacted alone would've taken up all my leisure time at the site.

clark was obviously out of line, he deletes his post, I delete his post and consider it done and over with, a wash, so to speak. Forget it and move on.

If you actually "expect" to get banned for acting like clark, then I suggest you reevaluate what you can get away with here. Something like that might be deleted in the future if I see it, but banning is something that is such a rare ocassion I don't even know why it is mentioned.

clark · 2005-08-28 11:49:21

Shuan,

You are not the first to try and ban me, and I'm pretty sure you won't be the last. While you've been contributing for 4 years, I've been doing this for 10. As far as I can tell, you contribute primarily to the free chat thread, on a board supposedly dedicated to Mars. Within this forum, you go on endlessly about your paranoid world view of immigration, the media, and countless other everyday world spanning events.

I understand, I do it too. However, if you notice, as others undoubtedly do, I tend to write my take on the state of space exploration, politics related to space, space themed fiction and poetry, suggestions for ways space advocates might make inroads toward their goals, or even random ideas on how to bring the pro-space theme into the populations larger collective consciousness.

Honestly, no one needs to justify why or when they edit or delete their own posts. The posts belong to the author, regardless if you go and quote the person writing. Now, you obviously felt that what i wrote was worthy of banning. Yet you also feel that deletion of any reference to these posts is somehow offensive. What would you like?

I don't like you. I don't think much of what you have to say. I find your opinions largely offensive. I believe you know what I think you are full of.

So I am a low grade sociopath troll. Pleasant name calling there.

And thank you for your wisdom. However, I see no real issue here. I went off on you, and I'm not sorry for that. You know where I stand now. Just deal with it.

For the most part, this place pretty much runs itself. There are not huge flame wars, and when things do get out of hand, the Mods have been more than responsive in dealing with it.

Lets also put this into perspective, Shaun. My questionable posts, are they littered all over the place? Have I been harassing you? Am I posting all over the board, or is anyone else, littering it with profanity and flame wars?

Aside from the heated debates in the Human thread, and here, things seem to be pretty calm around the board.

But, now that I come to the end here, I now see that your post is not off-topic. It is exactly on topic, because your call for everyone to act and be forced to behave under a strict common rule is part and parcel of what you have been raving about for, well, forever.

We better do as Shuan says. I mean, my god, it will be absolute chaos otherwise! Chaos!

Cheers.

Stormrage · 2005-08-28 12:42:59

Shaun, let me ask you one thing, where is the precedent for banning someone here? There has been a total of one actual user who has ever been banned from this site, and he was a somewhat paranoid schitzoid spammer who went on and on about his vision of Mars (NovaMarsella iirc). And he only got banned after going on about harrassing the Zubrin's (yes, spammers have been banned before, but they don't count, as they're not actual 'users').

Lol harrass Zubrin? Is that even possible? I saw him on "Mars on Earth" on the Science channle about Mars Society. He looks like the kinda guy who could kick anyone who messed with him. But this guy you talk of sounds funny. I wish i was there to see it.

BWhite · 2005-08-28 17:40:12

I think there was someone else that got banned, he was promoting some sort of space federation and was seeking cash donations. Aggressively.

= = =

Who remembers PaganToris, I miss him.

clark · 2005-08-28 19:10:39

I remember him.

Didn't you think he was someone else?

BWhite · 2005-08-28 19:28:50

I remember him.
Didn't you think he was someone else?

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-28 20:09:27

Thanks for the reply, Josh.
Josh:-

If you actually "expect" to get banned for acting like clark, then I suggest you reevaluate what you can get away with here.

I don't evaluate or re-evaluate what I can "get away with" here or anywhere else. (You're confusing me with Clark on this point.) I just rely on the manners I was taught as a child. My standards and those employed at New Mars apparently differ - in fact, it appears NM has no standards at all to speak of.
Josh:-

Shaun, let me ask you one thing, where is the precedent for banning someone here?

How about we create a precedent which states that calling someone a "f**king idiot" and a "mother f**ker" (among a sea of similar profanities which appeared in Clark's post and the one prior to it) will result in being banned? :?:
Josh:-

clark was obviously out of line, he deletes his post, I delete his post and consider it done and over with, a wash, so to speak. Forget it and move on.

Clark has been "out of line", as you quaintly put it, on previous occasions. "Out of line" enough to cause significant irritation among other members, and then devious enough to go back and delete his offensive posts to eliminate the record of his unpleasant sniping.
-- It's a pattern of behaviour which is a subtle form of trolling. Subtle enough to allow repeated attacks over a period of years by removing evidence and withdrawing from the disturbance he's caused, just long enough to let the heat die down. Then out from under his rock he emerges again ..
-- If you can't see that pattern, then you need to open your eyes a little wider. It's blatantly obvious.

Let's get this thing out in the open.
Bill. I ask you, directly. Have you noticed such a pattern in Clark's behaviour? A simple yes or no is all that's required.
CC. I ask you too. Yes or no?

I am completely taken aback, also, that one of my posts was invaded and altered without any prior warning or discussion with me about it. I quoted Clark's tirade specifically to stop him removing yet more evidence of his unpleasantness, in his usual way.
-- Imagine my disgust that the management had moved in and, without so much as a 'by-your-leave', had done the dirty work for him! Almost as though Clark has people determined to clean up after him. As if he's acknowledged as an offensive cur but thought to have his uses and therefore allowed to carry on snapping and snarling.

If Clark's disgraceful tirade of ad hominem abuse was offensive enough that New Mars management saw fit to invade my post to remove it, why was it not offensive enough to warrant some kind of censure of its author? :?:
How is Clark permitted to do these things over and over again with tacit approval, even back-slapping bonhomie, from people who should know better?

Clark:-

You are not the first to try and ban me, and I'm pretty sure you won't be the last.

You mention this in a way which suggests you are quite pleased with yourself about it, which of course you are. Your system works very well, doesn't it?

Clark:-

Honestly, no one needs to justify why or when they edit or delete their own posts.

Precisely! If not for that fact, the full extent of your unpleasantness would be so much more obvious, wouldn't it?

You've used the system masterfully for what, 10 years you say(?), here and elsewhere, to disguise your trolling. And all efforts by those astute enough to see through your game and have you banned, have apparently failed.
-- And the game goes on even now.
-- I have to say it; you are extremely good at what you do.

My only regret in drawing attention to your nonsense is the undoubted pleasure you must experience in being centre stage in all of this, confident that nothing will be done to curb your subtle malevolence.
Clark:-

I don't like you. I don't think much of what you have to say. I find your opinions largely offensive. I believe you know what I think you are full of.

Such admirable restraint in front of an audience, eh Clark? Such polite and refined chastisement from such a gentleman. Where are your "f**king this" and "f**king that" comments now, Clark? Why aren't you using them here?
-- Ah yes, of course! Not yet. Perhaps later. 8)
Clark:-

It is exactly on topic, because your call for everyone to act and be forced to behave under a strict common rule is part and parcel of what you have been raving about for, well, forever.

Whether you call it "a strict common rule", the Golden Rule, or just common good manners, is irrelevant. You understand the concept as well as everyone else does and you know how essential it is in any successful human interaction.
-- Your malevolence lies in your complete disdain for it. It lies in your deceitful use of it as a smokescreen for your anti-social behaviour.

Your smokescreen is serving you well at the moment. Not many people at New Mars have seen through it or, if they have, they choose to ignore what they see. I saw through it a long time ago and I know very well what's behind it.
-- You're a vainglorious and bitter little man, Clark.
-- And, incidentally, that stuff you laughingly call poetry is the most contrived, structureless, obscure and meaningless drivel I've ever had the misfortune to read. (Actually I stopped years ago - couldn't stand all the wincing.) The fact that you can sit up and preen yourself in public over such inane doggerel is really very comical and speaks volumes for your adolescent state of mind.
-- To quote you once more:-

You know where I stand now. Just deal with it. ( )

[When you get the time, Josh, Bill, and CC,I'm still looking forward to responses to my questions. Thanks, guys.]

Josh Cryer · 2005-08-28 21:39:30

I don't evaluate or re-evaluate what I can "get away with" here or anywhere else. (You're confusing me with Clark on this point.) I just rely on the manners I was taught as a child.

You said you "expect to get banned" from here if you posted the same kinds of stuff clark posted. Thus you evaluated the situation and incorrectly assumed that would result in your getting banned.

My standards and those employed at New Mars apparently differ - in fact, it appears NM has no standards at all to speak of.

The standard is pretty simple to me, if you're going to misbehave and make yourselves miserable, there you go. Simply ignoring clark would've saved quite a bit of trouble here, but instead you chose to make yourself out to be a victim and try to get back at him by coming after me and suggesting that not only does NewMars lack standards, but I myself must lack standards.

clarks rant, to me, was nothing. Perhaps that makes you better than me, or perhaps that makes you overly sensitive.

How about we create a precedent which states that calling someone a "f**king idiot" and a "mother f**ker" (among a sea of similar profanities which appeared in Clark's post and the one prior to it) will result in being banned?

You have to first judge intent. Rxke and John didn't think that he was being malicious, more over the top and dramatic. We're all adults here, it should be trivial for you to police yourselves, ignore others who you don't like (especially now that we have that feature) and talk to those who you do. This is an experiment in free association. You could click the ignore button and never have to be "subjected" to clarks posts ever again, but maybe that would be too much effort. Instead you insist that I or others police the place to make it better for you.

You questioned my standards, well I don't have vendettas against anyone, not even the man who stole my ex from me. Yet it seems that you and another person here has a vendetta against clark.

Clark has been "out of line", as you quaintly put it, on previous occasions. "Out of line" enough to cause significant irritation among other members, and then devious enough to go back and delete his offensive posts to eliminate the record of his unpleasant sniping.

Do you know how many members complained to me about clark in the 4 years I've been here? Two. That's right. A whole two users. One of which has had problems with clark from the start. A sort of ongoing obsession, if you will. "Significant irritation" does not make two users. The users who were banned here did cause "significant irritation," to the point of quite a few of the regulars calling the person on their behavior.

It's a pattern of behaviour which is a subtle form of trolling. Subtle enough to allow repeated attacks over a period of years by removing evidence and withdrawing from the disturbance he's caused, just long enough to let the heat die down.

I've seen the deletions, I don't particularly like them, but, let's assume for a moment he does delete them to irritate you. Why, exactly, are you feeding the troll?

The fact seems to be that he can get a rise out of certain posters by posting controversial stuff. Those posters seem to have a fixation on him (which is undoubtedly true by the vast number of PMs I've gotten from those posters), and he seems to get a kick out of it. If he was simply ignored, like any big adult would do when they don't like someone, then it would not be an issue.

And you could've ignored him 4 years ago, before the feature was implemented in software, consciously. It's not that hard.

I used to have people who would fixate on me on other forums I go to. I tended to get something out of making them miserable by posting opinions or comments they didn't like. I don't know why, it's sort of an insanity, really. But when I look back on that, I see myself as no worse than the people who were fixated on me. Who was I? Was I special in some way? Not really. I was just posting stuff, and they needed to fixate on me for some unknown psychological reason.

Now the solution is clear, is it not? You ignore the poster you don't like, stop fixating on them, and they'll simply go away. Or, the poster in question can stop messing with you as they clearly know you're watching their every move. But that isn't guaranteed because often times the one with the fixation will find something to complain about.

This is like some kind of playground bully scenario, except you're not really being physically hurt, and you can easily, very, very easily ignore said bully right out of existance. If only handling the playground bullies were so easy and inconsequential in real life!

If you can't see that pattern, then you need to open your eyes a little wider. It's blatantly obvious.

The "pattern" you speak of affects one or two users. If it was a forum wide disruption it would be something of my concern, but it is not. I don't make decisions based on the opinion of feuding users, that would be simply irresponsible. Adults should act like adults.

Bill. I ask you, directly. Have you noticed such a pattern in Clark's behaviour? A simple yes or no is all that's required. CC. I ask you too. Yes or no?

I suspect their responses to clark's behavior will be similar to that of Rxke and John when they thought he was banned. Two respectable users, might I add, who, according to you, might actually have subpar standards. Of course, you didn't explicitly state that I did, and you would probably argue to the death of it, but implied ad homs are still ad homs and I won't argue the point further.

I am completely taken aback, also, that one of my posts was invaded and altered without any prior warning or discussion with me about it.

I don't see why it is necessary to give some kind of prior warning. The post was obviously ridiculous on the face of things, why let it persist? So that this very type of discussion could go on or be reinitated in the future? "Oh look I quoted clark being bad, so here's more evidence that he's bad." That's not quite how it works. Unacceptable bahavior doesn't "add up over time," it is based on how the character in question is accepted by the community at large (they of course might use that metric). Everyone acts out on April Fools day, yet you don't see people tallying up the pranks over the years and suddenly deciding one day that someone deserves jailtime for too many egged windows. Just because several singular people disagree with one another over a long period of time, and it esclates, does not mean that the judgement should be based on their petty squabbles. The community itself would decide.

And I have yet to see any other than two people complaining about clarks behavior.

Imagine my disgust that the management had moved in and, without so much as a 'by-your-leave', had done the dirty work for him! Almost as though Clark has people determined to clean up after him.

Ahh, I didn't like the post very much, so by deleting it I am somehow doing his dirty work. No, I couldn't possibly have wanted the issue to actually die down, and users to move on. I couldn't possibly have wanted the users to act like adults and stop squabbling and letting one poster get to them. No, I must be out to help clark!

Hah, what a lot of good that would do! Me? Helping clark? The same guy who has recieved hundreds of PMs over the years over his squabbles with one other user who for all intents has an unbreakable vendetta against him? I would quite frankly distance myself from all of this, but I do want to be kind enough to give my rationale.

I could just as easily pull an Adrian and forget about you all. Certainly that would be the easiest thing to do. Certainly a lot easier than the hand holding that I have to give because some of you can't ignore someone.

If Clark's disgraceful tirade of ad hominem abuse was offensive enough that New Mars management saw fit to invade my post to remove it, why was it not offensive enough to warrant some kind of censure of its author?

Does its author disrupt the rest of the forum? Does its author have a significant number of users who are irritated by him on a regular basis? I will tell you right now that if you think that this is the case, you need to actually start reading NewMars, and get out of Free Chat where most of the squabbles with clark originate. He contributes to the other threads, to quite a few of them, in fact.

If two users don't like each other they have a choice, ignore one another, or act crazy. Both users have the choice to have this policy at any time. You clearly chose to reiterate the issue, much to clark's joy, I'm sure. But don't think I'm going to view you as the victim in that case. The thread was actually going back on topic, yet this had to start up again.

You mention this in a way which suggests you are quite pleased with yourself about it, which of course you are. Your system works very well, doesn't it?

Quite so, you are clearly incapable of ignoring him. You let a little man on the internet rattle you. Is that reason for banning? Not really, because you feed it, and you perpetuate it. Just think about how he'd feel if you did ignore him as the insignificant character that he is.

Again, I should iterate, that no other users seemingly have problems with clark. What is it with just one or two users that do? Perhaps their buttons are pushed too easily.

And all efforts by those astute enough to see through your game and have you banned, have apparently failed.

Two attempts (though one person has attempted unsuccessfully for years) does not sound like significant effort to me, the system seems to work, doesn't it? Certainly if a jury consisted of two people, then trials would be less fair.

Such admirable restraint in front of an audience, eh Clark? Such polite and refined chastisement from such a gentleman.

Oh yes, Shaun, your responses are so mature. Your tone isn't indicitive of flames at all. Everyone should learn to post like this.

Guess what? Ad homs don't require curse words. Calling my decisions substandard, for example, is easily facilitated by rhetoric. That's why a policy against ad homs cannot work, because people will find a way to skirt around such a policy. Just as you did in your own post.

Whether you call it "a strict common rule", the Golden Rule, or just common good manners, is irrelevant. You understand the concept as well as everyone else does and you know how essential it is in any successful human interaction.

Ahh, yes, but I'm sure even you would accept a condecending tone even with your sphere of "common good manners." You can bash whole countries, as long as you use "common good manners." Curse words do not make a disrespectful and unlikeable or even antisocial person. It is overall behavior, which from my point of view seems to be acceptable to the vast majority of NewMars users. If anyone would like to argue with this, then feel free. Tell me what you think other users think. Set up a poll, if you so chose. But know that clark knows where he stands, and doing that would only boost his ego even more.

Not many people at New Mars have seen through it or, if they have, they choose to ignore what they see. I saw through it a long time ago and I know very well what's behind it.

Ahh! Therein lies the rub! "Everyone else is too dumb to see how clark is." Perhaps everyone else is just mature enough to handle him? You presume that it is "wrong" to ignore him, at least that is what is implied here, but this is the internet, that is precisely how you deal with behavior on the internet. Perhaps you should learn how to deal with it, rather than have people go around policing for you?

And, incidentally, that stuff you laughingly call poetry is the most contrived, structureless, obscure and meaningless drivel I've ever had the misfortune to read. (Actually I stopped years ago - couldn't stand all the wincing.) The fact that you can sit up and preen yourself in public over such inane doggerel is really very comical and speaks volumes for your adolescent state of mind.

Such good manners.

clark · 2005-08-28 22:21:43

-- You're a vainglorious and bitter little man, Clark.

[bow]

Thank you! Thank you!

And all this time, I thought I was going unnoticed and unappreciated!

Now, please, exscuse me, I have some preening to do.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-08-29 02:04:04

Woohooo!!
What a slap-down by our Josh. Above and beyond the call of duty, too, I'd say.
Surprising how sensitive some people can be to any sort of criticism, eh Josh?

But wait! Yep, I forgot. 'Tis I who am the sensitive one. And somewhere at the back of my mind, as I wrote my last post, I just knew it would turn out that way - call it precognition, a kind of sixth sense.

Here I was, imagining that I was somehow the aggrieved party - you know, 'the victim' - when it was just my high-and-mighty, holier-than-thou standards which were at fault all along.
-- Out of the blue, I was called a "mother f**ker" and a "f**king idiot", for no apparent reason, and I managed to take offence at that. (Some people - sooo touchy!)
-- No reprimand of any kind for the perpetrator, you'll have noticed, but a lengthy diatribe from the Administrator aimed at 'the victim', for being a silly heart and complaining to the management. :!:
-- And, after nearly four years at New Mars, in which I've never mentioned Clark to the management at all, my one complaint about him means I have "a vendetta against Clark" (your words)!!

It's Twilight Zone stuff all right.

In fairness to you, Josh, I think that in most respects you've been a very good Administrator (a thankless task) and your computer skills have stood us all in good stead. I realize that you can't see a problem here and I take your point that you wouldn't be sure what to do, even if you could see the problem.
-- I realize, too, that my pedantic standards of good behaviour probably don't fit into today's world in any case, but what chance have I got asking for a politer and more orderly website when the Administrator is in fact a recovering anarchist!
-- I guess I'm totally out of my depth here!

QUOTE: "Instead you insist that I or others police the place to make it better for you."
Nearly right. I thought it would make it more civilized for everyone.
I understand now the futility of that aspiration.

But that's O.K.
I've lived and I've learned.
Clark, you've done well - even better than I thought you were doing. Evidently, you have more friends here than I realized - in high places, too - and more than willing to overlook your every little peccadillo and tantrum. Congratulations!

My last post was a one-off. I won't be pursuing the matter further.

Rxke · 2005-08-29 05:30:57

Topic getting locked and posts getting altered in 3, 2, 1...

Rxke · 2005-08-29 05:37:34

BTW, Josh, it's easy to say 'ignore the guy' when you're not yourself into the line of fire....

Far from taking sides, I'm sad to see Shaun go over something like this..., and no Clark, he didn't exclusively post in free shIt, (Hey, if other people can swear, I should get away with it too! ) Check out some life on Mars threads, for instance, where he had some good quality stuff going on.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-29 06:06:16

Arrgh!

Bill. I ask you, directly. Have you noticed such a pattern in Clark's behaviour? A simple yes or no is all that's required.
CC. I ask you too. Yes or no?

Yes, since my first day here. Sometimes I like clark because he has a tendency to take every position to the point of absurdity to illustrate flawed resoning. At the same time, he can be real prick at times without reason or provocation.

This last little tirade of his I would not have edited out of other users posts but I wouldn't have banned him either. Primarily because, like Josh, I don't want to get to the point of posting rigid rules that need to be enforced universally. Anythign we enact has at some point been violated by at least half the members. Where do we draw the line? One ad hom? Six? a clear pattern over years? Why? Besides, if we've reached the point where it's necessary, it's too late.

Yes, Shaun could with just a few mouse clicks never have to put up with clark's tantrums again. Hell, we all could. We could ignore anyone that says anything we don't like. We could enact all sorts of standards and aggressively ban anyone who violates them, but then we wouldn't have many users left.

Kinda like now but with more work.

No rules nor snazzy interface features are going to solve the apparent problem. If we can't associate as a functional community of our own accord this isn't going to work. We can blame Shaun for being too sensitive, we can blame clark for being a combative troll, but in the end it's the fault of no one and everyone. Shaun, clark, me, Josh; we all fucked it up in our own little ways. Some more than others but it's all so subjective and not worth any further time or effort.

<flush>

Farewell Shaun, you will be missed.

Rxke · 2005-08-29 06:08:55

Since I seem to be virtually the oly European posting in this thread, I have no qualms to take it yet further offtopic

my angry reaction on Clark's presumed banning was because I thought it happened w/o giving a reason, and I was seriously considering to leave the forum at that point. Because, frankly, all these heated political -getting-nowhere discussions tend to get mightily on my poor nervezzzz.
And no, I do not share Shaun's political views, I might even call him a right-wing nutter, heehee, but I liked the non-political stuff he posted.
And don't come to me politics is important, I am fully aware of that, It's just that discussing politics on the net is an exercice in futility (IMO)

Josh raised a good point though: when you feel someone's getting on your nerves, USE THE IGNORE BUTTON! It really helps, I know, I used it too. There were people I thought were trolls, and they started really irritating me, to the point of starting to reply in a not so friendly way.

It's just not worth the adrenalin, though.
So I discovered the ignore button and everything's fine again. After some time i gave the peeps a new chance, reset the ignore tag, ... and discovered they were ok after all, just having a quirky taste of humor, maybe.
...
of course, ignoring people can kill all debates, heehee... And the temptation to 'un-ignore' to check if they're not talking 'behind your back' might prove a bit too big...

Palomar · 2005-08-29 07:08:23

*My two cents' worth:

It's interesting that what originally started out as a thread devoted to European cultural issues has become a thread discussing New Mars cultural issues. But it's apt, in a way.

I occasionally drop by other space exploration/astronomy forums (though New Mars is definitely my mainstay). Another forum's owner discussed the possibilities of expanding his forum. Here was a response he received:

ooeee, an open discussion forum...DANGEROUS! I smell politics and people just coming for the open discussion forum.

"Interestingly" that comment was from a person who, for perhaps 6 months at least, was somewhat of a regular contributor to New Mars. There are also at least 4 other usernames rather active there who used to be rather active here: Those folks discussing science, Mars discoveries, other astronomy discoveries and missions, etc.

Getting the drift?

New Mars is becoming unhealthy. That other forum has more consistently solid, serious and productive discussions about probes, robotic missions, impending and historical missions, astronomy, etc. than New Mars does. New Mars used to have that level of influx, discussion and focus. Used to.

Adrian owns this board. He needs to decide in which direction the culture of New Mars will ultimately go. If he does not, then it falls to the Moderators.

It seems the primary objective of this message board is getting lost in the shuffle (and scuffle).

No, New Mars won't go belly-up and die if 1 person devoted to science, mission (primarily Mars) discoveries, etc., leaves. But an accumulative effect...

My preference is a lot of science and astronomy (all my many threads in Astronomical Events, Unmanned Probes, Science & Technology, Water on Mars, Life Support bear this out) with a bit of Free Chat (variety is the spice of life). To be blunt, I definitely believe there has been some abuse by others in the use of Free Chat. And the result is loss of focus and etc...a loss to New Mars. Refer again to the quote above by a former NM member at that other forum.

Adrian, Mods: Here's your wake-up call. What's it going to be?

--Cindy

P.S.: Just now received a PM wherein a regular, bright and worthwhile contributor has decided to leave New Mars. I'm very sad to know this. Looks like it's going to be even lonelier around here for folks like me.

Adrian, Mods: The geese producing the golden eggs are feeling compelled to take wing and fly away. Adrian, it's your board. Hello? Anybody home?

clark · 2005-08-29 07:22:45

This is so not worth it.

Cheers, all.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-29 07:35:04

Perhaps a total lockdown on political discussion is what's needed. I can't advocate that because I'm of the opinion that if we have to take that step it's beyond repair regardless, but if Josh or Adrian decide to go that route I won't object.

Initially I came to this forum for the "Martian Politics" and "Terraforming" topics, discussion about the wide open possibilities of the future and all that. Those areas have been next to dead for a very long time. A metaphor perhaps.

That said, the real issues of politics and uncivility are overall confined to the "Free Chat" and "Human Missions" threads. Making determinations about the entire board based on those anomalies is a bit rash.

Palomar · 2005-08-29 08:39:27

That said, the real issues of politics and uncivility are overall confined to the "Free Chat" and "Human Missions" threads. Making determinations about the entire board based on those anomalies is a bit rash.

*I disagree with that last sentence (I presume you are addressing all of us "in general").

We're losing productive, positive, bright and worthwhile contributors. In the end, that is all that matters...because it does effect the entire board (not just two forums).

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2005-08-29 10:44:02

Shaun,

You act as if you're respectable, and better than everyone else here, but your posts have always had veiled insults in them, especially when you disagree with someone.

Surprising how sensitive some people can be to any sort of criticism, eh Josh?

Oh, had I not responded, which I would've rather done, btw, I would've recieved even more complaining. I don't think that I was going on the defense, I think my response was reasoned and fit my position well.

But wait! Yep, I forgot. 'Tis I who am the sensitive one. And somewhere at the back of my mind, as I wrote my last post, I just knew it would turn out that way - call it precognition, a kind of sixth sense.

It doesn't have to be your 'last post' any more than this has to be mine. Somehow I knew the 'sensitivity' comment would get to you, though. Perhaps I shouldn't have said it, if it's what pushed you over. Or perhaps it's the fact that you're not getting your way, at least not through me.

Here I was, imagining that I was somehow the aggrieved party - you know, 'the victim' - when it was just my high-and-mighty, holier-than-thou standards which were at fault all along.

Oh, I don't think there is any argument that your standards do not reflect what you feel they are. You do insult people here. Indeed, you've insulted me, of all people, a neutral party, because I haven't done things the way you want. My reasoning is totally glossed over. In fact, all you can do is reiterate your tired argument.

Out of the blue, I was called a "mother f**ker" and a "f**king idiot", for no apparent reason, and I managed to take offence at that. (Some people - sooo touchy!)

Ahh, your years of thinly veiled insults, such as the ones in this thread to me, couldn't possibly have contributed to it? If I were to curse at you right now for taking time out of my day to respond to you, would that be unwarrented? What if I were to send you thinly veiled insults? I'm quite offended by how I've been treated by two users here, simply over one single user who can easily, very easily, be ignored.

No reprimand of any kind for the perpetrator, you'll have noticed, but a lengthy diatribe from the Administrator aimed at 'the victim', for being a silly heart and complaining to the management.

Yes, naturally, I couldn't win. Had I not responded, there would have been complaints that the Administrator wasn't listening. The only solution for you is banning clark, that much is clear in PMs and in public statements. But you got your response, and the answers were all reasonable and valid. This is how the internet works. You ignore people you dislike. You don't PM the Mods and complain about them once a week or two for 4 years. A significant distruption does not two people who dislike each other make.

And, after nearly four years at New Mars, in which I've never mentioned Clark to the management at all, my one complaint about him means I have "a vendetta against Clark" (your words)!!

It's a vendetta when you cannot accept my reasonable response to this situation. You already admitted that you "saw through [clark] a long time ago," and indeed, it seems like you managed to ignore him for 4 years, just like everyone else here who has no problem doing so. It's just that now it's personal. And now you aren't going to let it go and move on. Actually, strike that, you do seem to be "moving on," but not without placing the blame on me, of course.

I realize that you can't see a problem here and I take your point that you wouldn't be sure what to do, even if you could see the problem.

Actually, I do see the problem. Two users dislike another user. It's a rather simple problem, and it's solved quite easily. What's my solution? Putting up with PMs for years. Coddling. Both users are valuable assets to New Mars. If any of them leave, it won't be by my stead. So they can have it out until one of them gives it up.

But, this is what I'm talking about thinly veiled insults. You conclude at the end of your post that nothing is done to clark because he "has friends in high places," not that I'm incapable of seeing the problem. You just had to imply that I'm incompetent here.

I realize, too, that my pedantic standards of good behaviour probably don't fit into today's world in any case, but what chance have I got asking for a politer and more orderly website when the Administrator is in fact a recovering anarchist!

Your behavior is not good by any means, you refrain from using vulgar language, sure, but you certainly snipe at people and insult people, and have no problem doing so. Indeed, the very paragraph that I am quoting here is insulting to myself. Really, none of this would have even come up had I not edited your post, the edit pissed you off.

Nearly right. I thought it would make it more civilized for everyone. I understand now the futility of that aspiration.

You're not in touch with NewMars. People want to be free, they don't want to be restricted (and we admins don't want to have to go around restricting, we aren't paid to do this, you know, and that would be infeasible, NewMars is a mere $30 investment by the Mars Society, and that's all it should be). So yes, it is futile to expect people to work for you just because you refuse to ignore someone.

Clark, you've done well - even better than I thought you were doing. Evidently, you have more friends here than I realized - in high places, too - and more than willing to overlook your every little peccadillo and tantrum.

Actually, I consider you all my friends, all the regulars at least. Yet, somehow I get targeted when certain posters here clash with other posters and I try to remain the neutral party. Basically, it's like this. You don't like me because I'm trying to keep all of our regular members together. You insult me because somehow the bond that we've built over 5+ years (yes I've known quite a few of you since before this 4th incantation of these forums) is worth less than the petty squabbles you have with one another.

Well let me tell you. It hurts. It hurts when someone who I've known for a long time starts targeting me and says some pretty harsh stuff because I don't do things their way.

Rxke,

BTW, Josh, it's easy to say 'ignore the guy' when you're not yourself into the line of fire....

I understand that it was nearly impossible for Shaun to have ignored clarks ramble, but subsequent discussion should not have restarted. It was done with. The ignore button should've been used. Believe me, I've had my share of people sniping at me. I can happily say that after 4 months on another forum I successfully made them go away quietly. All without saying a word to them.

Far from taking sides, I'm sad to see Shaun go over something like this...

What generally happens is the posters that cannot get along with other posters tend to leave, because consensus is that the rest of the posters don't care about their petty squabbles.

and no Clark, he didn't exclusively post in free shIt

No, he didn't, he actually used to be a very prolific poster outside of Free Chat. Just a little under a third of his posts were exclusive to Free Chat. In fact, I have made more posts in Free Chat than he has.

Cobra,

Anythign we enact has at some point been violated by at least half the members.

And all of the regular members! If you think you're perfect, you're wrong.

We can blame Shaun for being too sensitive, we can blame clark for being a combative troll, but in the end it's the fault of no one and everyone.

But had you been me and said that you would've been accused of spouting moral relativism and being an anarchist.

So anyone want to pay me to quit my job and run NewMars being a full time objective moderator? Or are we all just going to have to accept that the lax policies are necessary? Perhaps stopping political discussion is possible, but that will be very hard on all of you, considering how popular those threads are.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#201 2005-08-16 19:01:57

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#202 2005-08-18 23:44:32

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#203 2005-08-22 12:18:53

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#204 2005-08-24 10:31:26

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#205 2005-08-27 23:06:11

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#206 2005-08-28 08:49:23

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#207 2005-08-28 10:41:57

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#208 2005-08-28 11:49:21

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#209 2005-08-28 12:42:59

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#210 2005-08-28 17:40:12

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#211 2005-08-28 19:10:39

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#212 2005-08-28 19:28:50

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#213 2005-08-28 20:09:27

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#214 2005-08-28 21:39:30

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#215 2005-08-28 22:21:43

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#216 2005-08-29 02:04:04

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#217 2005-08-29 05:30:57

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#218 2005-08-29 05:37:34

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#219 2005-08-29 06:06:16

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#220 2005-08-29 06:08:55

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#221 2005-08-29 07:08:23

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#222 2005-08-29 07:22:45

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#223 2005-08-29 07:35:04

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#224 2005-08-29 08:39:27

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

#225 2005-08-29 10:44:02

Re: Race and Culture - A Changing Europe - Opening a mighty can of worms...

Board footer