Speakeasy forum

General discussion

So, having been jumped on by two "Moderators" here

by Ziks511 / October 30, 2004 6:44 AM PDT

what's the breakdown right vs left among the "moderators"? I know Dave Konkel is on the side of the angels Happy but are the rest of the "moderators" split along the lines of the forum, about 80+/20- to the right? (I'm being conservative here in my estimate, as is appropriate to the leanings of the forum participants.) Sorry about the untoward moderation recently, it must be the influence of all these damned Canadians around me.

These are just questions folks, nothing worth grabbing your AK47 about. Its just that opinions here seem so slanted and the rhetoric so "Take-No-Prisoners" that I find it difficult to deal with. Generally I now try to couch my disagreements in humor. Its easier to deal with.

Yours immoderately

Rob Boyter

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: So, having been jumped on by two "Moderators" here
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: So, having been jumped on by two "Moderators" here
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
I didn't jump on you
by TONI H / October 30, 2004 7:00 AM PDT

I was even polite.......

I'm not left or right. I vote for the best person for the job and always have. Kerry isn't even close this time around. There are issues with Bush that I don't agree with, but they are minor compared to the issues Kerry represents in toto that I couldn't swallow if I was starvin' to death.

TONI

Collapse -
you sure have jumped on me, M'am
by netsky / October 30, 2004 9:40 AM PDT
In reply to: I didn't jump on you

What were the last heard words of Abe Lincoln?


"I'm not left or right."


i'm from missouri

"I vote for the best person for the job and always have. Kerry isn't even close this time around."


Yo- kay....

"There are issues with Bush that I don't agree with, but they are minor"


tell me, tell us, please.

"compared to the issues Kerry represents in toto that I couldn't swallow if I was starvin' to death."

Ok.

But tell us the little things that bug you about ******** Bush. And we of the other side will tell about our reservations about our Hanoi Kerry.

Fair enough.

I DO hope on Nov 3 I am say about King George:

"Now he belongs to the ages". i would allow that new plagerism, given that so many other moral plagerisms have come from this White House of black hearts.

oh what fun to debate in adult fashion. Some day you will teach me, I do hope for that.

Collapse -
It would be easier to debate with you
by TONI H / October 30, 2004 9:58 AM PDT

if you didn't throw the babble-bull into the mix...

However, one of the things I don't agree with Bush about is I don't want anybody messing with Roe vs Wade in any way, shape, or form, and I know he will or he will at least try to find a way to do that.

TONI

Collapse -
this deserves decent discussion
by netsky / October 30, 2004 10:17 AM PDT

i will walk Petey the pup, eat a hot dog and get back to you later in more level tone.

meanwhile- let's hear others talk about the proposed topic

Collapse -
Re: this deserves decent discussion
by netsky / October 30, 2004 12:12 PM PDT

"if you didn't throw the babble-bull into the mix..."

I only follow your lead, Lady.


"However, one of the things I don't agree with Bush about is I don't want anybody messing with Roe vs Wade in any way, shape, or form, and I know he will or he will at least try to find a way to do that."

Yes, he will see R v Wade dumped and you are giving control of your body over to the most extreme of all pro-lifers: the one who kills at the drop of a hat, but who would preserve crack baby fetuses and hydrocephalic vegetables.

A girl friend of mine last month had a late term abortion for that very reason. Her life was not endangered by the hydrocephalic mutant inside her body. Is this the sort of thing the Bushies would want carried to full term? Do they even care about the emotional cost to the mother, much less the social cost if the monstrosity should survive more than a few hours after birth?

I know very little about this stuff...

A quick story: in '73 or shortly after, right behind my maternal grandmothers back yard was Orlando's first and instantly -popular- abortion clinic.

The old cracker lady was terribly put out by the extreme proximity. From her second floor bedroom there it was to be seen: young women coming and going all day seven days per week. She fumed oh so terribly. 618 Woodward was her address, and that avenue was the first parallel street north of busy Colonial Drive. The clinic and "Bugsie" (my pa's unique nickname for the old lady) are both gone now. But oh, every newly lost pregnacy seemed to tear an ovary from herself. She was that PRO LIFE.

Collapse -
hydrocephalic mutant???
by Glenda / October 30, 2004 12:26 PM PDT

Excuse me but a couple I know had a child born with spina bifida and she lived a good life for 26 years!
Even tho her mother had to drain the fluid off her brain every day! I think my friend would have a few words for you calling her child a mutant! Rhonda was a beautiful kind girl! The world would have missed her had she not been born!
Glenda

Collapse -
Re: hydrocephalic mutant???
by netsky / October 30, 2004 4:36 PM PDT

This is an example of you inciting dissention where none was intended.

I did not call your friend's spina bifida child a mutant nor would i.

I spoke of my local friend's hydrocephalic fetus ALONE. That condition is not "spina bifida".

You may fault me if desired for using a poor word in "mutant", for no such thing is really true of the hydrocephalic fetus. It is for Bill Osler to clarify what this condition is really about. I -think- it is a lack of pressure-equalization of the cerebral spinal fluid.

The fluid pressure builds in the fetus' head, enlarging the forming skull, compressing and partially or completely destroying the brain.

I suppose too (never looked it up per se) that the severity of the condition varies greatly. But very commonly the fetus dies in the womb, if not shortly after birth. For those hydrocephalic infants that DO survive I doubt many of them can even feel the mother's tears nor rubs- the thing is practically a vegetable with all higher brain functions dead dead dead.

Spina bifida is entirely different. I may not know what i'm talking about in this particular case of -actual hydrocephally-. I just know it was a partial-birth-style of abortion.

And i know i did not shame the memory of your acquaintance's child. You have done that, and at my expense.

i really resent you for this. You might apologise, but such is the present tenor of SE i won't hold my breath.

Sorry, folks. I intended NOT to post to SE any more until some official changes are made here, but the implied threat that Glenda puts out that she -might- just go and cite my post to her acquaintances who loved and cared for a special needs child.. that just rips me up inside for them, and for Glenda's cocksure cockup here..

it just isn't right, Glenda. You've spoiled my night but don't you dare go spoil your acquaintances with such ignorance-base intent to make me feel guilt, and them feel even more pain.

Collapse -
Re: It would be easier to debate with you
by W2X3XP / October 30, 2004 10:40 AM PDT

I don't think Bush will, or can, mess with Roe vs Wade, he doesn't have THAT much power. There are the legislative and Judicial branches of the government to protect Roe vs Wade.

I think Bush is making noises about Roe vs Wade because he knows that's what the conservatives want to hear, he has no intention of doing anything.

Collapse -
yes, he will
by netsky / October 30, 2004 12:02 PM PDT

Bush is an Evangelical extremist.

The next four years will see probably four new Supreme Court Justices seated.

Ultra conservatives

or

Moderates

WHO becomes our next or last president determines the future of Roe v Wade.

Collapse -
Don't kid yourself Witooks. He'll stack the Court if he can
by Ziks511 / October 30, 2004 1:41 PM PDT

I fear the Bushies and all their extremist religious cronies. I really do think they're out to create a Fundamentalist Republic to face off with all the Islamic Republics. And besides its so easy to govern when thought and personal freedoms are taken out of the mix. The Religious Right have been working to this end since the late Sixties, and used to discuss it quite openly but seem to have grown craftier the closer they get to power.

Rob Boyter

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two "Moderators" here
by Mark5019 / October 30, 2004 7:07 AM PDT

ziks why is it that you just k\like kerry wont answer questions he refuses to release papers and you all change the subject why is that what is he afraid of and your afraid of .
we know do you?

he was a coward wait was is a past tense he still is in my eyes wish i coulda shared a walk in nam with kerry. see the back bone he had i could learn from him smirk

Collapse -
Just think, the forum, being composed of people who use
by Kiddpeat / October 30, 2004 7:09 AM PDT

computers to debate politics, is far more liberal than the US as a whole. A thought to brighten your day? Devil

Collapse -
I know Dave Konkel is on the side of the angels
by EdH / October 30, 2004 7:14 AM PDT

No, he's a liberal.

Collapse -
Re: I know Dave Konkel is on the side of the angels
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / October 30, 2004 8:58 AM PDT

Hi, EdH.

He's a liberal -- but I repeat myself! Wink BTW, you're fairly new here -- I converted from laissez faire conservatism to liberalism when I became convinced that aissez faire principles and Christianity are mutually incompatible.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
And that dear friends is why I can't dismiss Christianity
by Ziks511 / October 30, 2004 2:08 PM PDT

however strong the impulse when I hear the bleating of the supposedly "Religious" Right. Because every so often it prompts people to real thoughtfulness and real compassion. We were friends with an Anglican (read Episcopalian) minister in England and what a superb gentleman he is.

Rob Boyter

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two
by Roger NC / October 30, 2004 7:50 AM PDT

Why does a breakdown matter? Besides, moderators are members too, all were members before being asked to be moderators, or at least I was, long before.

We volunteer time and effort to try to aid CNET in managing the board.

However, we are still members, not paid managers, and as such our opinions of world events and personages are our own.

When we act in support of the TOS or other policies, that is in support of CNET.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two
by W2X3XP / October 30, 2004 8:09 AM PDT

"When we act in support of the TOS or other policies, that is in support of CNET."

What about when you DON'T act in support of the TOS or other policies?

See that's the problem .... when you have the red M by your name all the time, you are a mod all the time. As such you have to support the TOS or other policies all the time.

Shocked

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two
by Roger NC / October 30, 2004 8:11 AM PDT

I'm going to be quite frank, and probably be told I'm out of line.

Some of the recent activities makes me wonder about even reading the board, much less trying to help.

In fact, a lot of it makes me wish to just leave the place.

And there are plenty here who wish to moderate the moderators, I'm sure if you watch, you'll identify them.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Specifics please?
by Ziks511 / October 30, 2004 8:44 AM PDT

Since posts are overwhelmingly Bush-positive and reactions to contrary views are so strident, I confess to being puzzled. Is the right so insecure that questions and occasional irritation threaten?

Rob Boyter

Collapse -
Re: Specifics please?
by Roger NC / October 30, 2004 9:23 AM PDT
In reply to: Specifics please?

Specifics to what?

Why recently I'd consider leaving completely? the esculating number of hateful posts, take your pick of which side politically.

The attempted to be subtle attempts to completely change the nature of the forum and to confuse and tease some members into irritated reactions.

IMO, there are those that only come to irritate. There are some who come to be "victimized" so they can complain about it.

I'm not sure how your belief the right is insecure fit my posts or your request for specifics. Are you asked am I threatened by questions an occasional irritation?

I'm tired of view missionaries that try to be soooooooo calm while belittling everyone that doesn't agree with them. I rather have a man yell at me angry than one who attempts to psyche me into either

a- believing I'm wrong and too befuddled to decide for myself

b- losing my temper so he/she/it can act the wounded party.

As far as right or Republican, yes, I'm registered Republican. Many if not all of those here considered left at all accuse me of being far right. Like most, and perhaps as delusional as the next, I think of myself nearer the center than any of the speeches I hear.

I'd place myself just right of that gray center as far as in comparison to the range here. Others can place themselves if they wish to do so.

RogerNC

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two
by Mark5019 / October 30, 2004 8:13 AM PDT

when is kerry are you gonna reply to charges are again change the topic?

Collapse -
Excuse me?
by W2X3XP / October 30, 2004 8:16 AM PDT

I was responding to Roger's statement.

What are you talking about? I have never met Kerry. Or Bush for that matter.

Collapse -
Re: Excuse me?
by Mark5019 / October 30, 2004 8:26 AM PDT
In reply to: Excuse me?

im refering to when are you gonna reply to kerrys refusal to release papers like bush did are are u gonna change the subject

Collapse -
Oh. No, sorry I can't help you there. I don't know why
by W2X3XP / October 30, 2004 10:47 AM PDT
In reply to: Re: Excuse me?
Shocked
Collapse -
just as i thoght none can except the coward he is
by Mark5019 / October 30, 2004 11:10 AM PDT

and since he refuses to release we wont see it till after bush is reelected

Collapse -
I'm the only Moderator here who
by TONI H / October 30, 2004 8:20 AM PDT

is also a Moderator in four other forums....and all Moderators when they log in have their red M follow them from forum to forum, whereas the old software distinguished which forum it should show up in.

We receive Modalerts via emails......for all forums. To have to log in as a regular member (requiring a separate registration to do so which is against ALL CNET TOS rules) just to be able to post as a non-Moderator means that should a modalert come through for another forum that needs to be dealt with, I would have to log out, log back in under the Mod status, and then go to the email modalert and get to the problem post.......just to have the moderator tools available to us to do our job.

I don't think so......When I post a message, everybody knows by the tone and by my words whether I'm posting as a member or a Moderator. It's not hard to tell the difference.

TONI

Collapse -
Re: So, having been jumped on by two
by Chorus-Line A1-QMS / October 30, 2004 8:44 AM PDT

See that's the problem .... when you have the red M by your name all the time, you are a mod all the time. As such you have to support the TOS or other policies all the time.

Posted by: W2X3XP Posted on: 10/30/2004 3:09 PM

==========================================

Say when the cops are on duty, they wear their uniforms and represent themselves as the law.

Say when they take their uniforms off, they are ordinary citizens free to do all the hockie pokie that they want.

But then again, there are many abusive cops anyways enough to increase the crime rate of this nation...See how Rodney King has been beaten almost to death...Big headlines around the nation eh. What happens to these cops now? Justice is served.

It takes voices, it takes much patience and time.

Reminds me of the movie by Denzel Washing, "The Training Day" ---- recommended by CL. Oh! Watch it!

Collapse -
Actually SE at times reminds me of
by TONI H / October 30, 2004 8:58 AM PDT

"Kindergarten Cop"........the kids drive the teacher crazy to the point that one thinks he has a brain tumor instead of a headache. He finally takes control by treating them like they're in bootcamp and he's the drill instructor.

They don't like it, but they finally GET it and behave like they should.

TONI

Collapse -
At least.....
by Chorus-Line A1-QMS / October 30, 2004 9:09 AM PDT

In this particular Movie, the COP is not CORRUPT.
:
:
:
See the difference between the TWO COPS in these TWO movie?
:
:
:
Good example of the LAW IMPLEMENTERS create better citizens. Bad examples have to GO....

Collapse -
Don't hold back now CL
by TONI H / October 30, 2004 9:13 AM PDT
In reply to: At least.....

are you saying that the 'cops' (Moderators) in SE are corrupt? And if you believe, it.......explain how you feel that way.

TONI

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?