Hi Joe, I have been unsuccessful in getting you to reply via PM, so I'll ask here.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

phenomena

Joe,

Twice now you have sent me PMs which say precisely "Please watch your language on the boards".

Each time I have written you back asking you to tell me more specifically what language is problematic. Each time you have ignored my response. In case you are so flooded with PMs and due to all of your moderating duties, I thought I should ask here, so you will be sure to see it.

I don't know what "language" is troubling to you, and would like you to answer my questions with regard to my use of language and general standards for the use of language in PR, where I most frequently post.

I am not aware of any language which I use which isn't fairly commonplace in PR. In fact, there are many PR regulars who's language is notably more "noteworthy" than my own. So, I'd like to take this opportunity to ask if you could denote this PR language standard which is to be applied evenly to all members... Since there seems to be so much ambiguity about this and you are seemingly too busy to answer my individual queries to you in response to your messages, perhaps it would be better if the universal criteria were put here for all to see...

Thanks in advance..
 
Quote from phenomena:

Joe,

Twice now you have sent me PMs which say precisely "Please watch your language on the boards".

Each time I have written you back asking you to tell me more specifically what language is problematic. Each time you have ignored my response. In case you are so flooded with PMs and due to all of your moderating duties, I thought I should ask here, so you will be sure to see it.

I don't know what "language" is troubling to you, and would like you to answer my questions with regard to my use of language and general standards for the use of language in PR, where I most frequently post.

I am not aware of any language which I use which isn't fairly commonplace in PR. In fact, there are many PR regulars who's language is notably more "noteworthy" than my own. So, I'd like to take this opportunity to ask if you could denote this PR language standard which is to be applied evenly to all members... Since there seems to be so much ambiguity about this and you are seemingly too busy to answer my individual queries to you in response to your messages, perhaps it would be better if the universal criteria were put here for all to see...

Thanks in advance..
More...

Phenomena,
In response to your PM's I have only received one, and have included your PM in the print screen.

Your posts continuously call other members douchebags, and I have received complaints from other members that your posts are over the line in your retaliation towards another member.

Rearden Metal also noted the type of language you use, and by many this is seen as obscene in nature.
 

Attachments

Quote from Joe:

Rearden Metal also noted the type of language you use, and by many this is seen as obscene in nature.
More...
Uh actually RM was referring to language used by Optional777/ZZZzzzzzz in comparison.
 
Quote from Lucrum:

Uh actually RM was referring to language used by Optional777/ZZZzzzzzz.

Although it's hard to imagine the same people complaining about phenomena would also complain about Optional/ZZZzzzzz even though ET's biggest troll's behavior/language is consistently much worse than anything I noticed from phenomena.
More...

My mistake,
Here is an example: These are just examples of the posts that I left up. The rest were deleted.

Quote from phenomena:

If this was the 1770s you douche bags would be the biggest loyalist, statist dirtbags in the village. Ratting out patriots and sympathizers to the Brittish left and right...
More...

Quote from phenomena:

This is the douche bag who who wears knee pads, elbow pads, and a helmet with a reflective and lights vest when he goes on a bike ride. He wears shorts that go up to mid thigh and socks pulled all the way up and has big thick glasses. He was a pathological tattle tale and brown noser his whole childhood and had no friends. He probably still doesn't.
More...


Quote from phenomena:

Too bad he ended up reproducing... I'm sure he regrets it...

Quote from omegapoint:

My father in law is in his late 70's and he hangs on every word per the article. You may be younger.
More...
More...
 
Quote from Joe:

Here is an example:
More...
Quote from phenomena:

If this was the 1770s you douche bags would be the biggest loyalist, statist dirtbags in the village. Ratting out patriots and sympathizers to the Brittish left and right...




:confused: Jeez, if that's worthy of a warning/deleting in the P&R forum, most of it's regular users (including me) should be permanently banned hanged drawn and quartered.
 
Joe,

If that is an example of his posts I say he is an entertaining poster. I think the modern spelling is doooshbag though. That would be my only complaint.

Wikpedia Rennick out:cool:
 
Joe,

As previously mentioned the "goat F-er" comments were all made (numerous times) by zzz/optional, not me. It's also interesting to note that all of the examples you cite of "unacceptable comments" were comments directed at zzz/optional. Not only that, those posts were fairly mild by P/R standards, would you really refute that? I notice optional hasn't been banned for making racist statements against souther whites calling us all "inbred" and "rednecks" not to mention calling us "Klannish". Oh, and let's not forget how he repeatedly calls us "tea baggers", "wind baggers", and "douche baggers", and by you that's apparently just fine, yet it's not okay if I use the term "douche bag"?? That would all be fine, if it weren't such a salient double standard... as others have also pointed out. I noticed that you haven't outlined any general terms or set any general standards which will be applied evenly in terms of P/R conduct, as I'm sure we could all agree that "goat f-er" hysterically used over and over again is quite a bit more vulgar and offensive than "douchebag", which is said on prime time television, by any objective standard. Perhaps an outline of said general terms and an explanation of the highly visible double standard would be a good idea. "Douchebag" is too vulgar and offensive, but "goat Fcker", "inbred", "tea bagger", and "cracker" are all perfectly acceptable?? So, as things stand now, if there is no double standard, I'm free to openly use any term which zzz/optional/arouguetrader has used and so long as I don't direct the term "douchebag" at anyone, then that's alright? Please clarify... Thanks...

Quote from Joe:

Phenomena,
In response to your PM's I have only received one, and have included your PM in the print screen.

Your posts continuously call other members douchebags, and I have received complaints from other members that your posts are over the line in your retaliation towards another member.

Rearden Metal also noted the type of language you use, and by many this is seen as obscene in nature.
More...
 
Quote from phenomena:

Joe,

As previously mentioned the "goat F-er" comments were all made (numerous times) by zzz/optional, not me. It's also interesting to note that all of the examples you cite of "unacceptable comments" were comments directed at zzz/optional. Not only that, those posts were fairly mild by P/R standards, would you really refute that? I notice optional hasn't been banned for making racist statements against souther whites calling us all "inbred" and "rednecks" not to mention calling us "Klannish". Oh, and let's not forget how he repeatedly calls us "tea baggers", "wind baggers", and "douche baggers", and by you that's apparently just fine, yet it's not okay if I use the term "douche bag"?? That would all be fine, if it weren't such a salient double standard... as others have also pointed out. I noticed that you haven't outlined any general terms or set any general standards which will be applied evenly in terms of P/R conduct, as I'm sure we could all agree that "goat f-er" hysterically used over and over again is quite a bit more vulgar and offensive than "douchebag", which is said on prime time television, by any objective standard. Perhaps an outline of said general terms and an explanation of the highly visible double standard would be a good idea. "Douchebag" is too vulgar and offensive, but "goat Fcker", "inbred", "tea bagger", and "cracker" are all perfectly acceptable?? So, as things stand now, if there is no double standard, I'm free to openly use any term which zzz/optional/arouguetrader has used and so long as I don't direct the term "douchebag" at anyone, then that's alright? Please clarify... Thanks...
More...

Cmon Pal, who cares. This site is free and your dribble is probably distracting Joe from giving it a toss on RGC GIRLS thread.

:cool:
 
Quote from phenomena:

Joe,

As previously mentioned the "goat F-er" comments were all made (numerous times) by zzz/optional, not me. It's also interesting to note that all of the examples you cite of "unacceptable comments" were comments directed at zzz/optional. Not only that, those posts were fairly mild by P/R standards, would you really refute that? I notice optional hasn't been banned for making racist statements against souther whites calling us all "inbred" and "rednecks" not to mention calling us "Klannish". Oh, and let's not forget how he repeatedly calls us "tea baggers", "wind baggers", and "douche baggers", and by you that's apparently just fine, yet it's not okay if I use the term "douche bag"?? That would all be fine, if it weren't such a salient double standard... as others have also pointed out. I noticed that you haven't outlined any general terms or set any general standards which will be applied evenly in terms of P/R conduct, as I'm sure we could all agree that "goat f-er" hysterically used over and over again is quite a bit more vulgar and offensive than "douchebag", which is said on prime time television, by any objective standard. Perhaps an outline of said general terms and an explanation of the highly visible double standard would be a good idea. "Douchebag" is too vulgar and offensive, but "goat Fcker", "inbred", "tea bagger", and "cracker" are all perfectly acceptable?? So, as things stand now, if there is no double standard, I'm free to openly use any term which zzz/optional/arouguetrader has used and so long as I don't direct the term "douchebag" at anyone, then that's alright? Please clarify... Thanks...
More...

I understand that you think there is a double standard, but ZZZzz will be dealt with as well. Your posts stood out as offensive, and the posts I listed were mild compared to your previous comment, which is the reason why they were allow to remain up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top