Civility

[carhill]

On other, more heavily moderated forums I participate in, there is a simple 'be courteous' rule.

 

'I disagree with this opinion', then provide my own. This is courteous.

 

'Your advice is horrible. No person in their right mind should ever listen to it. What a chump' .... violates the 'be courteous' rule.

 

or, more appropriate to this forum...

 

'I think affairs are wrong'......and then explain my position. This is courteous.

 

'Only vile losers have affairs'.... violates the 'be courteous' rule

 

The second person would be moderated for violating the 'be courteous' rule. If such moderation would cause their posts to be reviewed, where 'member' occurs under their screenname, 'moderated' would occur while moderation was in effect. If sufficiently 'heinous' (loved Tony's verbiage) that a 'vacation' was warranted, then 'suspended' would appear. Total removal would be indicated by 'banned'.

 

The site owners here have some really simple rules for behavior. Stick to the topic and avoid personal attacks. 'You're behaving like an azzhole' is a personal attack on nearly every forum I participate in. 'Behavior' is not separate from person. If the person is behaving like an azzhole, simply report them for moderation, in accordance with the 'be courteous' and 'avoid personal attacks' rule.

 

Hopefully, once things shake out at the top, some new, perhaps more comprehensive rules will be instituted and a larger moderation staff tasked with enforcing them. Clear and consistent enforcement of rules is key.

[bentnotbroken]

Excellent example of twisting:lmao::lmao::lmao:

 

 

If you think so:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

[wannabdone]

"The other side of the story: Support and discussion for those who find themselves involved with a committed partner."

 

How is calling somebody "trash" support?

 

This topic has been addressed before and it would appear that those who believe that OW/OM are fair game win out. Sometimes I wonder if the description of this forum is a way to lure unsuspecting people in here so as to provide target practice for others. It's cruel and it's uncalled for in any situation.

 

Best,

Ellie

 

 

I completely agree with this!!!! The fact of the matter is when you get on here to slam people, and make them feel bad for things that were bad within itself, your holy than tho stance, IMO, is demolished. You can openly come on here and know that your words will intentionally hurt someone, but yet complain about how the OW/OM intentionally hurt everyone else. To me, thats just being a hypocrite.

[pureinheart]

PIH.... what in gods green earth did you get reported for???? are you kidding?

 

LOL, you are so sweet, thank you BTW. Some reports I deserved, some I didn't. I allowed myself to be provoked, and did some provoking myself.

[wannabdone]

LOL, you are so sweet, thank you BTW. Some reports I deserved, some I didn't. I allowed myself to be provoked, and did some provoking myself.

 

 

Well... at least your a big enough person to own it.

[pureinheart]

If you think so:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

 

Yep:D........

[SoleMate]

I have notice there are some here who feel the need to constantly restate the obvious. People involved in Affairs generally already know these obvious facts and are not here looking for someone to help them determine what an affair is or what is involved in an Affair. Perhaps we can.....minimize the need some feel to restate the same thing in every thread.

 

You're absolutely right that certain points are made over and over again in the OM/OW forum (and many other LS forums too, for that matter).

 

However, I can't agree that "...People involved in Affairs generally already know [the] obvious facts [about affairs]". Even less so do those contemplating A's or being groomed for A's know the facts. On the contrary, many or most OW (and the far-rarer OM) who post here display distorted thinking and unrealistic appraisals of the facts of their A. That is why some, including me, feel the need to make the same point to more than one poster.

 

So what? You can browse over to the forum that attracts threads about "first time sex" and find me warning many different teenagers about the risks of sex and the importance of contraception and safe sex. Again and again. That is another place where people either don't know the facts (e.g. physiology, contraception statistics) OR they DO know the facts, but are confused by some other factors to the point where their judgment can use some guidance from third parties.

 

So I disagree with your ideas that certain points must never be made, or can be made one time only, for all time. I would agree with the idea - which is implied by your post - that this forum often turns into a pointless ping-pong match of "affairs are horrible" vs. "affairs are not horrible", without regard to the actual issue posed by the OP.

 

...perhaps if an OW were to come on and ask "My MM is taking me to see my first play. What should I wear?", maybe we can eliminate or at least minimize the "Your MM is a lying POS, wear whatever you want, but he's just going to dump you and run back to his wife!" responses...

 

Interesting. Wouldn't someone who truly wants fashion advice, post in a fashion forum and give details relevant to the question? I'm thinking....where is the play, where do you live (warm climate or not etc.), how fancy is the venue, what time of day, are you going out to eat before or afterwards, what is he wearing etc. etc.? Instead, the question makes a reference to MM. To me, that is likely to be a veiled cry for help, as in, "Help me feel OK [because I really don't feel OK] about going out with a MM, by engaging me in a discussion that acknowledges and normalizes the A, and focuses on a trivial topic like clothes, without criticizing it or pointing out how it is likely to harm me."

 

Here are some analogous questions, to give you the idea:

 

"I am sending my life savings to Nigeria based on a 1-week old email discussion. How much postage should I use on the envelope?"

 

"I think my 14-year old daughter is having sex in a McDonalds parking lot with our 28-year old handyman. Should I allow them to eat fast food meals with trans fats?"

 

"I am going to my first play with my tax cheat husband, who is under indictment by a Federal grand jury. What should I wear?"

 

"My wife stay out until 6 am twice a week and comes home with her panties missing, but won't tell me where she's been. She also forgets to bring the garbage cans in. How can I tactfully ask her to remember about the garbage cans?"

 

"I learned in 10th grade that having sex standing up will prevent pregnancy. How can I get my gf to agree to sex standing up, since it's safe?"

 

In every case, the poster should be prepared to receive responses that make use of ALL the information in the post, not just the nominal question. That is appropriate. LS is not here to rubberstamp the life choices of everyone who posts. On the contrary, we should be urging people to dig deep and ask themselves questions to solve their own problems.

[pureinheart]

 

The site owners here have some really simple rules for behavior. Stick to the topic and avoid personal attacks. 'You're behaving like an azzhole' is a personal attack on nearly every forum I participate in. 'Behavior' is not separate from person. If the person is behaving like an azzhole, simply report them for moderation, in accordance with the 'be courteous' and 'avoid personal attacks' rule.

 

Hopefully, once things shake out at the top, some new, perhaps more comprehensive rules will be instituted and a larger moderation staff tasked with enforcing them. Clear and consistent enforcement of rules is key.

 

I have the hardest time with that one...

[fooled once]

It is interesting that you start a thread on civility, SMO, just after I thought you had put down another poster using sarcasm. I sometimes find your own posts do nothing but take a jab at another poster - I recall one saying something to the effect that having nothing to say doesn't stop you from saying it (not to me, to someone else.)

 

I wouldn't usually bring this up, as I expect a whole range of personalities on a public forum and I am willing to look for content and useful ideas even when they are presented in a less than polite way. However, since you started a thread on this very subject after denying you were putting down a poster and saying you didn't want to discuss it publicly - it now seems appropriate to bring up how much our two perceptions differ. It shows that we sometimes do not agree on what is rude and what is not.

 

I think most people can learn to be more polite and understanding - I know I am not always as polite or understanding as I would like to be - and if this thread somehow helps, that is great.

 

I completely agree woe! I was stunned that the original poster of this thread was hypocritical of others, yet he himself did it ... My first thought was reading this thread was "pot, meet kettle"! And it usually is the ones who participate and engage in sarcastic, belittling and snarky comments are the first ones to start a thread with "everyone should be nice and civil".

 

How about we let the mods decide what is and isn't appropriate? How about instead of deciding you are the forum police/new mod we allow people to DISCUSS things and if a comment is made that YOU find uncivil, you report it. Instead of trying to dictate what is and isn't necessary, what is and isn't repeatable, what is and isn't obvious, you let the posters decide

 

I think that it can never be left up to the individual to decide on the social rules and norms and I imagine that the moderators of the forum realize that in order to promote organic discussion the forums need rules that govern basic civility; which it has.

I find it bothersome when people feel the need to go beyond that structure and try to police and nitpick what THEY believe others should and shouldn't be able to do...

 

It truly is tiresome and is like that one person in class, where after the class rules and etiquette have been agreed upon, always curtails the proceedings by nitpicking at some rather trivial aspect...

 

You stated many things that should occur in a perfect world re affairs but do not, thus people should ignore that they do not occur and deal with what is...I agree. I would also add that perfect civility or people discussing heated topics without a sarcastic, acerbic, tongue-in-cheek, critical remark is also only possible in that perfect world...and since As would not occur in that perfect world...then this wouldn't be a topic. But since As occur and the world isn't perfect, perfect civility and politeness is also not possible so restating the obvious would include people time and again bringing up such topics asking for the impossible....

 

I find CG's voicing of opinion offensive, due to the context. She is MORE than welcome to hold and share that view. But on a SUPPORT forum for AP's? No, I'd argue calling OW/OM 'trash' to be unnecessary and counter-productive. There are other forums/boards where it would not be offensive.

 

Am I wrong in thinking that disapproval of AP's could be conveyed without resorting to insults? e.g. In a 'civil' manner?

 

This is actually a support AND DISCUSSION forum for those who 'find themselves' involved with a committed partner. Why oh why do some forget the discussion part?

 

So what about the low blows you said to Donna yesterday? What is your defense of that? Would you consider your comments civil?

 

You wouldn't do it but you'll defend the right of others to do so?

 

Again, a snarky comment made. So you want all these changes to how 'some' people post, yet here on a "let's all be civil" thread, you throw out a snarky comment. Why?

 

If the ONE person who made the less than popular post about trashy women, if she had said ALL BS's who still love their husband are TRASHY, would that have been okay? Would there be an uproar over it? It is ONE PERSONS view. So what. Report the post and if it is violation of TOS, then it is removed.

 

I wonder how often people (intentionally?) misconstrue the concepts of disagreemant and incivility?

 

Just because I don't agree with you (or you don't agree with me) doesn't mean that I'm being less than civil. Even if I repeat my viewpoint, rephrase it, or otherwise try to help you see my point.

 

Here's my thought...if anyone here finds my posts to be less than civil, rude, or in any fashion something they don't like...report me, or put me on ignore.

 

Don't expect me to change.

 

If my posts violate the TOS of this site...then theoretically reporting them should result in immediate corrective action.

 

Use the tools present to help enforce the TOS.

 

But don't expect that a thread like this is likely to change behaviors on this forum. Surely wouldn't be a realistic expectation.

 

I could kiss you Owl! As usual, excellent post!!

 

I would so like to name some names...but I get sick of the naughty step.

 

Dang you Bent, I spit my tea out again!!! :laugh::laugh:

[Silly_Girl]

Its so interesting how these types of threads never come up in the other forums here.

 

Oh well.

 

I thought you started an interesting one elsewhere in LS.

[Silly_Girl]

I completely agree woe! I was stunned that the original poster of this thread was hypocritical of others, yet he himself did it ... My first thought was reading this thread was "pot, meet kettle"! And it usually is the ones who participate and engage in sarcastic, belittling and snarky comments are the first ones to start a thread with "everyone should be nice and civil".

 

How about we let the mods decide what is and isn't appropriate? How about instead of deciding you are the forum police/new mod we allow people to DISCUSS things and if a comment is made that YOU find uncivil, you report it. Instead of trying to dictate what is and isn't necessary, what is and isn't repeatable, what is and isn't obvious, you let the posters decide

 

 

 

 

 

This is actually a support AND DISCUSSION forum for those who 'find themselves' involved with a committed partner. Why oh why do some forget the discussion part?

 

So what about the low blows you said to Donna yesterday? What is your defense of that? Would you consider your comments civil?

 

 

 

Again, a snarky comment made. So you want all these changes to how 'some' people post, yet here on a "let's all be civil" thread, you throw out a snarky comment. Why?

 

If the ONE person who made the less than popular post about trashy women, if she had said ALL BS's who still love their husband are TRASHY, would that have been okay? Would there be an uproar over it? It is ONE PERSONS view. So what. Report the post and if it is violation of TOS, then it is removed.

 

 

 

I could kiss you Owl! As usual, excellent post!!

 

 

 

Dang you Bent, I spit my tea out again!!! :laugh::laugh:

 

The fact it's support AND discussion does not negate the word 'support'. I think if it was billed as a discussion forum the scope of acceptable posts would be wider?

 

Low blows? I don't agree at all. Many posters hide their past and that's up to them, but where to do so means they're caught in a lie that's just unfortunate. I'm constantly accused of being other posters and am not, other posters have multiple usernames which are known about.

[NoIDidn't]

I thought you started an interesting one elsewhere in LS.

 

Ahhh, the underhanded post. On the surface it seems civil, but it only serves as a dig.

 

Thanks for a great example of what's not really civil.

[Silly_Girl]

Ahhh' date=' the underhanded post. On the surface it [i']seems[/i] civil, but it only serves as a dig.

 

Thanks for a great example of what's not really civil.

 

A dig how? You say threads as to what's acceptable on the forum don't exist elsewhere and elsewhere you started one. Not complex.

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

Here are some analogous questions, to give you the idea:

 

"I am sending my life savings to Nigeria based on a 1-week old email discussion. How much postage should I use on the envelope?"

 

"I think my 14-year old daughter is having sex in a McDonalds parking lot with our 28-year old handyman. Should I allow them to eat fast food meals with trans fats?"

 

"I am going to my first play with my tax cheat husband, who is under indictment by a Federal grand jury. What should I wear?"

 

"My wife stay out until 6 am twice a week and comes home with her panties missing, but won't tell me where she's been. She also forgets to bring the garbage cans in. How can I tactfully ask her to remember about the garbage cans?"

 

"I learned in 10th grade that having sex standing up will prevent pregnancy. How can I get my gf to agree to sex standing up, since it's safe?"

 

In every case, the poster should be prepared to receive responses that make use of ALL the information in the post, not just the nominal question. That is appropriate. LS is not here to rubberstamp the life choices of everyone who posts. On the contrary, we should be urging people to dig deep and ask themselves questions to solve their own problems.

 

 

Haha! Hilarious and astute, all in one post!

[MissBee]

You're absolutely right that certain points are made over and over again in the OM/OW forum (and many other LS forums too, for that matter).

 

However, I can't agree that "...People involved in Affairs generally already know [the] obvious facts [about affairs]". Even less so do those contemplating A's or being groomed for A's know the facts. On the contrary, many or most OW (and the far-rarer OM) who post here display distorted thinking and unrealistic appraisals of the facts of their A. That is why some, including me, feel the need to make the same point to more than one poster.

 

So what? You can browse over to the forum that attracts threads about "first time sex" and find me warning many different teenagers about the risks of sex and the importance of contraception and safe sex. Again and again. That is another place where people either don't know the facts (e.g. physiology, contraception statistics) OR they DO know the facts, but are confused by some other factors to the point where their judgment can use some guidance from third parties.

 

So I disagree with your ideas that certain points must never be made, or can be made one time only, for all time. I would agree with the idea - which is implied by your post - that this forum often turns into a pointless ping-pong match of "affairs are horrible" vs. "affairs are not horrible", without regard to the actual issue posed by the OP.

 

 

 

Interesting. Wouldn't someone who truly wants fashion advice, post in a fashion forum and give details relevant to the question? I'm thinking....where is the play, where do you live (warm climate or not etc.), how fancy is the venue, what time of day, are you going out to eat before or afterwards, what is he wearing etc. etc.? Instead, the question makes a reference to MM. To me, that is likely to be a veiled cry for help, as in, "Help me feel OK [because I really don't feel OK] about going out with a MM, by engaging me in a discussion that acknowledges and normalizes the A, and focuses on a trivial topic like clothes, without criticizing it or pointing out how it is likely to harm me."

 

Here are some analogous questions, to give you the idea:

 

"I am sending my life savings to Nigeria based on a 1-week old email discussion. How much postage should I use on the envelope?"

 

"I think my 14-year old daughter is having sex in a McDonalds parking lot with our 28-year old handyman. Should I allow them to eat fast food meals with trans fats?"

 

"I am going to my first play with my tax cheat husband, who is under indictment by a Federal grand jury. What should I wear?"

 

"My wife stay out until 6 am twice a week and comes home with her panties missing, but won't tell me where she's been. She also forgets to bring the garbage cans in. How can I tactfully ask her to remember about the garbage cans?"

 

"I learned in 10th grade that having sex standing up will prevent pregnancy. How can I get my gf to agree to sex standing up, since it's safe?"

In every case, the poster should be prepared to receive responses that make use of ALL the information in the post, not just the nominal question. That is appropriate. LS is not here to rubberstamp the life choices of everyone who posts. On the contrary, we should be urging people to dig deep and ask themselves questions to solve their own problems.

 

 

:laugh:

 

Humorous, but completely brilliant post!

[NoIDidn't]

A dig how? You say threads as to what's acceptable on the forum don't exist elsewhere and elsewhere you started one. Not complex.

 

That thread was addressed to the Mod for direction, the correct place for such a thread if you weren't aware.

 

That's the difference. You are correct. Its not complex.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Speaking of "civility," I must say that this particular forum seems to have the best collection of passive-aggressive "dig" givers out of all the LS communities.

 

When confronted with these moves, I, for one, am inspired to be decidedly uncivilized. Especially when the subject is one as sensitive as extra marital affairs.

 

The fact that often the "newcomer" whom the OP here seems interested in protecting is more frequently a brand new sock puppet of a well worn old timer, here just for the purpose of baiting people (and very practiced and good at it) makes it all the more tempting for me to snap.

 

Honestly. Yes, per the tos we are not allowed to call others out on their alters, but that does not change the fact that they are alters, and that most of us recognize them immediately - and that they know they are recognized!

 

But hands are tied (or not) and the sock puppet digs away.

[MissBee]

Ahhh' date=' the underhanded post. On the surface it [i']seems[/i] civil, but it only serves as a dig.

 

Thanks for a great example of what's not really civil.

 

Classic...

 

I suppose it would be someone's duty to make a thread about how posters shouldn't be able to make underhanded posts as it's not really necessary and discuss how feigned civility undermines the integrity of the board. However, I could care less, and reserve SG's right to make underhanded posts if she wants....*shrug* I have no desire to tell her how to express herself. If I dislike her posts, I'd respond TO HER versus tell everyone on the entire LS that I think they shouldn't do xyz.

 

Again it is very apparent that the only people who seem to be particularly perturbed about what is civil from what is not, are only posters of a certain kind....

 

And it always seems to be tangential to the actual point of the thread...like if the entire thread was great except for one maybe-possibly0insulting thing, some will find that one post in 5 pages or out of someone's 3 paragraph post, that one line and go on and on about it....wellllllppppp I dislike that but I have no desire to make a thread asking that posters refrain from that...if that is your thing, do what you do! It doesn't curtail my board freedom.

[MissBee]

Speaking of "civility," I must say that this particular forum seems to have the best collection of passive-aggressive "dig" givers out of all the LS communities.

When confronted with these moves, I, for one, am inspired to be decidedly uncivilized. Especially when the subject is one as sensitive as extra marital affairs.

 

The fact that often the "newcomer" whom the OP here seems interested in protecting is more frequently a brand new sock puppet of a well worn old timer, here just for the purpose of baiting people (and very practiced and good at it) makes it all the more tempting for me to snap.

 

Honestly. Yes, per the tos we are not allowed to call others out on their alters, but that does not change the fact that they are alters, and that most of us recognize them immediately - and that they know they are recognized!

 

But hands are tied (or not) and the sock puppet digs away.

 

Yes....'tis true

[Silly_Girl]

That thread was addressed to the Mod for direction, the correct place for such a thread if you weren't aware.

 

That's the difference. You are correct. Its not complex.

 

I was aware, but it wasn't pertinent for me.

[fooled once]

Glinda,

 

I agree!

[MissBee]

LOL. People are passive aggressive out if necessity. For example, if I actually posted the truth about what I think of some people here, I would be banned.

 

 

True

 

I used to be on another forum that was very lax. Posts could be deleted, people could be banned or a thread locked but for any of those to happen it would have to be very extreme; you could get away with choice words so long as it wasn't in all caps and littered with profanity and so long as you did not make it into an ongoing thread. I do not wish for that here necessarily lol, but I have no complaints about this board, as I have seen worst and people are very civil here in comparison, and like you, people clearly fear being banned, so do behave a lot more.

[SoMovinOn]

It is interesting that you start a thread on civility, SMO, just after I thought you had put down another poster using sarcasm. I sometimes find your own posts do nothing but take a jab at another poster - I recall one saying something to the effect that having nothing to say doesn't stop you from saying it (not to me, to someone else.)

 

You are right. I do have my moments as well. Fortunately, I read my own posts and take my own advice too.

[SoMovinOn]

With all that you have cited above as things people restate and should just not bother to state...what then is left? If it were your world to organize SMO, what would be appropriate to discuss if we omit all the above?

 

I appreciate you sharing your opinions, viewpoints and perspective with your detailed comments.

 

I can't make the entire world a better place. I can't even make this forum a better place, but, if I can throw out a post that gets 113 responses in one day, with the basic goal of getting each of us (including myself) to consider being a bit more civil towards each other in expressing our varied viewpoints... I'm good with that.

[pureinheart]

You are right. I do have my moments as well. Fortunately, I read my own posts and take my own advice too.

 

I think your straight up, and there is a difference.