[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/canterlot/ - Canterlot

Site related staff board
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.2124[Last 50 Posts]

File: 1541460182086.png (131.29 KB, 763x1024, 763:1024, pinkyT.png) ImgOps Google

a lost pony wonders if Rule Zero is ever going to be enforced here or if it is just vaporware.

I keep seeing deliberately rude things said in particular by a specific individual and when they are said to me and I say that wasn't nice, I am accused of using Rule Zero as a "bludgeon".  etc.

I have clearly stated on several occasions that my firm opinion is that Rule Zero violation which runs rampant on this site underlies the debacle that led to a complete rules makeover.

imo laze faire enforcement of Rule Zero (or perceived LACK of any enforcement all) causes a lot of unhappiness on an otherwise very happy pony site and I'm sorry Moons and staff, I'm really kind of frustrated about this and I'd like some direct discussion about the issue all by itself, without distraction of other issues.

 No.2126

File: 1541460970129.png (715.6 KB, 910x1200, 91:120, f_32_1.png) ImgOps Google

...

So ... is this a formal complaint  about the site's moderation?

 No.2127

>>2124
Do you report the posts?

 No.2128

Hi, LP. I was wondering if I could ask some questions about Rule Zero, what you think it is, and how it pertains to the site and your behavior/the behavior of others?

This matter would be discussed in a separate fashion from your recent posts in the /pony/ threads.

[I apologize, since you haven't seen my mod tag before, I didn't mean to cause confusion. My job on the team was to communicate with users and better understand how they feel about the site and rules, and I've recently returned to attempt that again.]

 No.2129

>>2124
I accused you of using Rule 0 as a bludgeon because you were assuming things that were not stated and trying to get me in trouble over your own assumptions. And you're also jumping into discussions you are not a part of to try and use Rule 0 to get me in trouble.

 No.2130

File: 1541461878145.png (76.06 KB, 211x211, 1:1, fancy ass bitchlord.png) ImgOps Google

I gotta side with Manley on this one. Just today I saw lp jump into two of his threads and get upset at things he thinks are wrong.

Hell, trying to push other people to Manley's posts is really scummy. Let people sort things out on their own.

 No.2131

>>2129
>>2130
>>2129

I understand your frustration, but this thread should really be used to discuss Rule Zero itself for the sake of productivity, not just the disagreement in the recent thread on /pony/.

LP is trying to discuss rule zero as a whole, not just this most current incident.

Maybe it would be best to ask with LP personally what assumptions you felt he was making?

In the meantime, how do you think Rule Zero should be enforced, and why do you think LP's assertions toward its lack of use are invalid?

 No.2132

File: 1541462137238.jpg (19.32 KB, 289x296, 289:296, Awww Flutter.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

i think my frustration mirrors yours to some extent, lp.

Let's talk about it. In that thread, i saw a situation where two adults had a misunderstanding, a disrespectful insinuation was made, and the situation resolved, all without staff intervention.

It is my firm opinion that staff intervention needs to be reserved when at all possible. Too much staff micromanaging sucks the life out of a place.

 No.2133

File: 1541462204464.png (282.97 KB, 526x353, 526:353, Shy Fluttersmile.png) ImgOps Google

we're having a lengthy and heated discussion on the staff boards about this topic.

i'm going to recuse myself of responsibility for this, in the interim period, and leave it in the capable hooves of our other staff.

 No.2134

>>2131
Personally, I only ever see LP react this way and refence Rule 0 toward my posts, but he ignores other posts that are way worse. It makes me think he has a vendetta.

As for Rule 0 in and of itself... Well, my issue isn't so much the level of "respectability" in posts, but the use of incorrect, biased information that is allowed to be spread freely that I can't combat because of my political ban. I don't feel respected when that happens, and I'm told it's a "personal problem" that they are allowed to spread that kind of stuff and I'm not allowed to say anything. But I take it in stride.

 No.2136

>>2134

This is a very informative post about how you feel personally, and I think speaking this eloquently and calmly to LP and other posters may help communicate your points better, also.

What incorrect or biased information do you mean, and how do you think the politics rule ban plays a role in that? Where do you perceive these issues starting?

[I apologize, I forgot my mod tag, this takes getting used to.]

 No.2137

File: 1541462638110.jpg (55.06 KB, 250x252, 125:126, Angelo_8179.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>2134
Honestly I've only seen him use it towards you as well.

 No.2139

>>2136

Well, pretty much any time political issues come up. I'll give you an example, but I hope you understand I'm not trying to break my ban by doing so. A while ago the topic of Brett Kavanaugh was brought up. Two posters spread some pretty harmful, false information about that, but I was not allowed to respond to it. Even after repeatedly stating I could not, they kept on. One poster even saying it "sounded like a personal problem" that I could not respond.

The issue here is that I'm put in a position where the opposition seems right by default, and I look like I cannot defend my position when I absolutely could. And keep in mind, my opposition is spreading hurtful and incorrect information about important things.

As for general rudeness, I've only really encountered that from a handful of people (besides LP), and only when they try and instigate "debates" with me. I feel like they aren't really interested in debating anything as in exchanging ideas, and are only interested in proving that they are right. When I never go in with that mindset.


But beyond the issues I have with my political ban and debates, the only person I've had issue with is LP. LP is constantly trying to use Rule 0 as a bludgeon against me.  Whenever I say something he find even the least bit offensive (or gets offended because he assumes I meant something I didn't), he tries to say that Rule 0 is failing. He does not even address me directly. Look at his comments toward me today. His first post was a passive-aggressive remark about ignoring my posts.  Which he proceeded to not do, so it was a comment meant only to mess with me. >>861476 I've tried to come to an understanding with him numerous times, and I don't wish for us to be at-odds. But I feel like he is almost unpredictable in how he'll act. Being ok some days and flying off the handle on others.

 No.2141

>>2139

Can you link me to the posts where the users accused you of having a "Personal Problem"? If they were repeatedly intentionally goading you, that may be something we need to look at more.

As for your opposition spreading information you deem hurtful or incorrect, there isn't much you personally can do about that on this site with the ban in place. I understand how situations like that might make you frustrated, but as long as you avoid speaking about politics, I'm sure moderation will understand.

In regards to LP, I think he is most likely angry at things he personally perceives to be hurtful to his friends or other people he cares about, and wants to defend those people. I suspect you knew that, though. You've tried multiple times to ask him about his convictions? Do you think his accusations toward you are themselves rule-breaking?

Keep in mind you're not being interrogated, this is only for the sake of understanding both sides better.

 No.2142

>>2141
it's a thread that got discussed a few times because it got locked and the other poster took issue with it, but I think it's still up. Hold on: >>857122 This is after stating several times I could not debate the issue. He continued just so it would seem like he was in the right with no opposition.

You asked how I felt about Rule 0 and that is my personal issue with it. I'm put in a position where other posters can be rude to me and I have no way of retaliating with this ban. It was not a fair position to put me in and I feel it wasn't all that well planned out. In my opinion, the modstaff found the easiest way to deal with the problem of out-of-control debates and took it at the cost of one person, without considering the affect it would have on them or addressing the real underlying problem. That's one of my personal issues with it.

As for LP, I feel like yes, the way he's been acting and the things he's been accusing me of ARE breaking Rule 0. But I've ignored it this far because I wished to keep things civil with him and set our issues with each other aside. But I feel it's reached a level where he has a clear vendetta against me that I do not have against him.

 No.2143


 No.2144

>>2142

And what do you think the underlying problem is? How would you have addressed it?

Which part of his accusations do you interpret as violating rule zero?

 No.2145

>>2144
Personally, I'm of the opinion the political ban does more harm than good, if that helps.

 No.2146

>>2145

Looking at the thread, do you think the situation could've been prevented if Manley said nothing about the politics being discussed? I can see how that situation would easily be perceived as baiting, but how do you think things would've proceeded if Manley said nothing?

 No.2147

File: 1541464963495.jpg (24.1 KB, 256x293, 256:293, pinkythink.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>2137
It is often directed at me.

While you are entitled to your opinion, using the word "scummy" >>2130 to describe my reaction to offense isn't very kind, even though I concede it is not inaccurate.  Further, it's been pointed out here >>2131 that this thread is about the issue of Rule Zero violations going without warning.

Today I admit violating the rule myself.  I have taken countless breaks over the last few days to avoid acting out as I did today, but each time I come back I see something new, and I lost my cool today.

Setsuna, as you pointed out here:  http://ponyville.us/pony/res/861216.html#q861776
a lost pony is not Ponyville's White Knight.  Yet, here you are doing the same.  If I understand your tone correctly, you feel offended personally by my perceived assault on Mr. Manley.  I felt personally offended by the things he said to Noonim about homeschooling.  
Perhaps you are able to translate your own offense at my words that were not directed at you, to seeing that I am capable of being personally offended by words spoken publicly that are not directed at me.

Finally, if this thread was about Mr. Manley, then it would be about http://ponyville.us/pony/res/859547.html#q859608 et seq. where Mr. Manley called me "gross" and when I told him that was rude he went on both to tell me that I have a vendetta against him and to discuss my genitals without my permission, and has continued to do so today despite my expressing my disgust at his repeated discussion of my penis.

It's revolting.  But that is not what this thread is about.  If I am the first to be sanctioned for violation of Rule Zero, at least I will feel that it is being enforced.

>>2132
words cannot express my appreciation, Moons.

>>2128
I'm sorry, !!Luna, who are you again?  Your mod tag isn't included in >>55
I am guessing you might be Rose??

>>2141
No, each time I speak to him he accuses me of vendetta and justifies his words.  For example, calling me gross, he went on to state that I was implying I have a boner, rather than apologizing for the name calling.  I'm sick of being the target of his vitriol and yes, witnessing people I care about, who don't enjoy it, being targeted as well.

Kindness seems something that does not require definition, Luna.  When people say something and someone says Hey wait that hurt, there are two options:  the offender can argue and cement his intent to offend, or he can apologize demonstrating his intent not to offend.  Since Mr. Manley seems determined to be the example in my thread on Rule Zero, here, demonstrated by his ongoing defensiveness of his actions and his accusations against me, then I will state simply that I have not once ever seen him say "excuse me I didn't mean it like that I'm sorry if that hurt".

Finally, for the third time in this post, I concede that I was rude to Manley today.  I tried many times to cool off over the alst few days and each time I came back I found something new that offended me, posted by Mr. Manley.  After taking a walk from this site more times than I can count in the last two days, I did in fact act out today.  If I am to be punished for that, I accept it but I feel I was goaded repeatedly by just one person, and that should not be ignored.


>>2144
I will follow this thread and try to be more constructive in a later response, Luna.  I apologize for being quite upset right now and I can hopefully be more balanced in my presentation later.

 No.2148

>>2144
As I mentioned, the underlying issue is the fact that there are people who do debate to exchange ideas, but to defend what they already think. As if the presenting is a counter-attack on theirs. Debates would not get out of hand if the other rules were enforced on them. No personal attacks or insults, etc. But I don't think banning specific people from discussing topics that have a real affect on their daily lives is the answer to end fighting. Perhaps new rules need to be made for the discussion of certain topics. If a rule can be made that says one person can't discuss something, then there could just as easily be made rules that govern the discussion of that thing to keep those discussions civil.


As for LP. Assuming malice on my part is a big part of it. He does not ASK me what I meant, he jumps to conclusions about what he thinks I mean. He accuses me of saying or meaning things I didn't. I think that's the biggest issue. The accusations and assumptions. Most of our issues could be solved if LP could keep a cool head and discuss his greivences with me. But I don't think he can.

 No.2149

>>2146
If politics weren't discussed, the whole thing probably wouldn't've happened, since it was on feminism which is ultimately a political ideology. But, then, from what I understand, Manley didn't realize it counted towards that.
At least if you're talking about the thread I'm thinking you are.

 No.2150

>>2149
If feminism is "political" then the definition of "political" is too broad for a political ban to be of any use. I'd be barred from discussing all manner of things.

 No.2151

>>2150
From what I understand of Mooney's posts, it is considered political. Not sure why that's a major issue, though, as it is ultimately just any political ideology.
Though it might be a tad looser depending on the subject. I doubt people'd have a major issue of a sort of theoretical discussion on Plato's Republic.

 No.2152

It will take me some time to respond to all of these, but I will pay them as much attention as I can. I want you to be aware you are being listened to.

 No.2153

>>2151
If Moony considers it "political", then it would have been nice to tell me that, or include what is and isn't political in the description.

But it's an issue because a wide number of things can be considered a "political ideology". What makes something a "political" ideology and not just an ideology?

 No.2154

File: 1541465571768.jpg (18.66 KB, 207x184, 9:8, 21.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>2152
You make it sound so corporate...

 No.2155

File: 1541465680563.jpg (102.93 KB, 1979x1381, 1979:1381, pinkywork1.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>2148
You called me gross, I said that's rude.

Do you really expect me to assume you did not intend to disparage me by calling me gross?

If you did not intend to offend, then why would you tell me that I am in fact gross when I called you on it?

Your accusation of assuming malice is not only nonsensical, it is ironic coming from someone who keeps accusing me of "vendetta" when I say you are being rude to me instead of saying "I didn't mean it like that".

>>2152
I'm taking a break now, Luna, because the constant unfounded mischaracterization of me by Mr. Manley is very discouraging and I don't think I am expressing myself very well now.

 No.2156

>>2154

I promise that's not the intention! I am just trying to be fair to every party involved. I am actually very empathetic toward these problems, but I have to be patient and listen carefully.

>>2153

I'll ask the mod staff specifically what they consider to be a "political" ideology, and how we can better define that.

 No.2157

File: 1541465749555.png (60.54 KB, 271x142, 271:142, 3.PNG) ImgOps Google

>>2153

>>2084

An ideology is political if its application goes to politics, government, or legislation, I'd say.

 No.2159

File: 1541465845697.png (209.72 KB, 348x329, 348:329, adorable pinky.PNG) ImgOps Google

>>2156
Nah, I feel you, it just seems rather humorously like what I get whenever I call customer service.
Kind of funny, in a way. I don't really mean anything by it.

 No.2160

File: 1541465852415.jpg (44.13 KB, 500x500, 1:1, dont yu dare.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>2147
Jesus christ, lp, can we have one conversation without you being like this? You have consistently tried twisting things I've said to fit whatever cause of the moment you're rallying against.

I'm done.

I will not engage you any further, and will keep avoiding you.

I'm out. If I stay in this, I'll just get heated.

 No.2161

>>2155
But I didn't call you "gross". You assumed that. I said "gross" to the joke you made about Princess Sally giving you an erection. It was more a "That's TMI, I don't want to hear about that." than a "you are gross." But when I tried to explain that, you denied you even made the comment we could all see. You assumed malice on my part and flew off the handle instead of talking to me about it.

>>2157
Moony's never told me feminism wasn't allowed, so I'm not sure if he's changed his mind or if, as I suspected, what was included was not made clear enough.

Anyway, again, that could apply to anything. I'm not aware of any feminist issue that are applied to government. But regardless, does that mean that work-place saftey isn't allowed to be discussed because the government has laws on that? It's too vague to be useful at that point.

 No.2162

>>2161
I didn't say erection, YOU did.

Leave me alone and STOP DISCUSSING MY GODDAMNED PENIS YOU PERVERT

 No.2163

>>2160
like what?  So, I am not allowed to be offended but you are?

 No.2164

>>2147
>>2148

I think the friction between you might grow fainter if you exercised in asking questions to one another for a time period, about your intentions. It seems to me that Manley doesn't intend to hurt you, LP. And Manley, it seems to me that LP doesn't intend to harm you.

You've both said and done things that harm each other, but I feel that discussing together peacefully why you're hurting may be ideal? I think you can both co-exist without harming each other, and if there is genuine malice at the end of these issues, it will come to light. It's probably something that needs worked out at individual steps.

And LP, no, I am not Rose. Take your time to compose yourself, the thread will be here.

 No.2165

>>2162
I'm not sure how else one is supposed to take the comment >>>/pony/859595
>>Was there a question?  All my blood went somewhere else.

You keep saying that's not what you meant, but then you never explain what you actually meant by this comment. Why don't you go ahead and explain what this comment actually meant now, if not making a reference to getting an erection.

 No.2166

>>2162

LP, your frustration at Manley's misunderstanding is understandable, but I don't think calling him a pervert is the appropriate response when there are mods.

Manley, since LP repeatedly asked you to stop bringing up private body parts, I think it may be best for both of you not to discuss this particular incident? Neither of you can seem to agree on where the incident starts and ends, and you both seem to regret the exchange.

I'd rather not have the thread be derailed or have it locked for insults when there is a chance to be productive.

 No.2167

>>2161
Hey, I'm on your side as far as that goes. It's why I never gave the ban much consideration, as it seemed terribly vague and hard to understand for my own perspective.

There's quite a wide range of feminist policies pushed into government. From things like equal pay measures, to items of hiring, to various discrimination laws.
>Does that mean work palce safety isn't allowed
Well, you'd certainly not be allowed to discuss it as far as the political aspect'd be concerned. You could discuss, though, safety measures within the workplace that aren't matters of legal requirement, I'd say.
I dunno. This is probably something you should be talking to Mooney or others directly about ,t obe honest. It's part of why I think it's a useless ban.

 No.2168

>>2165

I think he just wants that particular conversation to cease, at this point. And I think that's a good idea, before you begin attacking each other.

 No.2169

>>2164
OK, so what have I done that harmed Manley?
Whoever you are, I don't think that is a fair thing to say.

Perhaps it was a mistake to try this site again.  This is looking like one of those times where my losing my cool after getting goaded for days will constitute it's-all-my-fault and frankly, it is all my fault.  I came crawling back after this has gone on repeatedly since the first night I posted here.


>>2165
that's called a joke, son.  Ever heard of a joke?  If you didn't think it was funny, it's no excuse to call me gross then go on and on and on for days about my penis.  It's sexual harassment.


>>2159
It's been nice knowing you, Nooms.  Hope to see you on pchan sometime.

 No.2170

>>2167

I've reached out to the other mods about the politics ban and its definition, I'm sure we'll discuss it when possible.

 No.2171

>>2162
I think the 'blood went somewhere else' comment was rather clear on that, to be honest.
Now, that doesn't mean 'gross' isn't rude. I'd just say it's a rather small amount of such.

With things like that, I'd say you'd be better off collecting similar examples to prove a common habit, maybe make the case for general hostility. It's a tad too small to call for mod intervention, I think.
If it's a constant thing, then I can definitely see it being a pain. But, if it's just a one off, it's not really something easy to intervene with.

 No.2172

>>2169

You should probably ask Manley, calmly, how you hurt him, instead of me.

It sounds like the site may be personally unhealthy, and I'm not going to tell you to leave or stay, but you should do what you feel is best for your personal care.

 No.2174

>>2167
>You could discuss, though, safety measures within the workplace that aren't matters of legal requirement

Then by the same logic, wouldn't I be allowed to discuss the aspects of feminism that are not part of political discourse? Like say for example, their habits concerning debate like we were? This is why I'm confused by this. Moony seems to be contradicting everything about the ban I thought, and all the discussions over it take place in secret mod chats.

>>2168
But it's what prompted the "gross" comment he's upset about in >>2155. We can't discuss that comment without the context it was said in.

>>2169
So you admit that was the intention of the joke. I called the joke gross. Not you. Are you taking this personally just so you can be outraged?

>>2169
You've done tons of things to harm me.

 No.2175

File: 1541467407511.png (131.25 KB, 377x311, 377:311, 1.PNG) ImgOps Google

>>2174
I dunno. Would you be allowed to discuss the aspects of republicans that are not a part of political discourse?

Though, I think the discussion we had ultimately played a big role in the political aspect of feminism, so I don't really know if you could have that chat without discussing the political aspects to a fair degree.

 No.2176

>>2174

If you want to make a thread exclusively about the politics ban in /canterlot/, that might be a good idea.

 No.2177

>>2175
What parts are not? "Republican" is a distinction that only exists in political discourse, "feminist" is not.

And I don't think it did. We discussed debating habits. It wasn't until the end when political aspects were brought into it, and at that point I stated I couldn't discuss it.

>>2176
I did once before, to try and get clarifications on the limitations. But it got very few responses.

 No.2178

>>2177

I'll make sure to draw as much attention to it from the mod staff as I can, but you need to ask as many questions as possible in regards to the ban when making the thread.

 No.2179

>>2177
Well, if you can discuss the habbits of feminists, I'd say you could discuss the habbits of republicans, right?
That's what I was thinking of, anyway.

Our discussion also walked right in to the ideological aspects of feminism, though. I mean, why do you argue with someone, or debate something, if not to try to gain following to exert power over change towards your own ideological framework?

 No.2180

>>2179
"Feminist" exists outside of it's political aspects, "Republican" doesn't. That's the biggest difference to me, anyway.

 No.2181

>>2180
Eh, depends on what you consider 'political aspects', I guess.

 No.2182

>>2178
It might be worth it make a new thread to discuss that AND what was discussed here.

 No.2183

>>2182

As long as no one is spamming the board, making new threads is perfectly acceptable.

 No.2184

>>2183
I'll do that soon. But we should discuss Rule 0 and LP's behavior in this thread.

 No.2185

File: 1541471006771.png (240.18 KB, 900x1525, 36:61, skeptical5.png) ImgOps Google

>>2174
All right, I'll bite:
What specific things have i done to harm you?  Take your time and be clear now, because if you don't name any things in particular then you are forever estopped from asserting them.

Perhaps we can begin with how you accusing me of being a school shooter harmed you, and how threatening to call the police on me for it harmed you.  Then gradually work your way to the present and please leave nothing out.

>taking this personally just so you can be outraged?

Ah, presumption of my malintent.  Goes well with >>2142
>clear vendetta against me
and where ever all the times you accused me of assuming your malintent.  

So, when i am offended and tell you so, you explain that my offense is wrong.  You do not say that you didn't mean it that way, but how it is impossible for a reasonable person to take offense therefore i am pretending to be hurt in order to hurt you, as part of my "vendetta".

Looks like you've figured out my evil plan; i'm not fooling anyone.  Obviously i'm not hurt, tears aside, it's just my projecting my evilness on you so i can pretend.  Without a doubt, a lost pony intends maliciously to demonize the angelic Dragonpuncher until he is hated by all.

But seriously tho, have you ever tried saying "hey man, i really didn't mean it that way and i'm sorry" instead of accusing someone of a vendetta?

>>2176
You seem kinda Thorax-y.  I wonder why you are concealing who you are.  Also why, if you perceive i've hurt manley, that you don't enumerate some examples yourself.  Perhaps you don't have any examples and you are playing negotiator to try and foster a shared middle ground somewhere by seeking a concession from each party that they've made mistakes.  Well i've made some.  There it is.  But no matter what you get from me, you'll get no admissions from Mr. Right over there, who has never harmed a fly inadvertently or otherwise.

Likely you are someone who is not unfriendly towards me and you don't want to be perceived as partial in this thing that has somehow become some kind of a battle between myself and the Dragonpuncher.

The truth is i am drained of life by all this.  I don't have any vendetta or ill will against any of you here, with maybe one exception and no, it's not you Manley.  He knows who he is and i'm certain he is most entertained.  But the rest of you i've come to love and i can't say i've done a good job of being among you.

I obviously cannot function socially in this environment, and while i cannot be sorry for ever coming here as i made several friends, i can definitely be very sorry for the time i've spent here in terms of aparent harm i've caused.  I just don't know what the hell it is about you young adults.  I just can't get along with you.  It's like a disability or something.

I'm very sorry.  Very, very sorry to you all especially you, Moony.  I am informed there is a raging conversation going on right now about this and i don't feel happy at all i initiated that.  I'm very, very sorry Moons and i hope you still want to be friends.

I guess i'll go now.

>>2184
Yes that sounds like a nice topic, why don't you do that.

 No.2186

>>2184

It might be best to wait for him to get back to discuss him specifically, but the staff decided there was no rule-breaking in the earlier thread tonight, just a normal argument.

 No.2187

>>2185

I know you're hurt, but genuinely saying "I am hurt" to him is probably better than the sarcasm. Otherwise this is a good start.

Also, my name is "Savvy", or "Peppermint" on Saturday. And I don't want you to be hurt. I sympathize with you, but I do have to be impartial.

 No.2188

>>2185
The fact that you're still holding grudges for misunderstandings that happened months and months ago that I thought we had moved passed doesn't really prove your point of NOT having a vendetta.

You hurt me by constantly trying to get me in trouble, and accusing me of things I haven't done or said. By having wild, ridiculous over-reactions and not discussing things with me first. You JUST accused me of sexually harassing you in the thread because you kept denying you made a joke you did make.

>>2187
I hope you're not another Peppermint that I know. That person is dangerous.

 No.2189

>>2187
It was nice meeting you the other day.  You were very kind then and now.

>>2186
Perhaps you all should check it again because i feel in violation.

>>2187
I've told him i'm hurt and been told i'm not for almost two years now.  Even i'm tired of my whining.  What sarcasm?  According to his charge i spoke the truth about my intent and plan and without specific allegations to defend against it seems easiest to just concede it.  

>>2188
Those are not specific allegations but generalized conclusions.

Except the sexual harassment, which you did continually push in spite of my clear demands you stop.  I never said i did not make a joke, i acknowledged it repeatedly.  That I'd failed to notice your question in a thread specificallt about sex with cartoon characters i said was because my blood "was somewhere else".  Its a funny joke because it makes a general implication that the listener can make into a specific inference.  When you took a crude position that i had literally talked about my "boner" that was something that happened in your mind and you called me unkind names.

Making a general sex joke in your sex thread doesn't constitute me discussing my genitals.  Your calling me names was unkind, and your refusal to stop talking about my genitals was not only unkind but illegal.  I have a right to say No.  I said No repeatedly.  Yet you persisted, and you did so with both general and specific intent to a standard to be charged successfully with criminal harassment.

That's not my wanting to get you in trouble, thats my wanting you to stop harassing me.

Now, make your specific charges because believing you got away with past harassment and i still remember them now is not evidence of vendetta or my offenses against you, it is bullying.

 No.2190

>>2188

Oh yeah, ding ding ding.  Calling Luna "dangerous", very nice violation of Rule Zero there Manley.

Which you can't blame on my vendetta or say im white knighting because this is my thread specifically about violations of Rule Zero.

 No.2191

>>2189
>>2190

I feel maybe our treatment of Rule 0 is more lenient than yours, because we fear being too strict might make conversation difficult. Over a year ago I was far more strict with Rule 0, as you want us to be, but I think maybe Rule 0 either needs clarification or rewriting at this point. The rule is inherently difficult to enforce for all but the most egregious examples of insults or attacks.

 No.2192

>>2191
At this point what constitutes "most egregious insults or attacks"?

There have been many in the last several days directed at many people and in the time i've been here a particular person who has volunteered in this thread as an example has called me school serial killer and asshole and as i pointed out his conduct regarding harassment against me meets a criminal standard.

Itt he has accused me of vendetta and when challenged for examples of how i've hurt him, the examples given consist entirely of not forgiving him for a course of conduct he acknowledges itt was egregious enough that he felt was worthy of needing forgiveness, and even trying to get him in trouble for those things he admits he did to me, and i'm even supposed to both accept his name-calling and sexual harassment without hurt because his excuse is my "vendetta".  Textbook bullying behavior to a degree an outside observer would assume it's a sexual relationship between us (and i say this as a student of law and observer of countless restraining order hearings).

Would none of these behaviors rise to the standard of unkindness egregious enough to constitute violation of the current Rule Zero which states simply "be kind to one another" (quoting from memory)?

It doesn't say dont murder each other, and no one's calling for bans.  Just maybe a mod warning once in a blue moon that says "Hey that's not nice" once in a while.  Especially when someone says "ouch that hurt" and gets beat down because they are wrong so can't be hurt and to stop whining and btw have a vendetta.

 No.2193

>>2190
I didn't call Luna dangerous. I only mentioned I know someone who goes by Peppermint who is. Do you even listen to yourself before you spout off?

>>2189
The thread wasn't about "sex with cartoon characters." Sex was never mentioned. You made that up on your own. Now who's the pervert. And no, you did not Acknowledge that. You kept denying it and insisting I called YOU gross and not your joke gross.

You are the one harassing me! All of your comments today have been snarky remarks or sarcasm when I want NOTHING to do with your childish behavior.

 No.2194

>>2193
>>2193
Why do you two keep bickering about this?  Forgive and forget.

 No.2195

>>2194
Because he made a thread to complain about it? I'd much rather this thread not be here.

 No.2196

>>2194

This thread isn't even about him.  He came stomping in here on his own, and i've forgiven him countless times.  If i can't get some kind of protection from his abuse i will have to go.

 No.2197

>>2193
Yes, i acted poorly today.

But that doesn't excuse your behavior.

 No.2198

>>2196
The thread's not about me, but you posted >>>/pony/861746 mere minutes before this thread? Quit trying to play the victim here.

 No.2199

>>2197
What behavior? You told a joke that I found gross, but instead of talking to me about the comment you flew off the handle like a petulant child and accused me of insulting you. Then you played the victim while screaming about "Rule 0".

 No.2200

>>2199
>you flew off the handle like a petulant child
Give it a break already, Manley.

 No.2201

>>2200
What do you mean by this? I'm sick of his behavior. Do you want me to link the comments he's been making toward me today?

 No.2203

>>2196
>If i can't get some kind of protection from his abuse i will have to go.
Just write a GreaseMonkey script to filter out his posts.

>>2201
>What do you mean by this?
Stop using inflammatory language.  Start making an honest attempt to obey Rule Zero.  Realize that neither you nor LP are completely blameless in this matter.  If you don't see anything you've done is wrong, then you're not thinking hard enough.

 No.2204

>>2203
I didn't. I might have worded my response of "gross" to him better, having to meticulously explain that I was calling his joke gross and not him gross. And I'm not violating rule 0. I'm being far more civil with him than he has been with me, because I'm keeping a level head.

 No.2205

>>2204
>I didn't.
"you flew off the handle like a petulant child" is inflammatory.  Do you really not see this?

 No.2206

>>2205
How else should I describe how he's acting?
We are kind of ignoring the real big elephant in the room here for the sake of civility, but I'm still going to say he's acting immaturely.

 No.2207

>>2206
>How else should I describe how he's acting?
LP had already acknowledged (that he acted poorly) in the post that you responded to.  There was no need to shove his nose in it.

 No.2208

>>2207
This isn't an isolated incident. I've tried to make peace with this guy on numerous occasions, but he's constantly having these emotional outbursts and trying to paint me as the villain. Over a single comment in a thread about sexy cartoon characters... It's ridiculous and this needs to be addressed. He can't keep on with this vendetta against me and nobody else.

 No.2209

File: 1541478880285.gif (879.57 KB, 693x563, 693:563, lunac.gif) ImgOps Google

I think LP has a valid point in complaining, because not too long ago I shared his views about Rule Zero, and I do personally think you've been rude to each other.

Direct insults aren't acceptable. That isn't okay. And I don't want you to think it is. As far as I know, that's never been okay. Jokes, misunderstandings, arguments, and inflammatory opinions are not insults and do not usually infringe on Rule Zero.

That being said, LC has all but directly admitted to crying, and Manley is clearly in a great deal of emotional turmoil. Perhaps an apology and civility on both sides is not out of the question still?

 No.2210

>>2209
I'm willing to civilly discuss this and apologize if necessary.

 No.2211

>>2210

I think calling LP petulant, in this particular instance, is going too far. He is attempting to do right by him, as are you by yourself. I cannot force you to apologize, or to be sorry, but I do think both of your behaviors have transcended from bickering and on to personal attacks.

I will ask the rest of the mods for their opinions on this.

 No.2212

>>2211
I apologize for saying he was acting like "a petulant child" and for saying his behavior was "childish". That was a... poor attempt at civility by avoiding the aforementioned elephant in the room.

 No.2213

I'm sure LP would appreciate that apology most, but thank you.

I do think the majority of this is misunderstanding, and a clash of personalities. We try to intervene only when it's necessary, when there are direct insults or attacks.

I wish I could offer more advice, but aggressively disagreeing with one another isn't a violation of Rule Zero. The rule may need written to a more clear standard.

 No.2214

yet again Manley abuses mods attempt to be unbiased and civil ...

 No.2215

>>2214
What are you even talking about?

 No.2216

File: 1541483476151.png (77.2 KB, 376x267, 376:267, happy20.png) ImgOps Google

>>2213
Whats fun here is that there's some truth to "petulant child" and i was amused by it.  I really don't want any apology for that.

I haven't made any personal attacks on Manley.  I just want him to stop slamming people all the time.  It's unnecessary.  If he wants to express that the joke is gross he can say so without calling me gross and then pretexting that he didn't when i said thats rude and trying to explain how he wasn't rude when he was.

Further i don't wanna ever hafta see such outrageous double-disparagement as saying Noonim's homeschooling explains everything about his behavior and then trying to justify it.  That's just so not cool and i don't care who it was said about, my offense is real.

But petulant child IS kinda funny.  I dunno maybe it's just too true to be upset about.

Btw if i could get everyone itt to capitalize my name correctly, it's "lp".  Since i'm petulant and all.

 No.2217

>>2216

Regardless of whether you think it's funny, calling you petulant was an insult and thus against the rules that you wanted enforced. Sorry, lp.

 No.2218

>>2216
I already talked about the home-schooling thing with Noonim. You were not involved in that discussion. At all. You don't need to be Ponyville's white knight, you know. That's part of the issue I take with this. You getting offended FOR other people.

As for the other thing, the way you reacted is what exacerbate the situation. You accused me of calling you gross when that wasn't my intent, and then you ran with that assumption and have been for the past day or so. We probably could have solved that issue with a single conversation if you had just asked "Are you calling me gross? Because that's kind of hurtful." But you didn't do that. You accused and assumed and refused to listen to me. You're still doing it. You're saying I "pretexting that I didn't". You don't know and can't know my inner thoughts or intentions. Yet you assume the worst. It's upsetting.

 No.2219

>>2218
This is my point.  If whether i cared about the petulant child thing is considered unacceptable then insulting both the concept of homeschooling itself as well as behavior does involve me.

Im autistic.  I only made productive use of public education because of extensive work my mom and sister did with me in the years before school.  I have a foundation of homeschooling and disparaging remarks like that have everything to do with me.

That you dish it out constantly without regard for the feelings of others is the point here.  Dismissing me as not being hurt and just calling me more names is simply unconscionable.

Still on with the pretext you didnt call me gross huh.  Figures.  Of course thats my fault for "assuming" words mean what the words you said say.  Not a thought on your mind to take responsibility for what you said, it's the one who you said them to's fault.  Nice extra insult.

 No.2220

>>2219
Well if you had actually read the rest of the thread, I explained what I meant to Noonim and we handled the situation maturely.

There is no pretext. I'm telling you that the way you are choosing to interpret what I said is wrong and not what I meant.

 No.2221

File: 1541495010564.png (384.56 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, inquisitive2.png) ImgOps Google

>>2220
And i've heard it all and im convinced otherwise.  You have vehemently attacked me for being offended and i think that is at best callous and deeply selfish.  

What exactly do you hope to accomplish in my thread?  Convince everyone of your innocense?  Prove you are right and i'm wrong?  What are you willing to sacrifice to accomplish being right?

I'll be clear what i'm trying to accomplish here.  I want it to stop.  No more calling people names, no more casual insults about their education or whatever.  When someone makes a mistake, they should own up to it not deny the results.  

That doesn't seem like it should be so hard.  Should it be?  I don't think it should be such a difficult thing.  Why is it?

>>2209
I appreciate your validation of my complaint.  I don't understand why civility is so difficult.  I'd apologize if it would help and i have many times and it never has, and yes i have cried and not in that nice way i like from watching pony.  I've never understood why saying "don't step on me" is considered a "vendetta".  If it seems it's against him alone, it's because no one else here has ever treated me this way.

I come here to post happy ponies and get emotional support by socializing with others.  Like many here, my life is challenging and hard to cope with.  I don't come here to hunt people.  I have no energy left to carry any kind of "vendetta" and i just want to have a nice time with my friends without getting bullied or name-called or being told to mind my own busines as it happens to others right in front of me.  Who comes here to make trouble on purpose?  What sense would that make?

 No.2222

>>2221

I want to be clear I sympathize and deeply desire you to find peace and happiness here, but I do need to uphold the rules, regardless of personal feelings.

I hope that the good outweighs the bad.

 No.2223


 No.2225

>>2221
>And i've heard it all and I'm convinced otherwise

So basically your'e saying you are refusing to actually discuss this with me and come to an understanding. You can't just decide I meant something or intended something when I'm telling you, directly, that that wasn't the case.

I HOPED to come to an understanding with you, and get you to stop hounding me. I can stop using certain words to describe you or discussing certain topics with you, but if someone ELSE has a problem with something I've said to THEM, then THEY need to talk to me about it. You're not Ponyville's White Knight. You don't need to protect other posters.

 No.2230

File: 1541534861115.png (307.55 KB, 422x444, 211:222, wat.png) ImgOps Google

The fudge is Rule Zero anyways?

 No.2231

>>2230

It's called Rule 1, now. It is the rule regarding respecting other posters.

"Rule 1. Please keep posts generally respectful towards others"

[Grace]

 No.2232

File: 1541538657087.png (158.53 KB, 425x422, 425:422, caught ya staring at my pl….png) ImgOps Google

>>2231
her's a thing.
We can pretend to know what defines being successful, but you can ban me for being dismissive of this discussion
because that's inherently disrespectful towards OP

 No.2233

>>2232

I'm currently trying to discuss Rule 1 with the other moderators, as I don't think it's particularly helpful as it is right now. We need to arrive at a consensus on that before any changes are/aren't made, but I promise your criticism is being taken into account.

[Grace]

 No.2239

File: 1541547733879.gif (32.69 KB, 220x220, 1:1, pinkycycling.gif) ImgOps Google

>>2225
Well, I directly experienced it and it was what it was.  You can criticize me for not discussing it with you when in fact my attempt to do so was met with indignation and vitriol as you attempted to squash my feelings in the way that you addressed me.  If that's not what happened in your opinion, that's still the factual reality of what I experienced.

Further, as I explained, words directed to another can offend other people for example if I used a racial slur for black people against anyone, it would offend you and I find your ongoing accusation that I am offended because I am wrong and therefore not offended, or not offended and trying to cause trouble as a "white knight", to be in and of itself deeply disrespectful and dismissive of my feelings.  Whether you intend that or not, which I am not assuming.  It's how it comes across to me, and that you cannot rebut because it is simply true.

Fortunately, I seem to be wearing a thicker skin today so I no longer care.  I already regret having said anything, and I accept that it's not going to accomplish anything anyway because no one, least of all you, will hold you accountable for your words followed by circular evasions to any attempt to discuss it with you, unless you are able to reach the conclusion that no one got hurt and you got away with your careless hurtful words yet again.

Notice I said "careless" not deliberate.  Somehow I am convinced that you don't mean to be such an unpleasant person.  But my point has never been that you are unconscionably mean and nasty on purpose (or if it ever was, then I was wrong and I don't remember it anymore), but has been that you hurt my feelings and you demonstrate a lack of concern about having done so, and then attempt to force me to take the blame for what you have done to me.  I dunno, as I've said before maybe it IS all my fault.  I should probably not be here to be so easily damaged.

Regardless, today I don't care anymore.  Other than regretting the debacle that I caused trying to make a stand on this issue.  I know I should just let it roll off, and today it has.  Yesterday, it was different.

I really would appreciate if you at least try to listen to someone whose feelings are hurt and make a genuine attempt to understand how your words were involved instead of always having to be right about it no matter the cost.  Because you are not right, Manley.  You can try and convince yourself that you should be held harmless for what you have caused, and maybe you can convince others.  But you can never convince me, and I firmly believe that you are not incapable of being less offensive in your method of communication.  It has often been my position that people letting you get away with it day in and day out is as big a disservice to you as it is to others on this site.  You are receiving positive reinforcement for things you shouldn't be, and I suppose it's not surprising you can be surprised that someone actually stands up to you and says Hey That Hurt instead of laughing it off.  You don't live in a vacuum and I acknowledge this is probably just as unpleasant for you as it is for me.  Which I do regret btw.  I do not intend to make your time here worse.  It just seems to be a natural progression of our dynamic.

But whatever.  Do what you will, and I'll try to stay out of your way from now on.  What isn't your fault is that I am so crappy at letting things that shouldn't offend me, considering the source, hurt my feelings.

For example,
>>2232
You can never offend me Artee.  I don't know why.  Maybe it's cuz I love you as a fan of G3, as a hardworking, self-doubting sarcastic but deeply caring father struggling to deal with health and work problems.  Or maybe I just love your attitude, but probably not that cuz your attitude sucks.  But then so does mine.  At any rate, it's puzzling that there is nothing you could ever say to me that would genuinely hurt my feelings (unless you meant to and you never have) while inadvertent grumpiness from Manley grates my nerves to the point I'm willing to curl up and cry in between rage-aholic typing to the mods here.


In conclusion since less than an hour after posting this thread I've regretted it and my behavior in the days leading up to it.  Somehow, no one has decided I'm sufficiently in the wrong to warn or ban me about it, which is probably as much a negligence of the rule against disrespectful conduct as not cracking down on anyone else, but I still feel awful.


So, whatev.  Ponyville is as Ponyville does, and each time I've wanted to stomp away and never come back, I crawl back anyway and sometimes I meet someone I value who I would have missed if I had gone forever.  So I'll probably continue to be here, and I'll probably continue to be disruptive and hurt and unhappy and dissatisfied.  But I'll hopefully also bring something positive enough to be worth putting up with a lost pony, and when that's no longer the case I hope the staff has the gumption to take out the trash that won't take itself out.

Until then, Mr. Manley, I'll see you on /pony/.

 No.2242

>>2239
See, that's another problem. You are so emotionally unstable that it's impossible to know what is going to set you off and what you're suddenly going to stop caring about. I can't do what you ask because it's unreasonable. Even someone who doesn't like me like Noonim was able to calmly discuss my comment, while you had a temper tantrum about it. I can't deal with that kind of time. If you can't control yourself enough to interact with other people, I fail to see how that's my fault.

I can't control what you ASSUME my words mean, especially when it's clear you are looking to find the worst. And I can't control how you react. Does no one else see a problem with this?

 No.2244

File: 1541554844043.jpeg (286.52 KB, 1200x900, 4:3, You just connect the opti….jpeg) ImgOps Google

Thread is being locked on request of OP.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]