Townhall - Curial Commentary and Chat

[PointOfViewGun]

Much of the information was presented in a direct manner. Akar linkted to latest 16 Tribunal cases. He included links to every single post of Pontifex Maximus he presented. Pontifex Maximus calling people "bunch of whiny Citizens" was right there in the initial post as his defense. Things Akar couldn't directly post there shouldn't have made a difference.

[Akar]

If citizenship was based on my standards, Ponti and others posting/ debate style would be unacceptable.
The Mudpit and the Curia have be rife with antagonistic posts towards other members it is hard to see any standard of conduct that we adhere to at all.

Do you have any evidence that the Mudpit is rife with antagonistic posts on par with Pontifex's?

If you believe this so strongly as you repeating it a dozen times suggests, then you should have no problem finding 5-10 posts by Citizens in the mudpit in the past month that match the same antagonistic style as Pontifex.

[Sir Adrian]

Don't talk about the noose in the hanged man's house Akar. You had a problem with making the exact same kind of posts nary a year ago.

[Cookiegod]

Akar didn't libel people with holocaust denial accusations.

[PikeStance]

Do you have any evidence that the Mudpit is rife with antagonistic posts on par with Pontifex's?

If you believe this so strongly as you repeating it a dozen times suggests, then you should have no problem finding 5-10 posts by Citizens in the mudpit in the past month that match the same antagonistic style as Pontifex.

I wish I had the strength and the time to go through the Mudpit, but I have done countless times and regretted it every single time. It would indeed be miraculous to see such as a quantum shift as you suggest. I do not know that those that do frequent it also say there isn't anything unique about his posts.

I am still waiting for a true discussion on quality of discourse by citizens. How long is this nonsense going to continue?

[PointOfViewGun]

Don't talk about the noose in the hanged man's house Akar. You had a problem with making the exact same kind of posts nary a year ago.

You make these accusations often and then end up unable to show anything for it just like you did with me. Will it be different this time?

I wish I had the strength and the time to go through the Mudpit, but I have done countless times and regretted it every single time. It would indeed be miraculous to see such as a quantum shift as you suggest. I do not know that those that do frequent it also say there isn't anything unique about his posts.

I am still waiting for a true discussion on quality of discourse by citizens. How long is this nonsense going to continue?

We've had other Citizens continuously receiving infractions from MudPit exchanges in the past few years?

[PikeStance]

Let me try the more direct approach.

Examine the handbook. Then, go to the mudpit or any other subforum and cite examples of conduct unbecoming a citizen.
Quick notes:
-Make sure it is cross section of members both citizens and non-citizens.
-Just make the quote without including the user.
-Create a separate thread

From there we can discuss and develop a standard. If we can all come to a consensus, then we will have a set standards and real examples.
Then we can move forward and have citizens be once again the "cream de la cream"

(sarcastically, we can call ourselves Committee for the Betterment of the Citizenship and the Site. [CBCS] It sounds "Revolutionary." Anyway, I am serious about the above.... we don't need to form a committee. I am trying to lighten the mood.

Alternatively, we can continue this nonsensical tit for tat discussion to no end.

[Sir Adrian]

Akar didn't libel people with holocaust denial accusations.

He knows what I'm talking about.

[PointOfViewGun]

Let me try the more direct approach.
Examine the handbook. Then, go to the mudpit or any other subforum and cite examples of conduct unbecoming a citizen.
Quick notes:
-Make sure it is cross section of members both citizens and non-citizens.
-Just make the quote without including the user.
-Create a separate thread
From there we can discuss and develop a standard. If we can all come to a consensus, then we will have a set standards and real examples.
Then we can move forward and have citizens be once again the "cream de la cream"
(sarcastically, we can call ourselves Committee for the Betterment of the Citizenship and the Site. [CBCS] It sounds "Revolutionary." Anyway, I am serious about the above.... we don't need to form a committee. I am trying to lighten the mood.
Alternatively, we can continue this nonsensical tit for tat discussion to no end.

I asked a very simple question, and the bar I set for you to clear have been a very low one. What you're suggesting is not a direct approach. Its an approach that's wasting time to avoid answering a simple question. You've been continuously libeling other Citizens with sweeping accusations that you don't seem to be able to back up.

[PikeStance]

I asked a very simple question, and the bar I set for you to clear have been a very low one. What you're suggesting is not a direct approach. Its an approach that's wasting time to avoid answering a simple question. You've been continuously libeling other Citizens with sweeping accusations that you don't seem to be able to back up.

I haven't accused anyone of anything in connection to standards or the lack there of for citizens. Moreover, I have always included myself (by the use of the words, "we," "us," and "our." Additionally, other poster have repeated the same observations as I have made. You are making it abundantly clear that your only interest is to "in some silly argument that will only leave us in the exact same place we have been for years. I have stated that the ultimate goal is form a consensus on behavior, hold ourselves to it, and then move forward enforcing it. If you like, scroll up to my very first comment when I predicted that such "call to action" would be avoided (silence) or dodge (debaters). If you are not going to be serious about improving the behavior of citizens, then just say so. If all you want to do is "win" some debate, then say so. As it is right now, we are all losing out.

Oh BTW, anyone is welcome to do what I mentioned in the above post here.

I would do it myself, but, i. it never goes well. 2. I have no time with my new job.

[PointOfViewGun]

I haven't accused anyone of anything in connection to standards or the lack there of for citizens. Moreover, I have always included myself (by the use of the words, "we," "us," and "our." Additionally, other poster have repeated the same observations as I have made. You are making it abundantly clear that your only interest is to "in some silly argument that will only leave us in the exact same place we have been for years. I have stated that the ultimate goal is form a consensus on behavior, hold ourselves to it, and then move forward enforcing it. If you like, scroll up to my very first comment when I predicted that such "call to action" would be avoided (silence) or dodge (debaters). If you are not going to be serious about improving the behavior of citizens, then just say so. If all you want to do is "win" some debate, then say so. As it is right now, we are all losing out.

Oh BTW, anyone is welcome to do what I mentioned in the above post here.

I would do it myself, but, i. it never goes well. 2. I have no time with my new job.

You have been portraying Pontifex Maximus' posts as the norm of the MudPit for Citizens. You have indeed been accusing every Citizen of similar conduct. You have been called out on it by multiple people so far. Turning response to a simple question of mine made to substantiate your claim into this mess and then calling me argumentative because I don't let it go is not exactly going to help us move forward. You clearly don't understand that you're making an offensively sweeping generalization of people just too keep arguing and see it in yourself to call others argumentative.

[Akar]

Don't talk about the noose in the hanged man's house Akar. You had a problem with making the exact same kind of posts nary a year ago.

I wish I had the strength and the time to go through the Mudpit, but I have done countless times and regretted it every single time. It would indeed be miraculous to see such as a quantum shift as you suggest. I do not know that those that do frequent it also say there isn't anything unique about his posts.

Soooo that's a "no. I can't find the evidence that I allege to me readily accessible", then? Can't say I'm surprised exactly.

He knows what I'm talking about.

No, I don't. Do you want to be specific or do you just want to continue to speak in vague riddles?

This is the second time you've made an offensive personal reference and implication, I don't appreciate it. Either back up your spurious claims or retract them.

[PikeStance]

You have been portraying Pontifex Maximus' posts as the norm of the MudPit for Citizens. You have indeed been accusing every Citizen of similar conduct. You have been called out on it by multiple people so far. Turning response to a simple question of mine made to substantiate your claim into this mess and then calling me argumentative because I don't let it go is not exactly going to help us move forward. You clearly don't understand that you're making an offensively sweeping generalization of people just too keep arguing and see it in yourself to call others argumentative.

I made no such statements. I said his comments are typical of what I have seen in the mudpit for years. I further stated that sense such behavior has never been brought up before, then I am not going to entertain it now. It is only bad because you claim it bad and I said it is typical. You can't have it both ways. (Really, how is our quote above any different than Ponti, you are being inflammatory).

Maybe you do not know what argumentative is....

tending to argue : having or showing a tendency to disagree or argue with other people in an angry way

This is exactly how I read your post. You make a lot of unnecessary accusations, inflammatory analogies, and you nitpick everything to death.

I basically told you what you need to do to get a Ponti and others like Ponti citizenship removed. We need to established (really reestablish) a new code of conduct. Until then, we are just engage in an infinite debate loop, except now you are becoming more and more frustrated.

The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result.

[PointOfViewGun]

I made no such statements. I said his comments are typical of what I have seen in the mudpit for years. I further stated that sense such behavior has never been brought up before, then I am not going to entertain it now. It is only bad because you claim it bad and I said it is typical. You can't have it both ways. (Really, how is our quote above any different than Ponti, you are being inflammatory).
Maybe you do not know what argumentative is....
This is exactly how I read your post. You make a lot of unnecessary accusations, inflammatory analogies, and you nitpick everything to death.
I basically told you what you need to do to get a Ponti and others like Ponti citizenship removed. We need to established (really reestablish) a new code of conduct. Until then, we are just engage in an infinite debate loop, except now you are becoming more and more frustrated.
The definition of insanity is doing something over and over again and expecting a different result.

Saying that you have seen Pontifex Maximus' comments typical of MudPit is you making that statement. A pig is a pig regardless of the lipstick. The kind of posting you refer to as inflammatory doesn't get someone infracted over and over again. Having your arguments getting called out for their failures is not the problem here as much as you try to turn them to be. The problem here is glaring failures in recognizing simple common sense. A new code of conduct was not needed when you argued for revoking elfdude's Citizenship and a new code of conduct is not needed now.

Nothing wrong with being frustrated. It would be bad if I was getting frustrated by the failures of my arguments though. That probably sucks a lot. What you don't seem to realize is that with every loop you are exposing the lack of merit of your position more and more. You fundamentally contradicted yourself in this last round, solidifying the appearance of inability to come to peace with a failed claim that most Citizens in the MudPit post like Pontifex Maximus. A highly insulting position at that.

[PikeStance]

Saying that you have seen Pontifex Maximus' comments typical of MudPit is you making that statement. A pig is a pig regardless of the lipstick. The kind of posting you refer to as inflammatory doesn't get someone infracted over and over again. Having your arguments getting called out for their failures is not the problem here as much as you try to turn them to be. The problem here is glaring failures in recognizing simple common sense. A new code of conduct was not needed when you argued for revoking elfdude's Citizenship and a new code of conduct is not needed now.

Nothing wrong with being frustrated. It would be bad if I was getting frustrated by the failures of my arguments though. That probably sucks a lot. What you don't seem to realize is that with every loop you are exposing the lack of merit of your position more and more. You fundamentally contradicted yourself in this last round, solidifying the appearance of inability to come to peace with a failed claim that most Citizens in the MudPit post like Pontifex Maximus. A highly insulting position at that.

Ok, conversation over.

[Sir Adrian]

Soooo that's a "no. I can't find the evidence that I allege to me readily accessible", then? Can't say I'm surprised exactly.
No, I don't. Do you want to be specific or do you just want to continue to speak in vague riddles?

I wasn't going to go there but since you insist, remember exactly a year ago when you got kicked out of staff because you implied basics had mental issues and generally low-key called him all sorts of things while flinging mud even though you were repeatedly warned to cease and desist? That was worse than 90% of what you posted in the ostra.

[Akar]

I got a warning for asking if he was high one time if that's what you're talking about? Also, that wasn't in the Mudpit, so I'm not sure what your point is.

Is this single example of an isolated event that happened over a year ago the only thing you could find to support your claims?

[PointOfViewGun]

I wasn't going to go there but since you insist, remember exactly a year ago when you got kicked out of staff because you implied basics had mental issues and generally low-key called him all sorts of things while flinging mud even though you were repeatedly warned to cease and desist? That was worse than 90% of what you posted in the ostra.

Do me now. Why was I supposed to get Ostrakoned 2 years ago?

[Cookiegod]

I wasn't going to go there but since you insist, remember exactly a year ago when you got kicked out of staff because you implied basics had mental issues and generally low-key called him all sorts of things while flinging mud even though you were repeatedly warned to cease and desist? That was worse than 90% of what you posted in the ostra.

The remaining 10% are what matter. Like you I dislike throwing stones (especially since I'm acutely aware of my own flaws) but I do think that even with no clear line having been defined for what is acceptable citizen behaviour, Ponti definitely crossed it with the holocaust stuff.


Anyway, what's done is done. I have two requests now:

1: Let's all cool down and stop throwing stones.

2: Let's think about a reform for future incidents.

[Flinn]

1: Let's all cool down and stop throwing stones.

2: Let's think about a reform for future incidents.

1. Curia lives because of the drama; no drama, no activity

2. lol yes, like if we never tried