1  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  ...  28  |   Order by default

Apr 3, 2001, 9:44am

"agent1" wrote

> The problem is that Eep actually makes rational arguments (usually). There
are a few cases (maybe even a lot) where I've seen him overreact quite a
bit, but that is no reason to ban him from posting to these newsgroups. If
you were debating something with a person in real life and they started to
yell at you and hurl profanity, would you have their mouth sealed shut by
the government?

But this is the bone of contention here ... the whole reason for the thread.
Plenty of people here believe that the level to which Eep takes the
overreation moves his comment into abuse. If we were dealing with Eep in a
real-world environment, face-to-face, I would bet that Eep wouldn't be
anywhere near as abusive as he is. It would be pretty intimmidating to have
a whole room of people reacting angrily to your comments rather than a large
number of posts in a newsgroup.


> To put a new spin on this... Since I don't like what you're saying, and
think you are acting in a stupid way, I should get AWCI to ban you from
posting... Then I won't have to deal with your opinions.

Its not his opinions on the subjects that people have a problem with. We
have been through this discussion time and time again. Yes, sometimes he has
valid input ... and sometimes it is not so valid. Eep comments on everything
that he disagrees with (which if fine) ... but when someone disagrees with
HIM, he abuses them. People who can't exist in a civilised society are
ejected from that society ... (through natural selection, prison, etc.).
Does this forum not deserve to be run under the same rules as, and therefore
reap the same protection and benefits from other aspects of "life"?

On a similar note to your point, if you can be ejected from public worlds
such as Alpha World for using foul and abusive language and/or abusing
others, why not here?

Grims

Apr 3, 2001, 10:13am

Hmmm ... although its a low form of attention. If he gets a kick out of this
type of attention, then there is definitely something wrong there.


[View Quote]

Apr 3, 2001, 10:20am

True ... True ....

[View Quote]

Apr 3, 2001, 11:12am

[View Quote] > The public building worlds have a rating, I believe, but these newsgroups
only have a charter. Maybe we should all go back and read it over...


OK, fair point.

Apr 3, 2001, 11:14am

"agent1" wrote

> The public building worlds have a rating, I believe, but these newsgroups
only have a charter. Maybe we should all go back and read it over...

BTW ... where IS the charter?

Apr 3, 2001, 4:04pm

[View Quote]
> It's one of the first few posts, I think.

LOLOL ... c'mon ... its not going to get read THERE, now is it? Perhaps a
link off the activeworlds.com newsgroups page would be an idea ... assuming
its still relevant.

Apr 4, 2001, 5:41am

Hey ... big deal. That's my opinion ... so I shared it. Bite me.

[View Quote]

Apr 4, 2001, 6:06am

OMG ... I stand totally aghast ... TOTALLY! Speechless !!



[View Quote] it's actually the low self-esteem people who feel the need to talk about me
because they are probably impressed by my assertiveness and opinions--of
which they wish they could emulate (to a certain degree in most cases).

and ...

not having to deal with the real-time social crap. <shrug>

Apr 4, 2001, 7:36am

Ummmm..... pardon?

[View Quote]

Apr 4, 2001, 8:12am

Still not with you icey ...

I just made some flippant comment regarding a certain's person's belief that
other members in the NG aspire to achieving his advanced level of forming
opinions/being assertive and that social, personal interaction and the
etiquette that goes with it was ... and I quote ... "crap".

When did this become about me? I was just joining in the discussion.



[View Quote]

Apr 3, 2001, 9:48am

Dagnabbit!! ... what vote? (Been away a lot this year).

Grims

[View Quote]

Apr 8, 2001, 12:03am

Wing ... that's what Loss Adjusters are for ... insurance against these
things. A service provider pays its insurance against data loss to cover
themselves against legal action from their customers and to get back up and
running again as soon as possible without having to fork out for new kit
yourself ... out of you own carefully planned budgets.

Having said that, with that statement on the web-site, people can make up
their own minds whether they want to use jbell's services, although just
saying you're not going to cover any losses doesn't necessarily make it the
case legally.

Grims.


, and you have to admit, is should be part of any service to protect the
interests of
[View Quote]

Apr 19, 2001, 8:53pm

Hey ... if you ask him nicely, I'm sure Andras would host a newsgroup for
you lot called "My dick's bigger than yours". Then you can keep this crap up
all day long without boring other people !!

Waddya reckon??



[View Quote]

Apr 20, 2001, 6:06am

I think that, for some people here, that decision has alread been made!


[View Quote]

Apr 20, 2001, 6:11am

The speed/type of the connection isn't the issue here ... its the fact that
hosting servers on your connection uses up more of the ISP's available
bandwidth. They've forecast the average home users bandwidth requirements
and priced the at Home package accordingly. You pay more ... for at Work ...
because its a different segment of users ... with higher bandwidth
requirements.

Its their business ... let them run it and charge what they want. If people
don't like that, then they can go elsewhere. Geesh! its only the way the
world works afterall and has done for centuries!

[View Quote]

May 18, 2001, 11:23am

Well, to be honest, if I was sexy eyes, having probably my first post in
here responded to in such a fashion would only serve to make me think that
this NG is frequented purely by the anally retentive. If that's a tag you
want,, then fine.

No point beating someone up for something they didn't know was a a breach of
"etiquette" ... its just dumb and counter-productive. You and Tony M posted
over 90 minutes after the HTML was first mentioned ... and did so PURELY to
criticise. Nice welcome, huh?

Grims


[View Quote]

Aug 2, 2001, 9:04pm

Well I have the offensive know-it-all idiot filtered, and until this post
had almost forgotten about him - a policy that WAS working quite nicely.
GRRRR!!

[View Quote]

Aug 28, 2001, 7:38pm

Anyone going to say anything useful on this thread rather than this personal
slanging match? Preferably something to do with bots or the SDK perhaps
considering half of it is getting cross posted between the Bots and SDK
newsgroups.

Children!

[View Quote]

Sep 4, 2001, 9:06pm

Hey people, can we restrict this to ONE newsgroup please? ... rather than
all of them? The topic is kinda tired now.

[View Quote]

Sep 4, 2001, 11:31am

Considering you regard it as "CRAP", just delete it dopey!! Its what
everyone else with space problems has to do - try being a bit pragmatic
about it.

Don't take it out on tyrell just beacuase you can't be bothered to do have a
suitable amount of disk space for the applications you want to run. And
while you're at it, try thinking about why just stuck another 3K of crap on
top of 5K that you were so upset by.


[View Quote]

Sep 11, 2001, 7:44pm

Hmmmm .... "join hands and PRAY for LOVE and PEACE. And when whoever is
found that caused all of this mess they should be hunted down until dead."
What an interesting concept of "LOVE and PEACE" you have. Did you think this
through before you posted it or did you simply want to get your holy opinion
in everyones face?

Considering the huge loss of life and the global ramifications of the
inevitable retaliation, I think it would be more prudent to keep your
personal views to yourself and leave people to have their own private
thoughts on the matter.

AW encompasses many different cultures, beliefs and sympathies, some of
which are mutually exclusive. It IS a virtual community, free-er from the
malices and persecutions present in the real world - based partly on
escapism. While I share billions of other people's abhorence and sympathies
in this matter, this isn't the forum for anyone to get on their soap box and
push their beliefs, their politics and religious tendencies down the throats
of other members.

Geesh!



[View Quote]

Sep 11, 2001, 11:44pm

Oh well, here we go....

First off, I meant no disservice to the US emergency services or the people
that were directly affected by the attack including the thousands of dead
and injured. For some reason you chose to take the post that way, which you
are entitled to do I guess, but its dumb if you ask me - read the words. And
if you can find a "salute" to anything in the original post as opposed to a
reactionary rant, then well done!

"5% of the worlds' population that actually believes there is no God"
implies that you think that people's beliefs are black and white - one of
the roots of extremist views in itself. I have no convictions either way
about God's existence - but no God plays a part in my life. The two
contentious lines of the post were just indicating my irritation that those
who DO feel the need to have a God in their life expect or call on others to
share their beliefs.

I am mainstream English, lived in the UK all my life and as such am a
supporter of Democracy and Capitalism. I am as shocked by this attrocity as
anyone - I spend 50% of my time working within 150 miles of NYC so its a lot
closer to home for me than it may initially seem.

As for comments like "whoever did this deserves justice and death" is just
hypocrytical. Whoever did this didn't do it just because they were bored one
Tuesday morning - they believe that the US has comitted a crime for which
they feel they need to be punished. Even our western over-enthusiastic media
acknowledge this. The act itslef is extremism gone mad, but so is an instant
call for fatal retaliation except that can hide behind a semi-justifyable
mask after the events.

What scares me is what comes next ... Dubya will have the unconditional
support of 80% of key European nations for both hunting down the culprits
and, to some extent, in executing the retaliation. However, what the hell is
the US going to gain from taking out a few extremists? Very little I would
imagine. Dubya has recently disclosed a list of what he discribes as "Rogue
States" ... basically Middle Eastern countries that he doesn't like because
they have a beef with the US. Its reasonably certain that the retaliation,
in order to get the desired message across, will NOT be focussed to the
perpetrators - it would have to be swift and it would have to be public. The
US have been here before (Reagan ... Tripoli ... no proof ... ring a bell?),
and THAT scares me because there are too many of these countries that would
love to join in the melee to get a piece of America for its trophy cabinet.
And guess what ... we ALL get dragged in!

An extremist reaction to an extremist attack is going to cause more problems
in the long term than it solves in the short term. Time for Dubya to show
that he has the balls to stand up to his Generals ... 'cuz otherwise we're
all f**ked because you could see what the head of the Joint Chiefs was
thinking when he said that the US military was "ready". They do like to play
with their maps and models those guys.

BTW ... all the reports I have seen, on four different news channels,
clearly stated that the vast majority of palestinians were NOT happy about
either the attacks on the US or the impending retaliation. They are more
concerned about the additional hell this will bring into their lives. Israel
already seem to have used the apparent need for increased security as an
excuse to attack and take over a palestinian town. Any that were
"celebrating" are no doubt pretty pissed that the US refuse to show an even
hand in the Middle East and condemn the attrocities performed BY Israel as
well as those performed AGAINST Israel.

Sep 12, 2001, 5:50am

Geesh! NO ... I'm just looking through all the single-minded crap that's
going on right now. I appreciate that everyone in the US is horrified, as
any nation would be at a time like this, but making calls-to-arms like that
is just plain narrow-minded and dumb.

NOT being American, I can see a bigger picture without the personal
distractions.and the quandary that now faces the western world as a whole.
There is no sense in trying to believe that the US media is going to give
anything but subjective coverage to this so I wouldn't recommend basing your
views the "facts" they provide unless you want to get caught up in patriotic
hysteria (which is yet more extremism).

Somewhere in there you see "pent up frustration" with the US ... again, NO.
If you read it properly, without the disfigured slant that you insist on
putting on it, the only references I make to any US activities past and
present are:

(a) Reagan bombed Libya on the basis of a SUSPICION that Gadaffi was
responsible for a much, much smaller scale attack - this is history. A
Republican acting in response to an attack on the US and wanting to
retaliate - basically the position we are faced with today. Assuming Bin
Laden is responsible, the US have made it clear that if Afghanistan stand in
their way then they will wage war on them too. This isn't a threat against
Bin Laden or even the Taliban ... its a (very dangerous) threat against
Islam - something that will destroy the multi-racial societies in many
powerful countries around the world (many of which are allied to the US) and
inevitably end in disaster. A very high price to pay for US vengence.

(b) Bush has shown from Day 1 that he has little knowledge of viable foreign
policy and at a time of war, unless he grows some morals, common-sense,
foresight and a hefty pair of testicles, then the military will be running
the show. The absence of politics at a time of conflict is ALWAYS a bad
idea.

(c) An uneven hand in the middle east - which just backing up the point
regarding your ill-informed comment about all the palestinians "dancing in
the streets".

The US government IS an issue, since OUR fate now rests in their hands.
Hopefully, not just in the hands of the likes of Henry "gimme some action"
Shelton because that will be a catastrophic day for the world. The Cuban
Missile Crisis was only resolved through JFK (a Democrat) standing up to the
military and avoiding the incursions and air strikes on the silos, so lets
all hope that Bush can break with the war-mongering ethic that US
Republicans have a reputation for deal with this situation in a manner that
is appropriate to the global good. Now is NOT the time for American
patriotism and lust for vengence to dictate the fate of the rest of the
world.

As for my "attack" on JFK2, I believe you stated in your first reply that
this is a place for sharing views. Well, in my view, it was an unnecessary
self-righteous rant that doesn't belong in in a global forum. Also, if JFK2
is a God-fearing American, how does a call for violent revenge fit in with
his religious beliefs? Is that blunt enough for you?



[View Quote]

Sep 12, 2001, 8:53pm

Wing, obviously you're not alone in wanting to see an end to this vile
terrorism - its a view that I would hope is shared by the vast majority of
western-minded people. However, the nature of the US retaliation is a
concern. A war against terrorism is a war that will never end unless it is
stamped out in one swoop, otherwise it will only escalate. By definition,
innocent people will be the targets for terrorist activity and more and more
innocent people would die unless the RIGHT retaliation is exacted.

This is a relatively new experience for Americans. From a personal
perspective, I endured a number of years of working and living in central
London as a terrorist group, who had differnet views to Britain, were
exploding nail-bombs in pubs on busy Friday lunchtimes, bombs in litter bins
in crowded shopping areas, car-bombs outside densely populated commercial
buildings, etc. These things were happening week-in-week-out in pubs that I
frequented, shopping areas that I used and near buildings that I worked in,
so I know what its like to be terrorised. London was a closed shop for many,
many months with checkpoints manned by armed police, brandishing H&K
sub-machine guns, around the city perimeter.

They were killing innocent people and doing it without even so much as any
unconditional condemnation from one of our supposed allies. It is NOT an
experience that I would wish to go through again and certainly not on any
increased scale. Its all very well saying "go and kill the people
responsible" when its on the other side of the world. America's allies in
Europe are connected via land to these people and not protected by at least
3,500 miles of water to the East and West. America has experienced this
particular tragedy, horrific as it is, but either there should be either NO
retaliation or TOTAL retaliation. If its going to happen, it cannot be
half-hearted and must go all the way and get them ALL or it could condemn
millions of people around the world to more tragedy and misery. As I said in
another post, this is not the time for the American lust for vengence to
dictate the fate of the rest of the world.

I think Europe has experienced more than its fair share of civilian
casualties in the last 100 years. Check out the horrific scenes from the
mass carpet bombing of major European cities in WWII by both sides - there's
a big difference between fighting a war on your own doorstep and firing
smart missiles from miles and miles away. History has told that the only
successfuil way to end terror campaigns is to give both sides a forum in
which to express their grievances. Islam is a powerful force in the world
and the fundamentalists have plenty of lieutenants ready to take over where
their current leaders leave off. All or nothing or disaster ... and I would
be surprised if anyone truly believes that total anihilation of these people
is actually possible.

These are very real concerns and I have spent all the time I am going to
trying to express a very strong sense of anxiety for the future should the
retaliation be carried out in the manner being called for by an
understandably outraged nation.

No more thesis-lengths posts from me, but I hope at least some people can
appreciate that this is not a matter of one nation or group of nations
exacting revenge on a specific terrorist organisation. It is potentially a
huge influence on the life we live today and the values and state of freedom
that we all regard so dearly.

BTW ... what makes you think that The Pentagon wasn't the target for the
Washington plane? The White House seems such a token target with both The
Pentagon and The Capitol Building in close proximity - both far more
influential and representative of American might. Its an honest question ...
just wondering if there was information I'd missed or whether it was just
media speculation.

Grims.


[View Quote]

Sep 12, 2001, 9:13pm

Patriotism isn't a sin, its admirable (in moderation) ... but patriotic
hysteria IS a form of extremism. Everyones views get warped when they are
touched by such an attrocity, but such huge decisions cannot be influenced
by it.

I accept your point that the people change from administration to
administration, but the ideals that drive the Democrats and the Republicans
evolve very slowly. It is these ideals that mould their reactions. Democrats
react differently to situations than Republicans ... that's why their not
the same party. Unless the Reps have reinvented themsleves since Reagan, I
believe that they are driven by similar beliefs to their predecessors -
hence the comparison.

"you don't tell Americans what to do" ... I'm not even starting on that
issue ... I've said enough.

[View Quote]

Sep 12, 2001, 9:22pm

If I am reading this right, you're basically describing Ethnic Cleansing on
a genocidal scale. Scary really. And I don't think that you want to be
preaching about backing up your allies. The US goes remarkably introverted
when it comes to a decision on battling inherent evils that conflict with
their own materialistic interests.

BTW ... do you have ANY idea of the size of the (currently relatively
dormant) enemy you are facing? Islamic sects have a huge amount of influence
throughout America's enemies in the middle east. I don't think even the
combined efforts of the whole of NATO has the resources to "get rid of the
threat by destroying the source" in this case.


[View Quote]

Sep 14, 2001, 4:39am

By the same token, what they did was justified in their eyes ... attacking
the "Evil American Empire" ... and they regard ALL Americans as equally
guilty of the crimes they perceive. They just happen to be a minority and so
their actions and methods are abhorent to many, many more people. To them,
any retaliation will be seen as further crimes. Go figure.

[View Quote]

Sep 15, 2001, 1:47pm

You putting that link forward as the truth is as rediculous as debating this
whole issue. Its only their opinion.


[View Quote]

Sep 15, 2001, 1:50pm

bodhi wrote ...
"You are under some misguided belief that I have any wish to debate anything
at all with you lolol ..."

.... And with that comment goes your last ounce of respectability. I would
imagine that you're on a few more ignore lists after this debacle, you fool.

Sep 15, 2001, 2:01pm

Thankyou for helping me make my point.

[View Quote]

1  ...  19  20  21  22  23  24  ...  28  |   Order by default