fishweewee

Warm and fuzzy

Rate this topic

290 posts in this topic

Hahahahahhahaaa, this is funny. :D

 

 

2 hours ago, fish'nmagician said:

Tim,

YOUR bias will be used to justify your bias,

surely you can see the futility of this exercise you are suggesting.

In my opinion I did the right thing in treating these identical actions differently because in my opinion this guy deserved it more than that guy.

in light of the fact THAT is how you will judge things.

why go thru the motions?

 

 

5a9067d3dd46b_whatIthink.JPG.9afbfcf4ffc23ccc0caba96069b1237a.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2018 at 1:35 PM, PlumFishing said:

I reported a very offensive post exactly once. The post was saying not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake last year. 

My concerns were addressed by the private message attendant to the post I reported being made public and mocked (albeit without me being named as the reporter).

I don't report posts any longer for fear of that occurring again.

I have, as stated, unraveled this great mystery! :th:

 

Yes, you reported one post - and only one post, that is confirmed. Here is the 'report':  "Cheerleading for the death of children has no place here IMO." Of course, when I read that I was appalled that anyone on my website would "cheerlead for the death of children"...immediately I followed the link intent on removing the post and very clearly letting the offender know that cheerleading for the death of children isn't something that belong here or anywhere else. 

 

So when I go to the post I was very pleasantly surprised to learn that you had completely misrepresented the post you reported. Even in the quote at the top of this post you misrepresent the post you reported as saying "not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake". That part - the very premise for your reporting the post - is entirely false. Rather than just take my word for it, I have retrieved, in full, the post that you reported:

Quote

Couldn't choose a more perfect location.

 

"According to the most recent definition agreed upon by the federal and state governments, the Greater Mexico City population is 21.3 million people, making it the largest metropolitan area of the Western Hemisphere, the tenth-largest agglomeration, and the largest Spanish-speaking city in the world."

 

The key factors in my determining that your premise, outlined above, is entirely false were primarily the lack of the word of 'children' or any word meaning 'children' or hinting at 'children' - as well as the lack of any opinion about the quantity of them killed or not killed. When the premise for reporting a post is absolutely manufactured - like saying the post you are reporting is 'cheerleading for the death of children' - there is a very good chance that I will quote the reported post, in the thread, and explain that it was mistakenly or unfairly reported. I have been known to do this on the outside chance other people read the same post and got the same mistaken impression. 

 

So you were correct, I mentioned that someone reported a post. Except the post you reported was absolutely NOT "saying not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake last year". Nor was it "cheerleading for the death of children".  I would also be ashamed if I reported a post for "cheerleading the death of children" when the post doesn't mention children and doesn't cheerlead for their death:o Your recollection of the post you reported as "saying not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake last year" is a complete misrepresentation of what the post says.  I would also like to point out in my response, last year, where you say I "mocked" you - here's the entire post - as you'll note, the worst thing I said in the entire post was "that's some kind of weird logic" - not exactly what most would consider "mocking" you...I questioned your logic - which, looking at the examples in this post, that logic certainly seemed questionable at best :wave:

 

 

Quote

This was reported as "Cheerleading for the death of children".  Wow...that's some kind of very weird logic. While I don't agree with the thought that "couldn't choose a more perfect location", it certainly isn't "cheerleading for the death of children". I'm not going to remove posts because I don't agree with them or because someone imagines they say something that they don't. Yes, it's cold to say the above. No, I'm not going to remove posts because they are cold. 

 If he were "cheerleading for the death of children", I still may not remove the post, but I would certainly question it to try and understand why someone would "cheerlead" for the death of children.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2018 at 1:38 PM, fish'nmagician said:

It seems totally legit to tell people to report such posts instead of negatively responding to them,

and then publicly shaming those who do as you ask.

Poor Frank didn't know that the premise for both the reported post AND the one he quoted were entirely false...manufactured out of thin air even. But it's all good, Frank got to incorporate an extra whine :freak:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2018 at 2:36 PM, fish'nmagician said:

no you and mokes,

you can't bring  friends.

Wrong forum for scoring but the judges would be remiss if they didn't acknowledge the above as a debate ending left hook :read:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 mins ago, TimS said:

Poor Frank didn't know that the premise for both the reported post AND the one he quoted were entirely false...manufactured out of thin air even. But it's all good, Frank got to incorporate an extra whine :freak:

 

LOL,

I'm talking about my experience,

poor Tim is upset his bias isn't being accepted as proof he doesn't have a bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2018 at 2:38 PM, Slammer said:

I guess if you limit this stuff to this forum only,then it's OK?I'm not convinced.

In all seriousness, this forum - the Outpost - and the Town Tavern - are managed under completely different rules/guidelines than the rest of the forums here. And, yes, we have always done our best to keep the folks who participate on the three forums well aware that the behaviors tolerated in these three forums are NOT tolerated outside of these three forums. Very sincerely, if you find the posting in this forum or the Outpost to be offensive or distasteful, please stay out of them. I mean that honestly, these three are not fishing forums, they have nothing to do with fishing and unless you are looking for a good ball busting, they aren't for everyone :)

 

TimS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 mins ago, TimS said:

Poor Frank didn't know that

Tim FWIW my intention when participating in this forum is to have adult level conversation,

 

IMHO it's hard to do because there is a number of ankle biters who swarm threads and derail them,

and what's frustrating is that there seems no acceptable avenue for me to address it,

 

if I counter punch I get warnings to report,

if I report it falls on deaf ears because you deem me a douche.

 

there seems to be no good path for me,

 

but the gut punch comes when you ignore all of the flagrant nonsense that goes on here,

and proclaim me to be enemy number 1 and the primary reason this forum is toxic.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 mins ago, fish'nmagician said:

LOL,

I'm talking about my experience,

poor Tim is upset his bias isn't being accepted as proof he doesn't have a bias.

I'm not upset Frank, not even in the slightest...my level of angst is even lower than my give a **** of what you think...and that's pretty low :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 mins ago, TimS said:

In all seriousness, this forum - the Outpost - and the Town Tavern - are managed under completely different rules/guidelines than the rest of the forums here. And, yes, we have always done our best to keep the folks who participate on the three forums well aware that the behaviors tolerated in these three forums are NOT tolerated outside of these three forums. Very sincerely, if you find the posting in this forum or the Outpost to be offensive or distasteful, please stay out of them. I mean that honestly, these three are not fishing forums, they have nothing to do with fishing and unless you are looking for a good ball busting, they aren't for everyone :)

 

TimS

OK,I will avoid them like typhus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TimS said:

Do you honestly believe that was the first time you changed the spelling of an auto-censored word here? Are you sure I wasn't editing your posts where you skirted the auto-censor repeatedly, leaving comments in the edited post asking you to stop BEFORE I quoted one of them, disrupted the thread and asked you directly and publicly to knock it off? Cause it seems much more likely that you would have had to do is MANY times before I would respond like that, disrupting a discussion and quoting your post to publicly warn you :wave:

 

TimS

My recollection is either off topic or personal were the reasons given for anything of mine being edited or removed.  I have watched people write "chit" numerous times without repercussion.

 

Nonetheless look at your response to FWW and his posting of the c-word compared with the my auto-censor violation.  See a difference?  Even the Commish ha noticed it.

 

Awww, forget it.

 

You are always right and never wrong.  My bad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TimS said:

I have, as stated, unraveled this great mystery! :th:

 

Yes, you reported one post - and only one post, that is confirmed. Here is the 'report':  "Cheerleading for the death of children has no place here IMO." Of course, when I read that I was appalled that anyone on my website would "cheerlead for the death of children"...immediately I followed the link intent on removing the post and very clearly letting the offender know that cheerleading for the death of children isn't something that belong here or anywhere else. 

 

So when I go to the post I was very pleasantly surprised to learn that you had completely misrepresented the post you reported. Even in the quote at the top of this post you misrepresent the post you reported as saying "not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake". That part - the very premise for your reporting the post - is entirely false. Rather than just take my word for it, I have retrieved, in full, the post that you reported:

 

The key factors in my determining that your premise, outlined above, is entirely false were primarily the lack of the word of 'children' or any word meaning 'children' or hinting at 'children' - as well as the lack of any opinion about the quantity of them killed or not killed. When the premise for reporting a post is absolutely manufactured - like saying the post you are reporting is 'cheerleading for the death of children' - there is a very good chance that I will quote the reported post, in the thread, and explain that it was mistakenly or unfairly reported. I have been known to do this on the outside chance other people read the same post and got the same mistaken impression. 

 

So you were correct, I mentioned that someone reported a post. Except the post you reported was absolutely NOT "saying not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake last year". Nor was it "cheerleading for the death of children".  I would also be ashamed if I reported a post for "cheerleading the death of children" when the post doesn't mention children and doesn't cheerlead for their death:o Your recollection of the post you reported as "saying not enough Mexican children died in the earthquake last year" is a complete misrepresentation of what the post says.  I would also like to point out in my response, last year, where you say I "mocked" you - here's the entire post - as you'll note, the worst thing I said in the entire post was "that's some kind of weird logic" - not exactly what most would consider "mocking" you...I questioned your logic - which, looking at the examples in this post, that logic certainly seemed questionable at best :wave:

 

 

 

I think if you read the entire thread it gives more context to my assertion. 

But we can move on, there are bigger things to worry about in life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.