3100. jexster - 4/9/2007 10:16:09 AM
Ooops..Mote Cafe
3101. Magoseph - 4/14/2007 6:58:13 AM
Wabbit, the item, “the Topics of Interest:--Don Imus, Al Sharpton, and Rutgers women “ on the left side bar leads to The Mote Café’s post “21504. Magoseph - 4/9/2007 6:49:27 AM”, but it shouldn’t anymore since the conversation continues in “News & Current Events”. Maybe we should regale the numerous readers of the Mote with the profound and intelligent posts we spout about the matter. (tic)I would suggest respectfully that the title of the discussion should change. (tic)
Now, one more thing, can any of you guess what the initials (tic) mean to me?
3102. wabbit - 4/14/2007 12:58:34 PM
I usually just link to wherever a conversation begins, and this one started in the Cafe, hence the link. By changing it, people who might be interested would lose the start of the discussion. Perhaps instead of changing that link, I should add a link to the beginning of the posts in News?
3103. Magoseph - 4/14/2007 2:42:41 PM
That would do, Wabbit--we may get a new Motie that way.
3104. wabbit - 4/14/2007 3:31:31 PM
Done. Hopefully I caught the continuation post.
3105. judithathome - 4/14/2007 4:02:47 PM
Mags, I thought it meant tongue in cheek?
3106. arkymalarky - 5/19/2007 10:59:54 AM
Anyone have an opinion on this?
I haven't kept up with the issue, since I look at the Slate front page about once or twice a week and only occasionally read a full article from there--too much other good stuff available elsewhere and way more than I've had time to read as it is.
But it strikes me that their process seems somewhat inept, in the first place, and that it's interesting they're so into participant input compared to when we left being treated as unnecessary impositions rather than (Paying) customers.
I was also struck (though I didn't read the whole thing) by their complaint, similar to ours now and theirs back then (though with far less reason than we have since they're attached to a well-funded magazine), that they can't get new people in.
3107. arkymalarky - 5/19/2007 11:06:36 AM
I still think the explosion of the Blog world and places like TPM and Huffpost mean the demise of those online magazine and news providers that expected to corner a market and the profit from internet interaction. I hope I'm right, and I hope the same holds for music companies and television companies who are trying to do the same thing. There's enough money and monopoly to go around. Let the people have something that they can truly call their own for once. It makes me a bit nervous when they talk about chunking the current internet and completely overhauling it, and when it seems security of people and their computers is becoming such an issue as to warrant more control over the system in the minds of most users.
And I have come to hate Microsoft, for mostly unrelated reasons. I'd like to see them lose their domination.
3108. arkymalarky - 5/19/2007 11:08:47 AM
Oh man, I hadn't seen this:
Club Fray
You can post in these threads if you are a star poster or by invitation only.
Arts & Life
News & Politics
Technology
Business
Slate Movies Page
Travel & Food
Campaign 2004
Sports
Think this could be part of their problem? Who would want to participate in their freaking Peanut Gallery while the pet students get the preferential treatment?
What a turnoff.
3109. Wombat - 5/31/2007 3:31:30 PM
Goodness gracious! For the last few days, I've spent some time lurking Chez Acey. I got into this after Acey was given prominent play by Larry Johnson and others for taking the lead in committing some real bloomers about Plame and a memo from the US embassy in Bagdhad. Highlights included typical Acey abuse of Juan Cole and Pat Lang.
Chez Acey is like an insane asylum run by McMurphy. I must admit that I have occasionally posted there (under a different monicker), as it is fun to put on protective gear and do some poking with an electric cattle prod to stir things up (not that it really needs it).
3110. jexster - 5/31/2007 3:47:29 PM
The little shit's bad mouthing Obe Juan?
"The Great Satan" taken???
3111. jexster - 5/31/2007 3:50:19 PM
Cole screens his posts. Smart move
3112. Ms. No - 6/1/2007 8:36:25 AM
Arx,
I could only read so much of that before I was just rolling my eyes. They're still looking to woo people with public praise and gold stars. "One of our editors might pick your post to highlight as especially profound!!! You might even get start ratings from other posters!!!"
They still have no concept at all of what exactly makes people post on a message board. Plus, I can't figure out why the uber-brains at Microsoft have had a sign-in glitch for however many months now that they simply could not or would not fix.
Clearly, the problems are much the same as they ever were: Too much talk about how to change policy and appearance with no real technical support. Slate doesn't really care about the Fray as anything other than a traffic generator and a way to bring in readership which shows their profound idiocy. It's an entirely backwards idea -- that people who like to run their own mouths and talk to each other are going to suddenly start stampeding to read Slate's pundits instead.
If they want people to read their magazine they need better articles.
And naked chicks.
3113. prolph - 6/17/2007 12:13:06 AM
i am seriously tired of jexter, sex and health that may be harmful so i tried to go to ozzie's site without sucess , anyone tell me how?
sports is great and wizard etc, but i want to see what the otheer kids are doing,
patsy
3114. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 6/17/2007 10:47:50 AM
3115. wabbit - 9/11/2007 5:21:28 PM
I'm happy to see Ms. No posted about our 9th anniversary. No doubt some are snickering, but for myself, it's been a good nine years with all of you. Thanks to everyone who has hung in so far.
3116. jexster - 9/11/2007 5:46:04 PM
Nine years...my how time flies..or something like that
3117. wabbit - 9/11/2007 6:00:04 PM
Hmmm, is it 9 or 8? My bad, I think it's our 8th anniversary, not 9th. I think we went live 9/11/99.
Regardless, the sentiment remains the same. We're still here.
3118. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/11/2007 6:12:59 PM
Kudos & Congrats, wabb, et al . . . Celebrate Here . . . [provided your browser can do Java].
3119. arkymalarky - 9/11/2007 8:59:09 PM
I love this place and you all.
3120. judithathome - 9/12/2007 12:09:46 AM
Me, too...and especially at this time.
Because I'm depressed as hell.
3121. arkymalarky - 9/12/2007 8:23:43 PM
Oh my. Why?
3122. lemwalker - 9/12/2007 9:12:09 PM
I visit the Mote daily. Are we going under? Seldom post, enough do so often that there is no need. I thank all for their opinions.
We all have two things. One is an opinion, and the other... usually they both stink. The key is to express the one without being considered the other.
3123. Ms. No - 9/12/2007 9:46:17 PM
Yes, we're on the verge of collapse just as we've been since the first year. ;->
Good to see you, Lemwalker!
3124. arkymalarky - 9/13/2007 3:29:21 PM
Haha! I'd always heard "and they all stink but mine." I like "The key is to express the one without being considered the other."
3125. judithathome - 9/14/2007 2:43:58 PM
All of a sudden, I have to log in to post...WTF?
3126. judithathome - 9/14/2007 5:08:04 PM
Okay...this is getting OLD. I have to log in even though when I come here, it says Welcome, Judithathome. And even though each time I come here and log in, I check the box that says "remember me on this computer".
What is going on? I have changed NOTHING since yesterday.
3127. judithathome - 9/14/2007 6:34:55 PM
This is getting as irritating as World Crossing.
HELP!!
3128. arkymalarky - 9/14/2007 6:48:51 PM
Hmm. It's not doing that with me. Did you look at your settings? Toss your cookies and relog in and maybe that will help.
I can't get anything to post without stopping and reposting, so everything I say goes double, just like this.
3129. arkymalarky - 9/14/2007 6:49:09 PM
Hmm. It's not doing that with me. Did you look at your settings? Toss your cookies and relog in and maybe that will help.
3130. arkymalarky - 9/14/2007 6:49:25 PM
Heh. I had to repost, but it didn't post the first one this time.
3131. judithathome - 9/14/2007 10:15:55 PM
I think I fixed it...I hit "add" to favorites and it asked if I wanted to "overwrite" the address that was already there...I hit yes and here we are!
3132. judithathome - 9/15/2007 7:24:47 AM
And THAT fix lasted overnight and this morning I am back to having to sign in.
3133. judithathome - 9/16/2007 1:40:21 PM
Is there no one reading this thread? I am not computer-literate and need some suggestions here, people! ;-)
3134. arkymalarky - 9/16/2007 2:46:07 PM
You might try the tech thread, since it's not a Mote thing and the only help you could get would be computer stuff. For some reason your cookies are being dumped or something and you may need to change your browser settings. I'm having troubles of my own and almost didn't get in here. If a call to WildBlue doesn't fix it, I'm going back on dialup.
3135. arkymalarky - 9/16/2007 2:46:09 PM
You might try the tech thread, since it's not a Mote thing and the only help you could get would be computer stuff. For some reason your cookies are being dumped or something and you may need to change your browser settings. I'm having troubles of my own and almost didn't get in here. If a call to WildBlue doesn't fix it, I'm going back on dialup.
And I can barely post at all.
3136. wabbit - 9/16/2007 4:56:39 PM
Judith, it has nothing to do with your favorites, or the site, since it isn't happening to everyone else. It may be cookies, as Arky has already suggested. Have you tried clearing the Mote cookies and then logging in? btw, make sure you do NOT have the Mote open in any browser window when you delete the cookie, or it won't really delete.
3137. judithathome - 9/17/2007 7:17:07 AM
That should be no problem at all since I don't know HOW to delete or install or do anything with cookies but eat them.
3138. wabbit - 9/17/2007 7:23:33 AM
It's simple enough to ask. What browser do you use?
3139. judithathome - 9/17/2007 7:45:43 AM
Internet Explorer.
But I'm going to have Keoni do it because he's the one who fouled it up...he has this new security program and the Mote is the only place now (besides WC) that doesn't work. So he must have reset something and by gosh, he can just re-fix it! I didn't want the new program to start with and we went round and round about it because he overbought on it. Ha!
I know that makes me sound like a wuss and is a blow to women's lib but it has ticked me off enough that I am determined to make him do it.
For some reason, I can now get into WC with my old bookmark in favorites without logging in each time...so whatever he did, it left that one alone.
It will be fixed by tomorrow morning and I apologize for being such a pain about it.
3140. wabbit - 9/17/2007 7:52:02 AM
Who knows what messed things up, it could be any number of things, but deleting the Mote cookies and then logging in again fixes most log in problems. I have to do that sometimes at the NY Times site. I blame Microsoft.
Regardless, when you have him delete the Mote cookies, make sure the site is not open in any browser window, or the cookies won't delete.
When I have time, I'll write up instructions for deleting cookies in IE and Firefox and add it to the FAQ.
3141. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/17/2007 9:15:15 AM
Get a MAC and be FREEE!
3142. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 10/19/2007 1:03:40 PM
This place reminds me of this place which reminds me of this place . . .
3143. wabbit - 10/19/2007 1:35:22 PM
LOL!
3144. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/4/2008 9:59:38 PM
Hey wabb. AC
FYI DEPARTMENT:
I can't bring up The Mote on FireFox; here is the diagnostic . . .
Microsoft Active Server Pages error '80004005'
Can't call method "value" on an undefined value at C:inetpubwwwroot hemotelibperl/Objects/Applications/ViewThread.pm.
?, line 0
3145. alistairconnor - 9/5/2008 1:47:31 AM
That's not the browser, that's the server. Dunno. I'll give Sigi a ring if it happens again...
3146. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/5/2008 10:52:17 AM
I know, but why can I get here with Safari and other browsers, but not Firefox . . . and only for the Mote--I can get other websites with FF fine?
3147. arkymalarky - 9/5/2008 11:32:53 PM
I'm on FF now.
3148. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/6/2008 12:18:47 AM
Are you on a MAC? I am.
3149. wabbit - 9/6/2008 10:00:46 AM
I need to get my Mac hooked up, but AC is right, that's definitely on the server. Did you try the usual, closing the browser and clearing the cache?
3150. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/6/2008 10:19:44 AM
I did, wabb, nevertheless, why can I get other bookmarked websites, but not The Mote if it's a server thing?
[Check out Arts]
3151. arkymalarky - 9/6/2008 12:56:57 PM
No, but Bob's iphone uses Safari and he got on The Mote fine, as well.
The Mote looks great on an iphone, btw.
3152. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/6/2008 1:02:28 PM
Someone must have been a visual designer who got lucky . . . and who never anticipated miniaturization for cell phones.
3153. wabbit - 9/7/2008 2:56:12 PM
WoW, try deleting the cookie for the Mote. You'll have to log in and reset your time zone, but that might clear things up for you.
3154. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 9/7/2008 4:24:46 PM
I love you wabbit, because your mind sparkles!!!
[That did it.]
3155. wabbit - 9/7/2008 4:39:44 PM
Ah, cookies. We've run into that problem before, so once the cache is cleared, cookies become the primary suspect!
3156. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 10/6/2008 10:02:52 PM
My sincere apologies-- I think my posting of the end of the world video screwed up the International thread.
3157. marjoribanks - 10/7/2008 2:09:47 AM
Ironic, innit?
3158. robertjayb - 10/7/2008 4:35:51 PM
Whassa matta wit International?
Calling wabbit!
3159. wonkers2 - 10/7/2008 4:49:57 PM
It's a great video. Terrifying!
3160. arkymalarky - 10/7/2008 4:50:38 PM
I fixed it, but I don't know how to repost in a way that doesn't do that again.
3161. wabbit - 10/8/2008 11:58:06 AM
I'll repost it if someone can tell me which EOTW video it is…
3162. wonkers2 - 10/8/2008 3:13:24 PM
I think it was #1. However, my favorite and the most likely is #4. They all are worth watching. Thanks!
3163. wonkers2 - 10/8/2008 4:05:46 PM
Here's the English version that I believe was posted by the WIZ:
Doomsday Scenario--Large impact collsion
3164. wabbit - 10/8/2008 6:05:45 PM
Thanks wonkers, that link works fine (and the Pink Floyd soundtrack brings back some memories… ). No need to re-post the video, imo.
Also found at that site — CNN compares SNL to actual Palin interview. Sad, actually.
3165. wonkers2 - 10/8/2008 6:36:32 PM
Wow! That's a great one? Maybe McLame should have picked Tina!
3166. jexster - 10/9/2008 12:19:42 PM
HELP
Would someone delete msg num 37656 in American Politics???
I posted a WaPo video twice by mistake and the second one seems to have frozen the thread
Sorry
3167. judithathome - 10/9/2008 12:50:19 PM
Jex, Magos is gone for the day...I can call her later, though.
3168. jexster - 10/9/2008 1:09:31 PM
Better you than me..I've a bone to pick with Mags who dared to interrupt my Tuesday debate watch..didn't you?
Can you post to AP JAH? How about you Jen?
CAT FIGHT!
3169. magoseph - 10/9/2008 5:05:15 PM
Jex, e-mail Wabbit at viwabbit@yahoo.com.
3170. wabbit - 10/11/2008 3:16:55 PM
By the time I saw this, the thread had scrolled past the point of having a problem (although it actually wasn't a problem for me, the second video just kept loading, but nothing froze). Still, thanks for the heads-up, I deleted the duplicate post. It would have given me a headache when I next archived posts.
3171. wonkers2 - 12/13/2008 2:50:55 PM
VK and others have observed that now there is less serious discussion and opinion posted on The Mote than previously. It occurs to me that increasing the permitted number of words in a single post on all threads or on certain threads might encourage more serious discussion. I've run up against the per post word limit several times and had to break my comment into two or three posts. On other occasions I've just not bothered to post something that I wanted to cut and paste from another source (a w2 letter to the editor, for example). Right now I have a long one on a bit of auto industry history that I was going to post until I realized it was too long. ??? [This is not intended as a complaint but rather a suggestion. I don't know what the thinking was/is behind the per post word limit.]
3172. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 5:11:15 PM
Is it true that Jexter has been banned? If so, I would like to know by whom this decision was made and the reasoning behind it. My impression is that there are plenty of participants who disagree? Wabbit????...Anybody else???... If Jexter has been banned I hereby object strongly.
3173. David Ehrenstein - 1/5/2009 6:04:42 PM
Me too. WTF?????
Where's Jex? Let him roam free!
3174. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 7:25:52 PM
I agree. And I didn't see any announcement on The Mote? I wonder what gives? Is wabbit another Sister Aloysius Beauvier? Where are you Wabbit? Come out of your hole!
3175. arkymalarky - 1/5/2009 7:46:29 PM
MsNo and I are moderators. Get down off your soapbox and email him if you want to know where he is.
3176. arkymalarky - 1/5/2009 7:50:33 PM
If Wabbit or either of us makes such a move you'll figure it out a lot faster if you just check with Jex.
3177. wabbit - 1/5/2009 8:09:53 PM
That decision was made by me. We've been through this over and over and over. Enough already. I explained my rational well over a month ago, as you well know, and I said then there would be no announcement. You don't like it? Too bad. This forum is more than Jexster and he does not get to gloat about running people out of the forum. Miss that, did you? Again, too bad. He's been given every opportunity and he has consistently continued to display no sense of community or regard for this place. Feel free to help him set up a blog where he can post what he wants and "roam free", but he's done here.
This place has been created and maintained by volunteer effort from the start. People have been asked many times to help out, and nobody wants to do it because it's a thankless task. I blame myself for allowing Jexster to get away with being a troll for years, and since it was my fault, it is also my responsibility. And now it's a done deal.
I've explained this until I'm blue in the face. Complain all you want, but I will not explain it again.
3178. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 8:26:45 PM
Bye, Bye! I couldn't disagree more. I gave you credit for a lot more than you deserve.
3179. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 8:31:02 PM
You have acted in a very petty, intolerant and dictatorial way, contrary to the wishes of a significant number of participants. Are you familiar with the word consensus. I didn't detect any consensus beyond the continual crybaby VK who whines a lot and contributes little. I beg you to reconsider this very disappointing and counter-productive decision. The politics thread has been much less interesting lately thanks to your decision.
3180. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/5/2009 8:38:02 PM
Who did he run out and gloat over?
3181. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 9:00:51 PM
Okay, the decision was made by you, but not announced so far as I could tell scrolling and reading back through the Inferno. You complained at length vociferously about Jexter, but so far as I can tell you never announced that you were cutting him off. That was pretty sneaky IMHO on your part. You left no doubt about your irritation with Jexter, but if you ever said you were expelling him from the Mote, despite the many people who came to his defense, I was not able to find it. Most dictatorial and undemocratic. Not a good way to encourage commaraderie and good feelings among a group of people who I have come to view as my friends. You are making a big mistake in my opinion which will not enhance the future of this little forum. You have banned an active long time participant out of your own pique and that of several former (JJ)and infrequent (VK and Jenerator) participants. And in doing so you have made my favorite thread, Politics, much less interesting. You may not give a rat's ass about what's happening in Gaza or Washington, or Minnesota, aside from the Vikings, but others of us do. And Jex was a source of plenty of interesting information and political commentary. Jenerator and JJ didn't like it because the are right wingers politically and VK for his own nitpicking reasons. I have participated in a fair number of forums and in every case there are wide variations in the quality of the posts and in the opinions expressed, but everybody seems to live with this. I've never seen anyone banished from participating although I don't doubt that it happens occasionally. From what I gather you are in the driver's seat, capable of doing whatever you want even to the point of taking done the site, but you should be able to see that what you want is not in all cases the same as what other people want and that failing to take into account the wishes of others does not benefit the future of our little group.
3182. vonKreedon - 1/5/2009 9:44:27 PM
Volume if not the same as quality and indeed can be a bar to quality. Linking is not the same thing as thinking. Combining a large volume of linking combined with infantile insulting may be interesting to a few here, but it may also be the reason that there are few here.
3183. wonkers2 - 1/5/2009 10:16:54 PM
That is very true. But I suggest you should scroll past the links if you already have all the information you need on a particular subject. I often do that but just as often I click on them and sometimes find pearls and sometimes turds. You never can tell. I don't think its much of a burden on anyone to scroll past a link. They don't take up much time or space. I frequently post links in lieu of making the argument in my own words or by paraphrasing the particlar piece by Paul Krugman, or someone else whose views I respect. I find it hard to understand why you find that offensive. I agree with you on "infantile insults." They don't add to our sense of mutual respect. However, the rants or flames have been much less prevalent here than on losts of other forums, e.g. Slate, Huffington Post and my local newspaper. There is apparently something about the Internet that breeds insulting commentary. I try to point my nasty insults at political figures rather than fellow Moties for the most part, unless I find their comments totally unacceptable. My current objection is twofold: 1. We need greater participation, not less. We will reduce, not increase our participation by banning current participants and 2. I object to wabbit's unannounced decision to X Jex. It didn't appear to me at the time that she lost her temper at Jex and when she and you and I and others were discussing the issue, that there was a consensus on a solution to the problems/issues or whatever you want to call them. I don't recall anyone BUT wabbit suggesting that Jex be banned from the Mote. It strikes me that what she did was out of pique and a personal power trip which was not in the interest of future of The Mote whose days appear to me may well be numbered. That's a shame because I've gotten a lot of enjoyment out of the forum, both from individuals with whom I usually agree and from those with whom I nearly always disagree. However, I have never supported that anyone be banished from the forum.
3184. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/6/2009 12:00:29 AM
Jexster pushes boundaries and steps on toes--it's in his nature-- but I have no trouble tolerating it because I find him interesting Vk, Jexster has been gone for a while now and you've contributed nothing but boilerplate and disapproval. You're like some lurking albatross who swoops down to criticize at every opportunity. Links are ways of saying: Check this out! And they keep people informed.
I'm also vexed because I still can't seem to discover what jexster did this time to merit permanent banishment, but it's certainly wabbit's prerogative to do so. As for needing volunteers, I've been around a long time and i've never been asked to help with a thread.
This boat is sinking and and it's sad, but maybe inevitable. At this point we all seem to know what to expect from everyone else and that can get dreary. The ennui is beyond palpable and it's getting a lot harder to even care what happens here.
3185. magoseph - 1/6/2009 2:32:28 AM
Like Alistair here Message # 2027 in thread 147, I thought that Jexster would be back after the inauguration.
3186. David Ehrenstein - 1/6/2009 9:20:47 AM
Adios!
3187. wonkers2 - 1/6/2009 10:29:54 AM
Same for me, very sadly and reluctantly after ten years or whatever it's been. A little more democracy would have been nice.
3188. magoseph - 1/6/2009 11:16:29 AM
Adieu, chère Mote!
3189. anomie - 1/6/2009 1:28:21 PM
What's with these adios's adieu's and bye's. Why deprive the rest of us when you're pissed off at just one person? Now where's that holiday spirit?
3190. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 1/6/2009 1:44:10 PM
Now where's that holiday spirit?
Ask wabbit.
3191. psychprof - 1/6/2009 3:46:56 PM
This place disappears w/o Wabbit. I am so thankful for all she has done and does do, and she is my much respected friend. I support her, and I trust in her judgment...completely. I no longer post here with any frequency, but I lurk enough to know she was doing her best to be fair.
Also, Irv Snodgrass is now Irv Snodgrass PHD...
3192. robertjayb - 1/6/2009 3:50:00 PM
Lay off wabbit. Wabbit did what wabbit thought best. Bullies, and jexster is/was a bully, seldom respond to reason and polite entreaties. They push and probe until the only available response is to accept the abuse or administer a good whacking. In addition to all the other chores wabbit performs for the mote and moties, wabbit is the designated whacker. jexster needed whacking. wabbit did it.
Good.
3193. vonKreedon - 1/6/2009 3:51:32 PM
Dr. Irv! Whoo-hoo! Please send congrats from me.
3194. thoughtful - 1/6/2009 4:47:38 PM
congrats to Irv...I remember him most fondly.
3195. wonkers2 - 1/6/2009 6:01:51 PM
Designated by whom, Robert. By herself, it seems. I don't recall any such designation. I'll miss you and my other friends at the Mote. But for me it's a matter of fairness to Jex and to us all. Enjoy your smallerizing little circle.
3196. anomie - 1/6/2009 7:06:17 PM
I hope you reconsider, Wonks. I'd miss you and the others. Maybe after a cool-off period Jex will be back too. Who knows? I don't usually get involved in the meltdowns, but I think it would be a shame to lose any long-time posters. The circle is small as is, but it's a big part of my on-line time despite my small number of posts.
This storm wil pass, mate. Clear seas ahead...(Or whatever the Cap'n might say).
3197. wonkers2 - 1/6/2009 7:22:49 PM
Thanks for the friendly comment, anomie. I'll consider it, but I'm not inclined to change my mind. I wonder how one person was allowed to exercise her power in such a unilateral and arbitrary way. Whatever her positive contributions have been to The Mote, this action is unwarranted and unfair, in my opinion.
3198. wonkers2 - 1/6/2009 7:26:39 PM
Seems to me there should be room both for anal retentives and whatever you call the opposite! I personally prefer the opposite, but I'm opposed to banishment of anyone simply for being annoying without having committing a grave offense to the group. I could name names as to who are anal retentives and who are the opposite, but I think we all know who they are.
3199. arkymalarky - 1/6/2009 7:41:06 PM
Wonk, I will only say that MsNo and I both support this and the situation was made clear in the Inferno weeks ago. Wabbit didn't go rogue and there was plenty of information and comments made preceding the decision.
3200. arkymalarky - 1/6/2009 7:59:01 PM
Wonk, I will only say that MsNo and I both support this and the situation was made clear in the Inferno weeks ago. Wabbit didn't go rogue and there was plenty of information and comments made preceding the decision.
3201. anomie - 1/6/2009 8:03:09 PM
Thanks, Wonks. I really don't take sides on the issue. I just don't want to see interesting and good members like you, Mago and David go away. To me, online discussions are just that, and I scroll past the obnoxious stuff, which often includes Jex's posts. And while I may not ban a poster, I do see how exasperating it could be if I were responsible for the tone and quality of a thread or site. Jex does push it, wouldn't you say?
3202. wonkers2 - 1/6/2009 11:05:18 PM
Sometimes. However, without naming names, others put up quite a bit of stuff that's not of general interest. I apparently do so myself. So what? I've been reading and commenting in several other sites. They all contain a majority of pretty low quality and obnoxious comments. But the sites are into banishing participants so far as I've seen. My impression is that the sites and Mote threads in particular work best with a minimum or even zero supervision. Over-supervision is a bigger problem for me at least than under-supervision. I can remember when Pelle got bent out of shape and threw a hissy when somebody got off the topic of a thread. We didn't need that. Now, several of the thread hosts haven't been heard from for months. Yet the threads seem to function satisfactorily. I'm liberal politically but libertarian so far as Internet comments are concerned. The sites that "moderate" comments are a turnoff for participation. The ones that post rules but don't moderate get more participation.
3203. judithathome - 1/7/2009 12:37:25 AM
First off, I'd like to thank everyone for their comments and concerns about my recent loss...I appreciate every single one of you for the true friends that you have been to me and remain still. Friends are definitely what all of you are even though some of us have never met.
I just want to say that I know what can happen to online forums when disagreements happen and steps are taken (for whatever reason) to remedy those disagreements: I had a wonderful and vibrant forum at AbleMinds...our forum started from TableTalk and generated to the Atlantic Monthly forum and eventually evolved into Atlantic Refugees at a site Mark Richer set up for us (AbleMinds)...a wonderful, exciting place that some of you may or may not have visited.
A rift occurred at my forum and several people left Atlantic Refugees because I refused to ban those with whom some in the group didn't see eye to eye...they left to create their own forum, quite successfully, at World Crossing.
Since that rift, my forum has died....oh, we still have people posting to some degree but I feel they are mostly "pity posts" from people who are somewhat loyal to me, not necessairly the forum.
I can respect the decision made here by those in charge but still wish to ask them to reconsider...the Mote has survived many upheavals but I am not so certain it can survive this one...just check the number of posts made by those who are so "offended and outraged" by Jexster's posts. How many of those old posters have returned en masse since Jex has been away?
Oh, they were quick to return a few weeks ago and condemn him but where is everyone now? I, like a few others, have learned to skip the posts of Jex's that didn't interest me but evidently others haven't the patience to try this technique. Yes, it's too bad we don't have an "ignore" filter. I have employed this function at WC on a poster with whom I simply cannot get along. But here? I've learned to scroll when I am bored...it's a great knack to cultivate.
I fear eventually the Mote will suffer the fate of my forum at Ableminds...people might check in on occasion but will gradually reduce their participation and soon, the Mote will fade in to obscurity. These things happen with such ephemeral entities as internet forums...it's sad when it happens but perhaps all these "sites" have a shelf life and are destined to be fondly remembered by those of us who have participated over the years.
Things change...shit happens....and life goes on.
3204. magoseph - 1/7/2009 6:03:05 AM
Ali, let's have a "Ignore option” and end this nightmare, please!
3205. wonkers2 - 1/7/2009 10:49:50 AM
Arky, I beg to differ. I reviewed the posts, and no decision was ever announced by wabbit. If I missed a post to that effect please point it out to me. You are in my opinion being very petty, narrow-minded and officious on this matter. And why don't you let Ms. No speak for herself?
3206. wonkers2 - 1/7/2009 11:09:21 AM
You and a couple of others have poisoned the well.
3207. anomie - 1/7/2009 12:22:34 PM
Perhaps it's not a well but a barrel of apples, most of which can be salvaged.
3208. Ms. No - 1/7/2009 12:52:00 PM
I have been speaking for myself. I just didn't feel any more comment needed to be made. I've never been shy. If I'd disagreed with the decision I'd have said so.
3209. Wombat - 1/7/2009 3:54:57 PM
It is too bad that there is no way to allow the Jex who has always been entertaining in the History thread, while banning the bile and filth-spewing Jex of the Politics thread.
3210. arkymalarky - 1/7/2009 5:46:37 PM
Jex knew his choices and he made them. Judith's forum story is very apt; it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Things will run their course here, as elsewhere. People will leave if you don't act and others will if you do.
Wonkers: as moderators we don't function in isolation. As long as you've been here you should know that I don't speak for anyone. I provided you pertinent information so you could share your venom with the others responsible besides Wabbit.
And on a much more pleasant subject, congratulations to Irv!
3211. Jenerator - 1/7/2009 7:11:24 PM
I could have sworn you all said Jex was returning Jan 20th!!!
3212. Jenerator - 1/7/2009 7:14:40 PM
Jex says he's coming back on Jan 20th
3213. dandillon - 1/8/2009 5:40:45 PM
Wow. So may familar faces here. Nice to see you all. And happy new year!
3214. vonKreedon - 1/8/2009 5:43:54 PM
Happy New Year to you!
3215. wabbit - 1/8/2009 6:13:36 PM
Hey dandillon, Happy New Year to you! How've you been, how is the family?
PP, please pass my congrats to Irv!
3216. Jenerator - 1/9/2009 6:04:16 PM
DAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
3217. arkymalarky - 1/10/2009 12:55:50 PM
Hey DanD! How's the fam?
3218. thoughtful - 2/4/2009 5:23:47 PM
i miss jex and wonks...will they be able to return from purgatory ever?
3219. arkymalarky - 2/4/2009 7:27:09 PM
Wonks left of his own accord.
3220. robertjayb - 2/4/2009 7:45:02 PM
Wonkers in an Accord? I don't believe it.
3221. magoseph - 2/4/2009 8:05:58 PM
I wonder if we've lost Wiz too, Arky.
3222. thoughtful - 2/5/2009 8:35:32 AM
I know that but wonks left because jex was banished...he may return if jex is allowed back...
3223. thoughtful - 2/19/2009 3:43:12 PM
This place is dying a slow death. at least jex used to keep politics jumping if nothing else was happening. I never understood why he was banned. With wonks gone too, its just not happening any more.
3224. judithathome - 2/19/2009 4:50:22 PM
I know...sad to see but that's the way it goes with forums.
My own is mirroring this one...what I call pity posts and that's about it.
3225. magoseph - 2/19/2009 5:04:56 PM
We lost David too and maybe Wiz, four frequent posters.
3226. magoseph - 2/19/2009 5:08:06 PM
Total, I mean...
3227. thoughtful - 2/20/2009 4:09:42 PM
And concerned has disappeared as well.
Not a good trade off, esp since I never did understand what jex did that was so terrible. At one point I thought the rule for banishment had to do with making threats against another poster in real life, as had been done in the past.
And wonks was one of the few posters whose posts I've saved over these many years and I miss my discussions with him.
3228. judithathome - 2/20/2009 6:02:27 PM
I'm wondering how many people are left who were so offended by Jex...seems as though Von K is the only one who raised a stink and remained. Others DID but they seem to have flown the coop with his banishment.
We had a short influx of people cheering the move but they don't seem too interested in continuing to post here, do they?
3229. alistairConnor - 2/21/2009 5:56:24 AM
My philosophy is not to mourn anyone, nor to assume permanent absence if someone is gone for a few months. I love to see old friends return, and old enemies too.