Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT

WCDT: 2286-90 (1-5 October 2012) Weekly Comics Discussion Thread

<< < (66/73) > >>

DNR:

--- Quote from: Omega Entity on 06 Oct 2012, 15:56 ---
--- Quote from: DNR on 06 Oct 2012, 15:30 ---

--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 06 Oct 2012, 15:00 ---(moderator)
Nobody's come up with an original insight yet in this discussion. Please put down the sticks and back away from the horse carcass.
(/moderator)

--- End quote ---

I'm genuinely curious. What, to you, would constituent original insight into this discussion? Because, by the sounds of a lot uses here, not talking about it at all...seems the only advised and engaged (if not original) way of dealing with this.

--- End quote ---

But it's already been stated, repeatedly, that this topic has been brought up over and over again, ad-nauseum in the past, and I assume that nothing here has any new points that haven't been heard by everyone else in the past, if I read the subtext of IICIH's post correctly, while taking into account that this has come up before. Just because you (or I, for that matter) weren't around for said discussions, doesn't not mean they didn't happen, and frankly, I can't blame people for not wanting (or frankly, needing) to rehash it for the umpteenth time.

It was requested, politely, that the matter be dropped, and you are still (politely) insisting that it needs to be rehashed. One thing I've found with this forum, is that it's take it or leave it - if people don't like how things are run, or at the very least can't tolerate it, then they are more than welcome to move on to other places; no one is holding a gun to anyone's head to keep them here. For those that understand and can, at the very least, respect how thing are run (note that respecting how things are run, and agreeing with it, are two entirely separate matters), are more than welcome to stay. At least, that's how it looks, from my observations.

--- End quote ---

Perhaps. Thanks for the measure response to what I said. It may be a case of perceptive. As you said, I simply haven't been around for the amount of times this has reported happened. It's perhaps akin to running an atheism-based website which, on a monthly basis, has a creationist pop-up on the forum. (note: I'm not saying anything with that example, only that it'd get annoying for the webmasters to constantly deal with the same exact problem). The reason I haven't dropped it is simple, and partly the same as the admin. I feel like there hasn't been any real discussion. Don't get me wrong, there has been some--e.g with DR. Thingy--but it's mostly been: 'this again, jeez', 'you just want politic correctness!', 'stop analyzing stuff' etc. Perhaps those posts come from this topic being done to death, however--where-in, before, discussion was had...but no real impasse was met. I'll take your advise, and assume I'm beating a horse which this forum has decided to put to sleep--in other words, let it go.

pwhodges:

--- Quote from: DNR on 06 Oct 2012, 15:30 ---With respect though, as I asked, have I not been polite? Have I been hugely rude? Have I insulted Jeph?
--- End quote ---

I have not suggested that you have not been polite (I didn't see the remark deleted by another moderator, so I can't comment on that).  I was answering your remark that you were uncomfortable with the logic that we should be polite because it's Jeph's forum.

However, I would remind you that there can come a point at which reiterating the same point at greater and greater length does become rude in itself.

Omega Entity:
DNR, perhaps a dive through previous WCDTs might yield the answers you're looking for, as far as how far discussions have gone in the past, and might give a bit of a sense of closure to said discussion if you read what's come before? As I've said, I'm pretty new here, so I wouldn't personally know where to begin. But some of the veterans of the site might be able to give you an approximate timeframe for which to begin your search.

WAYF:
I'm gonna try to do this in one sentence:

If Angus had really had a problem with it, Faye would have said "Nothing" in response to Marigold, but Angus would have said "Why did you hit me?"

Vurogj:
Angus may or may not have a problem with it. He has a long history of putting his foot in his mouth with Faye, and he's tried really hard over the length of their knowing each other to get better at not doing it. He might well want to say "Why did you hit me?", but be good enough to not say it in front of Marigold. In panel 4, Faye is looking at Angus because he did a wrong thing. Angus is avoiding eye contact with... who? Faye because he's in the wrong, or Marigold because he's not comfortable lying to her when says "nothing"?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page