March 15, 2008
I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and confirm.

I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks and vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a person spends time creating attacks and searching messages from months,is disturbing.But we can not fight that because in a news group the one with less scrupules always wins.kris could "win" an argument with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical for me to participate in this group.

We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing a car accident in slow movement.The person is not willing to play the same game and leaves disgusted.We are happy it ended.

Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter said he likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk with no lows or limit says anything he wants to decent people and we must accept that in silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is valuable as a D programmer that is not a reason to accept such comportament from him or any one.

I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right answer to what happens in this group.
March 15, 2008
Reply to Anonymous,

> I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this
> for her protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me
> from my IP and confirm.
> 
> I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks
> and vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a
> person spends time creating attacks and searching messages from
> months,is disturbing.But we can not fight that because in a news group
> the one with less scrupules always wins.kris could "win" an argument
> with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my message is anonymous is the
> same.kris would make impractical for me to participate in this group.
> 
> We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes
> tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all
> time and energy in these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing
> a car accident in slow movement.The person is not willing to play the
> same game and leaves disgusted.We are happy it ended.
> 
> Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good
> contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter
> said he likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk
> with no lows or limit says anything he wants to decent people and we
> must accept that in silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is
> valuable as a D programmer that is not a reason to accept such
> comportament from him or any one.
> 
> I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right
> answer to what happens in this group.
> 

Maybe I'm a bone head (it wouldn't be the first time) and just don't see it, but pleases site posts.


March 15, 2008
Anonymous,

I don't agree with Kris' approach either and have told him so plainly; I believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is spewing shrapnel at many innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in the community atmosphere.  Further, it comes across as a person who is holding a grudge, whether he intends that to be so or not. I believe his actions will do more to blight the Tango name than to cleanse the newsgroup.  I say this directly because I believe Kris is the kind of person that can take this directly.  I believe that says a lot of good about the type of person he is.

Yet, it also gets tiresome hearing (and seeing) examples of sock-puppetry, accusations of sock-puppetry, and (finally) anonymous complaints.  Kris has been right to some degree.  He's just carried it way too far.

/But/ I'm entirely surprised that you (anonymous) are asking for moderation based on Kris' posts alone considering the recent atmosphere created by another much more serious problem (partially described in the previous paragraph). This is such an astounding gaff on your part, that I'm perplexed at your purpose for posting: you seem to have your priorities confused, or perhaps you have completely overlooked something.

Perhaps, like I have, you have written to Walter to ask about how he can fix the problem here? If not, perhaps you should do so now, so that he can better understand the seriousness of the situation?  I agree that some sort of moderation is necessary for this group.... more so than what currently is happening: semi-moderation already exists in the form of "post-deleting" episodes. Unfortunately that does little to stop the original poster from posting more or to stop equally malicious posts from annoyed responders.

Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of "universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his "bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/ simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message". Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along" mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged. That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding the problem in this newsgroup.

Next case: this community has been hit with sock-puppetry, aka "get even" with the "bad guy" mentality. Please.. may I ask: what in the world does this achieve?  Can we fix one evil by using another?  Such actions will only further destroy this group's morale by engendering distrust and doubt among members.  Apparently it isn't just the new-comers who are corrupt.  The corruption is right here inside. At least, that's what these recent episodes are showing based on the responses.  This test appears to be here to shake our cup to see what's inside it.

I'm afraid letting things go as they are will only encourage the downward spiral of this whole community, especially since each member handles the situation as they see fit.  Please, the solution is to avoid back-biting, refuse response to war-mongers, and be relentlessly peaceful.  Even so, while I whole-heartedly endorse mercy and compassion as important qualities, please understand that they are little use to those that refuse the offering; obviously, these qualities only work on those that accept them.  Those that respond with rudeness and hatred should just be persistently ignored, until such a time that Walter (the only moderator here that I know of) decides to act on the issue.  Those that counter-post with the same manner are responsible for continuing the problem.

-JJR
March 16, 2008
The irony, anon asking for moderation /b

What exactly is the problem with personal attacks?
(Except that they aren't related to programming)

I have no problem with personal attacks, as it challenges my ideas.

If the personal attacks are solemnly at parts that I can't change (skin
colour etc.) then I'd just ignore them.
The same goes for dumb name calling.

Almost always a post like 'ignore X, he/she is always like that' suffices to make the attacked aware of the status of the attacker and for those times it really goes too far the posts can be deleted.



March 16, 2008
John Reimer Wrote:
Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly
responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of
"universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the
offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the
existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this
is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a
pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his
"bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/ simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message". Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along" mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged. That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding the problem in this newsgroup.

> -JJR

You tend toward idealism John Imposing your ideals on this "community"

The problem with this is that it becomes a narrowed forum and free speech no longer applies.
Don't know what they are putting in your water down there but get up and have a go . The world did not become populated by moderation applying ,rather the reverse.
Nobody is trying to take your "community " away from you .
You have a secure place in it but it needs to grow if "D" is to be accepted .
Sometimes these things a religion based . Hope not in your case.
March 16, 2008
John Reimer Wrote:
Further, several community members here (in good standing!) are directly
responsible for feeding the problem by adopting a philosophy of
"universal acceptance", aka "wishful thinking": that is, they accept the
offender no matter what by (apparently) hoping that if they ignore the
existence of the bad, then the good will flow through.  Honestly, this
is not how real life works; would we accept a murderer, a rapist or a
pedophile "just the way he is"?  Would we assume that if we ignore his
"bad habits" and speak nicely to him, that we will all just get along?

I apologize for the extreme example, but realistically... those that are intent on being disreputable must be shown that what they do is unacceptable to the operation of this community.  There is no need to continually scream or rant at such personalities.  We must /first/ simply refuse to communicate with them so they "get the message". Second, a good moderating board would eject persistent cases to keep the seed from destroying or fracturing the group. The "lets just get along" mentality only works when individuals are willing to moderate themselves and exercise self-control and courtesy, even when they are wronged. That said, members who have responded tit for tat are guilty of feeding the problem in this newsgroup.

> -JJR

You tend toward idealism John Imposing your ideals on this "community"

The problem with this is that it becomes a narrowed forum and free speech no longer applies.
Don't know what they are putting in your water down there but get up and have a go . The world did not become populated by moderation applying ,rather the reverse.
Nobody is trying to take your "community " away from you .
You have a secure place in it but it needs to grow if "D" is to be accepted .
Sometimes these things a religion based . Hope not in your case.
March 16, 2008
My two cents: I'm down with moderating out the trolling/flaming that's going on, but I think that until off-topic posting becomes a real problem, it should be allowed. "Me too" posts are also useful for gaugeing interest, so I'd rather have any moderation system filter out posts that are actually negative to the community atmosphere, and not posts that are of questionable value.

anonymous Wrote:

> I am a regular on this news group from Europe.Not Janice.I say this for her protection for more attacks from kris.Walter can identify me from my IP and confirm.
> 
> I write because I am indignated about how kris does personal attacks and vendetta in this group with our silent acceptance.To see how a person spends time creating attacks and searching messages from months,is disturbing.But we can not fight that because in a news group the one with less scrupules always wins.kris could "win" an argument with Hawking in sci.physics.The reason my message is anonymous is the same.kris would make impractical for me to participate in this group.
> 
> We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in these evil attacks.To read his posts,is like seeing a car accident in slow movement.The person is not willing to play the same game and leaves disgusted.We are happy it ended.
> 
> Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good contributors away.When some asked for a moderated newsgroup,Walter said he likes the wild west style.But no adventure here.Simply a jerk with no lows or limit says anything he wants to decent people and we must accept that in silence,otherwise we will be next.Even if kris is valuable as a D programmer that is not a reason to accept such comportament from him or any one.
> 
> I too do not like the delays.But now I think moderation is the right answer to what happens in this group.

March 16, 2008
John Reimer Wrote: another rehash of his kris apology . funniest thing about kretinis is his minions . posing as objective reasonable fellas ... a bit criticizing him ... patting him on the back ... always giving justification for his antics . john real friends dont let friends miss therapy.
March 16, 2008
anonymous wrote:
> We saw the same thing many times.kris picks somebody who criticizes tango.He bombs the person with dirty personal attacks.He invests all time and energy in these evil attacks.

I've only seen this with Janice; they annoyed each other long in the past and have a habit of getting on each others' nerves, and being on a text-only forum doesn't help.

But this doesn't happen often, and it's pretty easy to ignore, unless you're directly involved.


> Filtering his messages out is not the response because he pushes good contributors away.

But works quite well with Ty Tower. And that's why you're mentioning Kris rather than Ty.

I don't think this is a significant problem. If you do, well, that's your problem, not Walter's.
March 16, 2008
Robert Fraser wrote:
> My two cents: I'm down with moderating out the trolling/flaming that's going on, but I think that until off-topic posting becomes a real problem, it should be allowed. "Me too" posts are also useful for gaugeing interest, so I'd rather have any moderation system filter out posts that are actually negative to the community atmosphere, and not posts that are of questionable value.
> 

I agree about your assessment that off-topic and "me too" are usually not an issue.

-JJR
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2 3 4
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home