I've stated plainly that there is no room for compromise for me as far as the Bike Racks is concerned. That is, I believe it is a misuse of the forum, it has ruined the forum for use by myself, and I will certainly complain in the future if people attempt to use the forum for that purpose again. I will hope that the next time, perhaps my request to have the thread moved will be accepted rather than denied.
Why don't we wait (and I'm willing to wait, I have other things to attend to as well), and then after you've given the evidence of what you consider my complaining to be (no longer referring to others who are sick of it if they aren't willing to show up), maybe we'll have a better understanding of what it is you feel we need to compromise about? At this point, I really have no idea what it is you want from me.
No Cerin, you know exactly what is wrong. Again, you refuse to compromise on even starting to compromise.
I made it clear what the compromise was about. It was nothing about you. It was about co-existence.
A real compromise - one that will satisfy both sides of this debate. One that will allow posters to make self-referential self-mocking threads (one of the core esprit de corps of B77 and the old TORC) and the occasional healthy flexing of the rules which everyone can live with.
That has nothing to do with any perceived problems with you per se.
I'm sorry, but I'm not going to jump through hoops if you are not willing to do the same. I'm willing to tango, but to do it alone is unacceptable and a silly dance.
Compromise. Work with me on this. Be an equal partner. You're part of a society, and as part of a society, compromise is a way of life. Your "no room to compromise" - a comment you have made on many issues (post to follow if Cerin's willing to start working on a compromise) - might suggest to some you should not be part of this society, or at least quakes will be inevitable from a poster with this attitude being here.
And for the sake of peace, I shall not respond to this insult (to me the worst of insults) other than pointing it out:
If others do not post, I say I will take it that they do not exist; of course, I'm not saying it is proof that they don't exist. I'm just not willing to take your word for it...
Regarding humor and multiple mock-BR threads, TP has it right. Permit me to expand on this and perhaps it will shed some light on where both sides are coming from.
Humor
Seeing Lucy's face as she tramples grapes is funny. But to see the same grape-treading and reaction in every episode is not.
One of the key aspects of humor is the unexpected. The unexpected twist of logic, the unexpected prat-fall, the unexpected situation. That's why Cerin's use of "Chill, babe" was funny.
Humor is surprise without promise or threat.
Promise
When I get a letter saying I have been pre-approved for a great credit card is a surprise (well, not much of one if you live in America), but it isn't funny because there is a promise involved. Telling someone they have won the lottery (when it's a prank) is a surprise, but a promise too, so it isn't funny.
Threat
Finding a Cruise missile is heading towards your house is a surprise, but it isn't funny because there is a threat.
Ethnic jokes are funnier when someone of that ethnicity tells them because there is less of an implied threat. What applies to ethnic jokes applies to jokes about any group. Insiders telling jokes about the group represent less of a threat than outsiders telling the same jokes. The same is true of religious jokes, for example.
Sexual humor is not funny to people who believe that the loose morals the humor represents threaten a way of life. Making fun of religious beliefs is not funny to people who hold those beliefs sacred. Anyone who takes something very seriously might be offended by humor directed at that something, if the humor is seen as threatening the importance of that something.
I could write a lot here about humor - especially in its use to minimize the sense of threat (dentists are trained to use humor, for example), and how it is used to help in the cohesion of a group, but alas work calls.
Summary
So basically, having the one thread in the BR is funny to many because it is a surprise and they see no perceived threat to the use of the BR forum. Cerin and others do not, because even though it was a surprise, they do see it as a threat. And this is especially the case to those who were involved in drafting the rules. If Cerin herself had started a mock thread, it would have been even funnier because the surprise would have been greater and any perceived threat reduced.
Whether it is a threat or not is a matter of perception and ultimately is in one's own head. There is no right or wrong.
However, whatever one thinks of TED's or my threads, if a continual series of mock threads were put up, the surprise, and therefore the humor, evaporates. I think the posters here are mature and clever enough to work that out for themselves and to self-regulate accordingly.
I too would not welcome another mock thread - at least not for several months.