board77

I am well aware of many peoples anger over the ongoing dispute between Halplm and myself in which the focus seems to be debating tactics rather than issues. And I can well understand the frustration of other members in this regard.

I do think if all of us - Halplm and myself included, simply observe a few basic simple courtesies of debate, then we do not have to fight the constant war of tactics. Everyone thus is spared the constant digressions.

In any discussion, people are free to make any statement they want to make. Then others are free to make a personal decision what to do with that statement. Do they ignore it and move on.... or do they react to it... possibly supporting it or taking issue with it?

If someone makes a statement, I cannot react to it unless I know what type of statement it is. Is the person merely voicing their opinion or are they presenting this statement as a statement of fact? How I react to it is highly dependent on which one it is.

example: Poster A says "I hate Target stores"
Now that is clearly a statement of opinion. There is little I can do with that other than possible ask the poster to explain the reasons or state my own opinion of Target stores. But the person has a right to their opinion.

If Poster A says "Target stores have a record of ripping people off". Then that is something else entirely. That is presented as fact and can be dealt with by asking the person to support this allegation with independent outside and authoritative sources. that is the way debate- even internet debate - works. You have a right to your statements, but back them up when challenged.
But what if a poster makes a statement that is not clear to other readers? What if they say something like "Government regulation is bad for business".

Is that a statement of fact or is it a statemnt of opinion. How anyone reacts to it matters greatly which one the original poster claims it is. Nobody wants to waste valuable time researching expert sources on the net and make a well constructed post only to have that original poster come back and say "well thats just my opinion of how I feel".

The problem I have with Hal is that he refuses to back up most of his views with anything but his own beliefs and musings. He presents his own observations as facts and then uses himself as his own authoritative source to validate his "facts".

That tactic is completely contrary to any intelligent debate or discussion. It allows the person to substitute their own individual creative mental construct for reality.

This problem could be quickly remedied and ended once and for all, if this tactic would stop now. When Hal makes one of his statements, and it is not clear to another poster if it is a fact or his opinion, and he is asked which one it is, all he has to do is answer the question.
Hal only has to state if it is indeed a allegation of fact or his own personal opinion. Then we can move on from there.

If makes a statement that he views as a fact, and he is challenged to support it with outside sources,then he should do so and we can move on.

I have gotten lots of messages from people which are variations on the same theme" they all tell me that I am wasting my time debating with Hal because.... well [i]..." Hal is Hal... he is just being himself, and (nudge nudge, wink wink) we all know what that entails.

Is it right that everyone else here observes certain protocols of normal exchange of ideas and one person is allowed to subvert the Board with their own version of reality?

Solving this problem should be a very simple thing to do. Just ask everybody to observe the basic protocols of discussion.
- make your statements
-if asked by others, identify your statements as facts or opinions
- if you claim them to be facts, support them with outside sources validating them as facts

It is so simple to do... and is done thousands of times every day all over the internet in these types of discussions. Why can't it be done here?

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers

I agree that Hal should not present his opinion as fact.

(On the Harry Potter board where I post, the mods are forever saying, 'IMO is your best friend. Keep repeating that in your posts. IMO. IMO. IMO. Over and over again.' )

However, if a poster continues to keep presenting their opinion as fact, no matter how many times they are admonished not to do so, you also have a choice ...

you can stop responding to them.

I've met a lot of dogmatic posters in my time. Hal is hardly the only one. And on any other board, a poster who kept on insisting that their opinion was fact would be rapped over the knuckles: I quite agree with you.

However. B77 is not quite like other boards.

So, short of wanting to get rid of Hal all together, sf, and you know that B77 does not operate that way, you also have a choice, I think: you can stop behaving like you have a personal vendetta against his posting style.

There is no way on B77 to enforce the rules you are wishing for by force. If people won't abide by the reasonable set of protocols you've set forth here, I think you should simply ignore them.

They'll soon get tired of talking to themselves.

_________________
"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal

Peace on B77 would be for you two to stop obsessing over each other.

_________________

Di - This is not about a personal posting style like a part in someones hair or if they like to wear plaid socks with sandals. This is about basic protocols of discussion observed everywhere where people can put brain cells together.

Until this is openly and frankly discussed, it is going to the the elephant in the room.

I strongly suspect that if this was a problem with somebody who joined just last week, it would be dealt with and remedied in short order. But because its.... Halplm .... good old Hal ... our buddy Hal ... eccentric sad Hal .... its a whole different matter.

This has to be dealt with or it will simply not go away.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers

Throwing around insults like "eccentric sad hal" does nothing to strengthen your position. It makes clear that this is a personal issue between you two, not a boardwide problem as you're trying to suggest.

_________________

These are my friends, see how they glisten...

I've been carefully avoiding all these threads about what's wrong with various members of B77. Then I (hopefully) open a thread entitled "Peace on B77" and find that it is just another tired assault on Hal. Enough already. Get a life you guys!

Sorry, Di, I just had to say that. Now I will take your advice and go back to ignore mode.

_________________
Well, I'm back.

Or get a room.

Alatar - that sentiment has been communicated to me by members here.

Why are people not willing to face this obvious breach of simple discussion courtesy?

It could all stop today.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers

What do you mean by "face"? And how could it all stop today?

_________________


Melkor and Ungoliant in need of some relationship counselling.

hey, it's no skin off my nose.



Actually, people have been calling Hal on this for years.


You and Hal have something in common: you both keep insisting that other people should somehow fix the problem for you.

The problem you have is with each other. I don't think anyone here can fix that.

_________________
"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal

I used the "read post" function to see what SF had to say here. (You can do that even if someone is on your "ignore" list - it's kinda cool.) I also read Hal's comments in the "something is wrong" thread.

I notice Hal has not shown up to give his take on the suggestion. I will not presume to know what he might have to say about it.

Here's what this has begun to sound like to me.

"Hal's posting style is blah blah blahdiddy blah."
"SF's posting style is blah blah blah blahdiddy blah.
"If Hal would only do blankety blankety blank, the board would work better."
"If SF would only yada yada yada the board would work better."
"Personal attacks!"
"Ad hominem!"
"Vendetta!"
"It would be so simple if only Hal just do exactly what SF wanted."
"It would be so simple if only SF would just do exactly what Hal wanted!"
"Why doesn't someone FIX this?"

Look. No one is going to fix this, because no one gives a fat rat's ass about it anymore.

This is not the Harvard debating forum, it's a fucking message board...and a little tiny one at that. It's member moderated, which makes it different than other boards in that you have to moderate yourselves.

You are not doing that. You are spreading your personal shit all over the board and stinking the place up and expecting other people to shovel it up for you. You want us to "face" the problem.

YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

Put up, shut up or get the hell off the board.

(IMHO, of course.)

Jude
you asked


All this could stop today if everyone - including myself and all others - simply observed normal protocols of discussion.

Somebody makes a statement. It is not clear if they are voicing their opinion or making the statement as a fact. I cannot properly respond until I know which it is.

So I ask - is that your opinion or is that a fact? And then I get an answer. Now I can formulate the appropriate reply.

Is that so difficult? Am I asking too much?

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers

That is worth quoting. B77 is not the Harvard debating forum.



Well, once again, this is making it sound like this is a board problem, when I don't think it is. It is your problem with Hal.

(And that is just my opinion, not gospel fact. )



And if you get an evasive answer that fails to satisfy you, what then?

I think we all know here what 'normal protocols' of discussion are. It seems to me that you want other people to do something about the problem you are having with Hal.

_________________
"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal

Apparently.

In all seriousness - the only person whose behaviour you can control is your own. So, assuming you do everything right, and one or more person continues to act like a [insert your favourite insult here], how can it all end today?

I'm afraid the only answer I can come up with is: ignore.

_________________


Melkor and Ungoliant in need of some relationship counselling.

okay

I will adopt a new tact.

Thanks to all for the advice.

thread can be locked if Rangers so desire as the problem has been solved.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers

Locked at originator's request.

_________________