Feedback

[Avisionaire]

[This was originally posted out of the public eye, as I deemed it something not everyone needed to be privy to, but I was informed that was an incorrect approach to the subject; since I was informed posting it in public would have been more correct, I am doing so.]

I'm going to post this here because I don't figure it needs to be consumed by the public.

I'm unhappy with how yesterday's exchange with lilblu was handled. It reminded me a great deal of how another exchange on CT from a year or two ago was handled--my "attacks" on Ryan--which played significantly into my ceasing to post here for a while.

At the time of the Ryan exchange, I asked for the posts to be pointed out that were deemed so offensive as to be "attacks", because I was confused--I didn't intend for them to be attacks* and I thought it was obvious Ryan's reaction was more the result of him being an oversensitive whiny beatch than anything I wrote.

The same thing is true with the lilblu exchange. Where are the attacks that indicate I'm looking to start a flame war? Lilblu herself assured me last night she didn't feel I was attacking her, just being nit-pikey.

I don't consider the posts nit-piky, but even if others do, and if being nit-piky justifies a warning and suggestion to go elsewhere, then then I can think of numerous posts on CT from other people that should have resulted in the same reaction. This is why I'm annoyed.

In the time I've been on CT I've never started a flame war. If you read something I've written that seems edgy or unusual, maybe that could be pointed out, instead of assuming I'm out to rip someone to shreds? That way I could possibly clarify my point, instead of being put immediately on the defensive.

My initial reaction to yesterday was to say "fine" and skip town again, as I did after the Ryan thing, but I enjoy posting here, so I figured I would try this approach.


*When I decide to go after someone, you will know it. There will be no doubt about it in anyone's minds, I assure you, so if there is doubt in your mind as you read something from me--it means I'm not.

Not trying to be a contributing member of the passive-aggressive Seattle throngs here. I'm attempting to communicate in the manner I thought was best that I am unhappy about how something was handled.

[lilblugrrrl]

I just wish it could have all been avoided. =/

I will admit that I got "pissy" reacting to your questioning me but I thought you were questioning my use of the word "never". I think that if we both had been more clear we would have understood each other better.

I also think that we did get off-topic and I believe this was Spitfire's original point. I guess if there is this much of a misunderstanding we should PM one another instead.

I don't want you to stop posting here because you've been here for a lot longer than I have AND this board is much better, by far, than the others I have been on.

Meh.

[Spitfire]

I'm unhappy with how yesterday's exchange with lilblu was handled. It reminded me a great deal of how another exchange on CT from a year or two ago was handled--my "attacks" on Ryan--which played significantly into my ceasing to post here for a while.

These two "exchanges" have little to nothing to do with one another save the fact that you are a passive-aggressive poster. Perhaps in the case of (anti) I was being a little biased, however in the case yesterday, you were going out of your way to argue something that really didn't need much or any debate. Whether or not you will acknowledge this is not my deal, it's yours. I'm sorry that it went as far as it did, but I did try to steer the conversation back on target and that didn't work. Yes, Lilblugrrrl didn't let it drop either. Then again she didn't start it, she was defending and explaining herself.

At the time of the Ryan exchange, I asked for the posts to be pointed out that were deemed so offensive as to be "attacks", because I was confused--I didn't intend for them to be attacks* and I thought it was obvious Ryan's reaction was more the result of him being an oversensitive whiny beatch than anything I wrote.

A: What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

and

B: How dare you call anyone else a whiny bitch, you pansy? You're the one who runs away with your tail tucked between your legs when an internet argument begins, be it from here or any of the Seattle boards. You're the one who whines to high Heven should any one you care about contradicts you or fails to stand up for you. You're the one who ran and posted this some place totally inappropriate so that no one could see your whining and possibly mock you for it.

The same thing is true with the lilblu exchange. Where are the attacks that indicate I'm looking to start a flame war? Lilblu herself assured me last night she didn't feel I was attacking her, just being nit-pikey.

I didn't say you were attacking her either. But then you're jumping to conclusions about what I mean when I say "flame war" and "gunning for a fight." One doesn't necessarily have to attack another person in order to start a fight on the internet. You were coming across as hostile, you were coming across as out of line. The way you were maneuvering things, in the wrong place it would start a flame war because of the passive-aggressive nature of the posts.

I don't consider the posts nit-piky, but even if others do, and if being nit-piky justifies a warning and suggestion to go elsewhere, then then I can think of numerous posts on CT from other people that should have resulted in the same reaction. This is why I'm annoyed.

Yes, but that"nit-pickiness" is not a result of an obscene obstruction of the interpretation of the English language, so far out of left field that it becomes obvious that the poster is scraping for reasons to belittle the other poster. Sorry, I've seen it enough times to recognize it.

In the time I've been on CT I've never started a flame war. If you read something I've written that seems edgy or unusual, maybe that could be pointed out, instead of assuming I'm out to rip someone to shreds? That way I could possibly clarify my point, instead of being put immediately on the defensive.

I never accused you of "ripping some one to shreds" now did I? I only said that your posts were inappropriate, which they were and that they looked as though you were trying to start a fight.

*When I decide to go after someone, you will know it. There will be no doubt about it in anyone's minds, I assure you, so if there is doubt in your mind as you read something from me--it means I'm not.

I assure <b>you</b> that there is no doubt in my mind about what you were doing or why.

All this post is about is you whining about how you feel you have been treated unfairly. You're still making cheap stabs at some one who has nothing to do with the issue at hand, not exactly a good way to communicate your displeasure. Well I'm terribly sorry you feel like a martyr. Maybe it's about time you stop thinking that everything any one says or does relates back to you.

[Avisionaire]

Three things.

[shit that you're not supposed to say]

2] Your reactions are far beyond the offense taken by Lilblu herself. I'm not sure why--perhaps the rough waters of your personal life are feeding into this? I'm sorry if that's the case.

And I'm sorry if that's not the case. This isn't what I intended.

3] Not sure what else to say, apart from that I disagree with everything in the following paragraph:

B: How dare you call anyone else a whiny bitch, you pansy? You're the one who runs away with your tail tucked between your legs when an internet argument begins, be it from here or any of the Seattle boards. You're the one who whines to high Heven should any one you care about contradicts you or fails to stand up for you. You're the one who ran and posted this some place totally inappropriate so that no one could see your whining and possibly mock you for it.

[Spitfire]

2] Your reactions are far beyond the offense taken by Lilblu herself. I'm not sure why

It doesn't matter what her offense level is since I am not her nor am I doing this because of her.

perhaps the rough waters of your personal life are feeding into this? I'm sorry if that's the case.

<b>Or</b> perhaps if you knew me even a fraction as well as you think you do you might understand why I'm so set off about it, eh?

3] Not sure what else to say, apart from that I disagree with everything in the following paragraph

Not surprising, since that would involve admitting your own faults.

[Avisionaire]

[shit that you're not supposed to say]

Editing my post to take out its primary point is a move worthy of the Bush administration. That doesn't happen on SG or STFU even... Your inability to admit that you overreacted saddens me, but not as much as compounding it with an abuse of power.

[Spitfire]

Editing my post to take out its primary point is a move worthy of the Bush administration. That doesn't happen on SG or STFU even... Your inability to admit that you overreacted saddens me, but not as much as compounding it with an abuse of power.

Yes, except we have rules that explicitly state that you are <b>not</b> to discuss that. You know that. You want to discuss <b>that</b> do it in pms. I don't <b>like</b> the fact that I had to edit your post, but you're the idiot who seems to think that rules don't (or shit, the way life works doesn't) apply to you and only to other people. Plus, I didn't feel as though that was the primary part of your post. If you want to rewrite it leaving out what you know you should be leaving out, be my guest. I'll reply. You can get your point across without making mention of that.

You can compare me to a "dictatorship" as much as you like, but then that's what every precious snowflake does whenever some one tells them something they don't like. This rule applies to everyone on CT, regardless of who they are and what else is going on. You broke it, I went on damage control.

Rewrite your post without mention to that. I know you are capable of getting your point across without it, or at least you would like to think you are.

For the record, Seagoth <b>does</b> delete posts, moron.

[(anti)]

[This was originally posted out of the public eye, as I deemed it something not everyone needed to be privy to, but I was informed that was an incorrect approach to the subject; since I was informed posting it in public would have been more correct, I am doing so.]

I'm going to post this here because I don't figure it needs to be consumed by the public.

I'm unhappy with how yesterday's exchange with lilblu was handled. It reminded me a great deal of how another exchange on CT from a year or two ago was handled--my "attacks" on Ryan--which played significantly into my ceasing to post here for a while.

At the time of the Ryan exchange, I asked for the posts to be pointed out that were deemed so offensive as to be "attacks", because I was confused--I didn't intend for them to be attacks* and I thought it was obvious Ryan's reaction was more the result of him being an oversensitive whiny beatch than anything I wrote.

The same thing is true with the lilblu exchange. Where are the attacks that indicate I'm looking to start a flame war? Lilblu herself assured me last night she didn't feel I was attacking her, just being nit-pikey.

I don't consider the posts nit-piky, but even if others do, and if being nit-piky justifies a warning and suggestion to go elsewhere, then then I can think of numerous posts on CT from other people that should have resulted in the same reaction. This is why I'm annoyed.

In the time I've been on CT I've never started a flame war. If you read something I've written that seems edgy or unusual, maybe that could be pointed out, instead of assuming I'm out to rip someone to shreds? That way I could possibly clarify my point, instead of being put immediately on the defensive.

My initial reaction to yesterday was to say "fine" and skip town again, as I did after the Ryan thing, but I enjoy posting here, so I figured I would try this approach.


*When I decide to go after someone, you will know it. There will be no doubt about it in anyone's minds, I assure you, so if there is doubt in your mind as you read something from me--it means I'm not.

Not trying to be a contributing member of the passive-aggressive Seattle throngs here. I'm attempting to communicate in the manner I thought was best that I am unhappy about how something was handled.

Oh Michael... does the fun ever start? Well, I sort of forgot what happened way back then, but I think it went something like this:

1) I said something that wasn't directed at you.
2) You got upset, and responded on behalf of mankind.
3) I said something to you, and you thought it was an attack. (my bad)
4) You continued to complain online and offline, needlessly putting a strain on your relationships with people.
5) I forgot about it.
6) You didn't.

I never really said many things to you before, because I actually didn't want to make you pissed or anything, but.... don't you think it's time to be a big boy? Stop torturing yourself, and more importantly: let. it. go.

As for that thing about me being an "oversensitive whiny bitch"... c'mon. If I recall, you were the one who pissed and moaned for weeks, and then ended up leaving the forums. It's all ancient history, though; treat it as such. However, if you wish to dig up the past and talk about useless stuff, drop me a PM. And if you wish to speak ill of me to a bunch of random people I don't know, ask me first, okay?

xoxo

[Avisionaire]

Misdirected anger and personal attacks aside, I see precious little here to respond to, so I'm going to clarify a couple of points and then you'all can go at it.

Spitfire, I was unaware that the "sensitive" information you deleted was still sensitive; even assuming that is the case, you deleted far more than that--including the primary point of the post, which I will reiterate but which will now no doubt be lost as a result of the micromanaging of the thread.

1. I objected to how you handled the lilblu thread because it was almost identical to how you handled the (anti)-exchange. I did so by posting it outside of the public eye (since I didn't think doing so was going to prove all that productive) and e-mailed a copy of it to lilblu, so she would know what it said, since she was indirectly involved. She can cooborate both the text and the timing.

Not hiding. Not being sneaky. I was objecting to something in as constructive a way as I thought was available at the time, and seeking to avoid further pubic overreactions to non-situations.

2. After being informed I should have posted it in public, I did so.

There you have it. I imagine any further public exchanges at this point are not going to accomplish anything, so I'm going to step back and trust that, once the dust settles, some perspective may return to everyone involved.

Not running. Not hiding. Just recognizing when a situation has ceased to be constructive and moving ahead.

[Spitfire]

Misdirected anger and personal attacks aside, I see precious little here to respond to, so I'm going to clarify a couple of points and then you'all can go at it.

Misdirected? I think not. Personal attacks? You started those.

Spitfire, I was unaware that the "sensitive" information you deleted was still sensitive;

And why on Earth would you think that? There have been no changes to our rule structure involving that topic. If you had any questions you could have, I don't know, looked it up?

even assuming that is the case, you deleted far more than that--including the primary point of the post,

No, I deleted the sentences pertaining to that subject, none of which would have made sense if I would have deleted only specific snippets.

which I will reiterate but which will now no doubt be lost as a result of the micromanaging of the thread.

*nods sarcastically* Oh totally, because as we all know, I delete everything I don't want to see (*cough* Hear that Brandy?) Oh wait, no I don't usually edit posts. In fact, this is the first one I've ever done like this (with the one exception of removing a link in a previous flame war) and why? Because some one couldn't be bothered to turn his brain on.

1. I objected to how you handled the lilblu thread because it was almost identical to how you handled the (anti)-exchange. I did so by posting it outside of the public eye (since I didn't think doing so was going to prove all that productive) and e-mailed a copy of it to lilblu, so she would know what it said, since she was indirectly involved. She can cooborate both the text and the timing.

First of all, I was in no way out of line with what I said to you about the Lilblugrrrl exchange. Yes, ok, so the Seagoth parallel might not be the most diplomatic way of putting things, but since when am I a diplomat? You were being stupid, I called you on it and told you to back off. You shifted your heat from Lilblugrrrl to me.

Secondly, the post you made sounds like whining. It sounds as though you are trying to garner sympathy for a cause that no one cares to join. People end up saying dumb things. People will inevitably get called on these if they associate with others in any way. You did this time around. Further, situations arise where people feel slighted by others. We all deal with it. We don't need to spend days or longer drawing these conflicts out in an attempt to let others see how wounded we are.

Not hiding. Not being sneaky. I was objecting to something in as constructive a way as I thought was available at the time, and seeking to avoid further pubic overreactions to non-situations.

A: Why couldn't you have said something publicly to being with? What would it have hurt? Or better yet, you could have pmed me immediately after the first post. Novel idea that, taking care of miscommunication and whatnot before it spirals out of control...

B: Well it didn't work. Perhaps you should have let things die. Somethings simply don't need to be hashed out a thousand times until the world can see events through Avisionaire's eyes. Get over it.

C: You were fucking whining.

2. After being informed I should have posted it in public, I did so.

Yes, yes you did. Be glad I checked my tongue earlier, you're still tempting me.

There you have it. I imagine any further public exchanges at this point are not going to accomplish anything, so I'm going to step back and trust that,

<b>Good</b>.

once the dust settles, some perspective may return to everyone involved.

Right. You plan on doing any of that? Changing of perspectives that is? Because it would be nice, you know before you go throwing those words around, if you did so once in a while.

Not running. Not hiding. Just recognizing when a situation has ceased to be constructive and moving ahead.

You realize that this whole paragraph just makes it worse, right? If you want to just step away you should do, not <b>make sure</b> that everyone understands that you're not running.

[lilblugrrrl]

I think that almost this entire thread is useless and not worth reading.

Yes, there are rules that need to be followed and enforced but most of this post seems, to me, to be pointless drivel worthy of STFU and Seagoth. This is the kind of crap I am trying to avoid.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could all be adults and act accordingly?

Play nice people or I will shake my mighty fist at you!

[lilblugrrrl]

i'm hoping that avisionaire returns after this has cooled down. everyone needs to get off of their high-horse. it's my f-ing turn!

[Spitfire]

Meh.

I'll help you with your high horse.

[lilblugrrrl]

Sweet. I need to train it to intimidate everyone else's high horses. hee hee

[Spitfire]

I'll get right on that.

[errhead]

i feed my horse a mixture of acid and pcp then graze 'im on pot plants
i've got the highest horse in the land

[Spitfire]

Yeah, I have to admit, that's going to be pretty hard to top.

[djeternaldarkness]

What if you only feed your horse the best in coke laced pot, washed down with an LSD, Meth, and Vodka smoothie?

[Alice]

Wouldn't it be nice if we could all be adults and act accordingly?

Would that involve the cessation of fluff posting in non-fluff areas? Just a thought.

[onu]

What's not supposed to be discussed?

[Spitfire]

What if you only feed your horse the best in coke laced pot, washed down with an LSD, Meth, and Vodka smoothie?

Ok, so that would probably be even more efficient.

Would that involve the cessation of fluff posting in non-fluff areas? Just a thought.

It might.... Not that I'm contributing or anything.

What's not supposed to be discussed?

I sent you a pm.