tabbyfan


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".  Gladly this is no longer a problem, I guess these guys all got football jobs in the CFL/NFL for their knowledge.  I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.

beaglehound


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".   I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.
Good to hear tabbyfan!

FootbalYouBet


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".  Gladly this is no longer a problem, I guess these guys all got football jobs in the CFL/NFL for their knowledge.  I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.
aww c'mon, tell the truth.  You took 2 years off to learn something about football....right? :)
Crush cream soda is oh so good.  I think I'll have another

There are people out there who just will not be happy until they have created sentient AI.

guelphcatsfan


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".  Gladly this is no longer a problem, I guess these guys all got football jobs in the CFL/NFL for their knowledge.  I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.
aww c'mon, tell the truth.  You took 2 years off to learn something about football....right? :)
Excellent use of the emoji FootbalYouBet, good to see you take the time to read the updated guidelines  ;D

DisplacedCatsFan


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".  Gladly this is no longer a problem, I guess these guys all got football jobs in the CFL/NFL for their knowledge.  I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.
aww c'mon, tell the truth.  You took 2 years off to learn something about football....right? :)
Excellent use of the emoji FootbalYouBet, good to see you take the time to read the updated guidelines  ;D
Then can we get "sarcasm" emojis or fonts?
Is it OK to call a post idiotic, but not the poster?
Formerly sigpig

Velox Versutus Vigilans

R.I.P. Cpl Nathan Cirillo Albainn Gu Brath

beaglehound


I had left the boards a couple of years ago due to one reason, there were guys who would slam you if you were not  a 'football guru'.  Too often a post or reply would be met with "this guy knows nothing about football".  Gladly this is no longer a problem, I guess these guys all got football jobs in the CFL/NFL for their knowledge.  I haven't see much slamming at all so good job moderators.
aww c'mon, tell the truth.  You took 2 years off to learn something about football....right? :)
Excellent use of the emoji FootbalYouBet, good to see you take the time to read the updated guidelines  ;D
Is it OK to call a post idiotic, but not the poster?
You raise an interesting point DisplacedCatsfan. It isn't so much is it okay or is it not okay to use this or that.  It is about expressing disagreement while remaining civil and respectful.  I think everyone is capable of expressing disagreement, even strong disagreement, without appearing condescending, controlling, judgemental and sounding like a know it all.  We all get caught up in that occasionally.  We just need to read carefully our post before clicking the "post" button.  By asking ourselves, how is this going to be received, we can save a lot of hurt feelings.  

"Oh, I didn't say he was stupid or he was an idiot, I merely said his opinion was a stupid or idiotic opinion."  That to me is a cop out.  If you disagree, why not ask the person to support the opinion or tell the poster you strongly disagree but do it in a less confrontational style.  That way everyone wins.   Why does someone have to say, "That is the stupidest comment I have read in years!"  




Lennywasout

So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post?  If the challenge is not attacking the poster but his “fake news” ( as the POTUS would say) is said challenge considered inappropriate or an attack?  
I kinda look at it as if I was still in board meetings. “Would I use the same tone with a peer or superior face to face in a meeting?” If the answer is yes, then I feel like it is ok.  

The problem we have is that there are tremendous differences in how people react to being challenged or disagreed with.  Some are ok with it, others no so much. I’ve dealt with some very sensitive soles in my time and had to learn to deal with these personalities.  (Not really my style😀)

I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent.  I always told my managers to err on the side of “sweetness” when responding in writing because it could be interpreted as hostile when it was not the intent.

Palmer

Sorry, I guess I'm not very adept at finding my way around the forum.  Where do you find the guidelines?

beaglehound

Sorry, I guess I'm not very adept at finding my way around the forum.  Where do you find the guidelines?
You'll find them under "CFL Talk"

Palmer

beaglehound

So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post?  If the challenge is not attacking the poster but his “fake news” ( as the POTUS would say) is said challenge considered inappropriate or an attack?  
I kinda look at it as if I was still in board meetings. “Would I use the same tone with a peer or superior face to face in a meeting?” If the answer is yes, then I feel like it is ok.  

The problem we have is that there are tremendous differences in how people react to being challenged or disagreed with.  Some are ok with it, others no so much. I’ve dealt with some very sensitive soles in my time and had to learn to deal with these personalities.  (Not really my style😀)

I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent.  I always told my managers to err on the side of “sweetness” when responding in writing because it could be interpreted as hostile when it was not the intent.
"So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post? "

And that does happen from time to time.  All the more reason to ask the poster to back up the information.  "Cite your Sources" is found in the guidelines.  Challenging the opinion is not the problem.   [See "Debate, Don't Argue" under guidelines.]   How an opinion is challenged can become the issue.  Personally, I believe some get too caught up in having to be right.  Ergo, they focus too much on the minors and not on the majors.   Saving face is very important to some and we all need to be sensitive to that fact.  To disagree with someone I shouldn't need to demolish that person to feel good.     A person can be right, make that point in a dignified manner while saving the face of the other person.    The question we all should be asking ourselves from time to time is, "Why are we all here?"  

"I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent."

An astute observation!  All the more reason to re-read our posts before clicking the Post button.  And if we have clicked the post button we can still quickly modify the post.

I like your use of the "hostile". Very suitable in this discussion.  None of us have the benefit of studying facial expressions and body language or voice inflection.  I can say the same phrase face to face using 3 different tones and that phrase could be communicating 3 different meanings.  When it comes to the internet I may be coming across as hostile without realizing it.   Hopefully it is not being done on purpose.   The perception that we are coming across as being hostile is what we are all hoping to avoid.  

Obrigardo

So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post?  If the challenge is not attacking the poster but his “fake news” ( as the POTUS would say) is said challenge considered inappropriate or an attack?  
I kinda look at it as if I was still in board meetings. “Would I use the same tone with a peer or superior face to face in a meeting?” If the answer is yes, then I feel like it is ok.  

The problem we have is that there are tremendous differences in how people react to being challenged or disagreed with.  Some are ok with it, others no so much. I’ve dealt with some very sensitive soles in my time and had to learn to deal with these personalities.  (Not really my style😀)

I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent.  I always told my managers to err on the side of “sweetness” when responding in writing because it could be interpreted as hostile when it was not the intent.
"So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post? "

And that does happen from time to time.  All the more reason to ask the poster to back up the information.  "Cite your Sources" is found in the guidelines.  Challenging the opinion is not the problem.   [See "Debate, Don't Argue" under guidelines.]   How an opinion is challenged can become the issue.  Personally, I believe some get too caught up in having to be right.  Ergo, they focus too much on the minors and not on the majors.   Saving face is very important to some and we all need to be sensitive to that fact.  To disagree with someone I shouldn't need to demolish that person to feel good.     A person can be right, make that point in a dignified manner while saving the face of the other person.    The question we all should be asking ourselves from time to time is, "Why are we all here?"  

"I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent."

An astute observation!  All the more reason to re-read our posts before clicking the Post button.  And if we have clicked the post button we can still quickly modify the post.

I like your use of the "hostile". Very suitable in this discussion.  None of us have the benefit of studying facial expressions and body language or voice inflection.  I can say the same phrase face to face using 3 different tones and that phrase could be communicating 3 different meanings.  When it comes to the internet I may be coming across as hostile without realizing it.   Hopefully it is not being done on purpose.   The perception that we are coming across as being hostile is what we are all hoping to avoid.   
Having been a target of vicious personal attacks in the past I for one welcome the revamped rules.they will lead to a  more insightful and  fruitful exchange of ideas without the nastiness of the past.I thank you for this breath of fresh air

beaglehound

So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post?  If the challenge is not attacking the poster but his “fake news” ( as the POTUS would say) is said challenge considered inappropriate or an attack?  
I kinda look at it as if I was still in board meetings. “Would I use the same tone with a peer or superior face to face in a meeting?” If the answer is yes, then I feel like it is ok.  

The problem we have is that there are tremendous differences in how people react to being challenged or disagreed with.  Some are ok with it, others no so much. I’ve dealt with some very sensitive soles in my time and had to learn to deal with these personalities.  (Not really my style😀)

I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent.  I always told my managers to err on the side of “sweetness” when responding in writing because it could be interpreted as hostile when it was not the intent.
"So how about when someone is posting an opinion that is so far out in left field and basically a myth, half truth, call it what you will and that poster gets challenged about his post? "

And that does happen from time to time.  All the more reason to ask the poster to back up the information.  "Cite your Sources" is found in the guidelines.  Challenging the opinion is not the problem.   [See "Debate, Don't Argue" under guidelines.]   How an opinion is challenged can become the issue.  Personally, I believe some get too caught up in having to be right.  Ergo, they focus too much on the minors and not on the majors.   Saving face is very important to some and we all need to be sensitive to that fact.  To disagree with someone I shouldn't need to demolish that person to feel good.     A person can be right, make that point in a dignified manner while saving the face of the other person.    The question we all should be asking ourselves from time to time is, "Why are we all here?"  

"I think that’s just like emails and texting,  the written word can be much harsher than the intent."

An astute observation!  All the more reason to re-read our posts before clicking the Post button.  And if we have clicked the post button we can still quickly modify the post.

I like your use of the "hostile". Very suitable in this discussion.  None of us have the benefit of studying facial expressions and body language or voice inflection.  I can say the same phrase face to face using 3 different tones and that phrase could be communicating 3 different meanings.  When it comes to the internet I may be coming across as hostile without realizing it.   Hopefully it is not being done on purpose.   The perception that we are coming across as being hostile is what we are all hoping to avoid.   
Having been a target of vicious personal attacks in the past I for one welcome the revamped rules.they will lead to a  more insightful and  fruitful exchange of ideas without the nastiness of the past.I thank you for this breath of fresh air
That is how we are hoping things will go Obrigardo.  Do enjoy!

Caretaker

...The goal is to maintain a high standard of decorum on the CFL forums 150Gage.  We are committed to doing that as best we can.  

I can't speak for Hamiltonians but it is not impossible to express oneself explicitly without being obnoxious.  
guelphcatsfan and beaglehound,

Thank you for moderating these forums. 

Don't hesitate to be assertive, as your goals are the correct ones, namely to make these forums polite and friendly so more people are willing to engage in the conversations here.  

Those of us who value our free speech rights to be obnoxious have lots of other places on the Internet to indulge our desires to be rude/mean/or angry.  :-)

Cheers,   Bob.
 


Users Online

113 Guests, 20 Users (15 Spiders, 5 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
Hamilton2005, Grover, ExPat, Reggiemac, ploen_truth, ticat1, Balticfox, hanker66, KevinRiley2, schmenger, popo, Holy Mackinaw, pikk, letsgoticats, MadJack, Google (AdSense) (8), Google (7)

Most Online Today: 152. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)