Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
Is it so that in order to be a member here, all your opinions have to be condoned by the rest of the community? I don't think so, I just think you should stick to the rules. Okay, if you're a nazi cannibal murderer, perhaps your opinions are too extreme, but I don't think they are in this case.
To you, I guess they're just some stupid guy's opinions. Why do you get emotional about it? And do you think we should ban people for having stupid opinions? Shall we remove his right to write about them? What do you think should be done in this case?
See, in the bolded part, you are saying that because Sopsych's opinions provoke others, he should be the one to take responsibility when other people start to troll him and derail the thread over it.
Don't you see what a slippery slope that is? We have laws here and we shouldn't hold people responsible for the crimes committed against them, no matter who they are or what opinions they have.
I believe me and Erica both see the bigger picture here. In the end, it is not about Sopsych, but about the rules and what should be expected from the members here.
|
No tore, again you're seeming to see what you want to see. I am NOT saying sop's opinions are wrong or that he can't express them. I never said that. I'm saying that constantly complaining without offering any solution, ignoring other people's contributions, making unsupported comments such as "only a few people read journals" and then when these are sussed to be total lies or at best not well researched, ignoring them, is getting up everyone's nose and there is absolutely no case for allowing someone to continue on with what I, and a lot of others here, consider bad behaviour simply because "they have a right". What about our right?
How about that old Star Trek maxim: Logic dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. In this case, the one.
I'm sorry to say it, but I do wonder that if you were not already so disenchanted with the forum and also if you were being lambasted instead of praised by sop, if you would take this stance? Don't you see that it's not cliquey behaviour, just people agreeing? We're allowed to do that. Most if not all of us agree that what sop is doing is unhelpful and is in fact both derailing (again!) this thread and taking from the solutions duga asked for, so we are within our rights to challenge and take issue with that. What would you prefer? That we all just nod and say ok? What purpose would that serve?
08-17-2013, 09:22 AM
Threaded Mode