NorthAI the Hand wrote:
I was going to reply to your more lengthy post, but this will have to do as I am heading to bed. Let's clarify one thing: There's a major difference between new posters and retarded posters. This is common to any major interaction online, that doesn't really require split second speed. An effort made in creating a sentence. Punctuation. Format. These things are necessary for anyone else to be able to quickly ascertain the nature of the post.
I fully agree, North. I fully agree that people who spew drivel in a posting pane and then expect to be taken seriously need a bit of a wakeup call. You can't tell me that every poster who asks a question here demonstrates only minimal skill/effort in the written literacy department. It's the overly harsh responses to people who post highly readable questions who are mistreated simply because someone felt like answering the questions was beneath them.
Quote:
Secondly, a certain amount of effort made in finding out for themselves. This is also a staple on any forums such as these, to avoid a swarm of "how do I ******?" questions which would have been answered by a very quick use of either the search bar which stands out to our left, or by reading a sticky/game manual/following the bloody tutorials.
Maybe things work differently in the UK, North. Here in North America,
progressive groups are trying to pull people
out of manuals and directories and reinforcing respectful information by saying basically, "If you have a question, please don't hesitate to ask." Sure, some people still ride their dinosaurs to work and fill out invoices on stone tablets, but the social convention of handing people a mammoth stack of reading materials and treating them like a scrub until they've memorized them all just doesn't work. It's being phased out. On the level of cognitive/social psychology is the understanding that just because something has "always been done" a certain way, doesn't immediately justify that way is right or effective.
Quote:
Third, don't bloody expect anyone to leap to your service if you don't fulfill the first two requirements. If you don't, and get snapped at, it is your own fault. This is not rocket surgery, and it doesn't require more than a token amount of effort. If you don't feel like doing this, I am well within my rights to take the effort of correcting your mistakes.
The question becomes, North, who are you to define these requirements? Who is anyone else to? If Allakhazam, Defender of Justice, doesn't come down with an edict that says so, it's not your place to be creating requirements of anyone.
I assume your response to that will be to label me a hypicrite. Something along the lines of, "Aren't you trying to create your own set of requirements?" If you read closely, you'll notice that I've said sometimes being a bit harsh with people is the only way to bring them around. You'll also notice I've said that lately I've seen it spiral out of control, which is what often happens when people see certain behaviors are now socially acceptable but don't quite grasp the boundaries of those behaviors yet.
Quote:
I hold you accountable, as a regular poster with foreknowledge of how internet relations work, to stop sounding like a stuck up prig who can't stand the sight of honest criticism.
There's an incredibly distinct line between honest criticism and being a grade A asshat. That's my entire point.
Quote:
My standards of behaviour are actually quite high. But they don't apply to people who fail to make even the slightest effort to learn something for themselves. My self respect is actually quite high, as any former Army soldier can attest to.
Then no, your standards of behavior are not quite high. They're subjective. Your self respect is not as high as you might want it to be, or you wouldn't create such a negative perception of yourself in these forums. You boast of your reputation as an *******...that's not self respect. That's telling people you're something socially unacceptable and proud of it. There's no respect for yourself in any of that.
Quote:
And don't even try to tell me that my interaction with others fail to meet my own standards. I have been harsh in alot of posts, very true. But I've yet to see any mention of the four out of five posts where the OP hasn't broken the first two unwritten rules of the internet in general. Funny, how one out of five posts are the ones I hear about all the time.
Wow...so now not only are they required to read the sticky before they post in order to avoid your wrath (and the wrath of others), now they're expected to know and observe the
unwritten rules. Try to be a bit more realistic in your expecations, please.
AureliusSir wrote:
I changed my mind, I have to adress this one too. Exclusive group of people, huh. Yeah, I guess any regulars would be part of that. If that's a clique, I've been part of at least five since I first learned to speak, at any given time. If that's the definition, anyone who agrees on anything is a clique. Refuse to accept the presence of others unless unrealistic criteria is met. Unrealistic? Is it unrealistic to require a minimum of research, or a minimum of effort made in writing a post? Is it unrealistic to ask someone to read a sticky named "Every question answered here"?
If the sticky were more user friendly, it would be realistic to carry a reasonable expectation that folks would read it. For most people, clicking on a sticky with
no useful index and then having to read through pages upon pages of "stuff" if they have any hope of finding an answer to their question is not realistic. It's not by any stretch of the imagination unrealistic to refer them to the sticky, but the venemous tripe could be left out in a lot of cases.
Having said that, it says very close to the top of the sticky that certain questions will be met with nastiness. "What is the best <anything>", "What is a good pet?" etc. are not kosher questions to ask. There are a lot of questions asked here that fall well outside those basic guidelines, however, that certain people have given themselves liberty to rip apart.
That is what I take issue with.
Quote:
Give me a break. Your clique **** is not only getting old, it is a poorly thought out attempt to group up individual posters to make the "frightful, horrible posters of the Hunter forum" seem like some kind of massive entity to be defeated. As I said, single out the posters, and you just might be taken a bit seriously. As it stands, you sound like an enraged cyberpolice trying to enforce your own standards and values onto what is essentially far beyond you to moderate.
And your, "These are the reasons why it's ok for me to be a prick" excuses are getting old. So where does that leave us?
Quote:
And yes. I do so enjoy shaming people. I enjoy making them cry, if I could pull it off. I so love to see someone go into a hissyfit or post-fed rage due to something as simple as words on a page. Discriminatingly, of course. I choose my own targets carefully. Those who deserve it, or fails to meet the exceedingly low expectations of this and other forums. But I won't deny it. I get a warm fuzzy feeling inside from doing it. And nothing you say, could ever dissuade me from verbally assaulting someone who deserves it.
And why is that, North? What is it about making feel bad that is so appealing to you? Is it because you don't feel all that great about yourself so bringing people down to your level in your own eyes makes you feel less alienated? Is it because you feel a lack of control and mastery over yourself in everyday life that you chose to compensate by finding a sense of power here?
My sense is that your cruel response to others has nothing to do with them, and everything to do with
you.
Quote:
And that's where you fail to understand this, and possibly other forums. Those who annoy me, deserve my wrath. Don't like it, rate me down and rant away just like I do to the newbtards (not to be confused with newbie) that fails to meet said expectations. The only difference would be that I enjoy that too.
Those who annoy you...deserve your wrath...why? Because you're perfect? Because you like and fully expected to be treated like **** by the people
you annoy? If you really did, you wouldn't be defending yourself to me. You'd be thriving on my criticism of some of the behavior in this forum. You'd be begging for more. But you're not. You're basically saying, "This is how I do things, and if you don't like it sod off." You're maintaining a double standard, North. It's ok for you to be cruel and disrespectful to people who annoy you based on your criteria of annoying, but something about you entitles you to exemption from your own standards?
I'd like to clarify...I'm not singling you out. I'm responding to what you're posting. Any of the others who have repeatedly treated newcomers poorly would be receiving similar responses. My purpose is not to cut you down, but to examine the logic behind your decisions, and there doesn't seem to be very much reason at all to why you do what you do. At least, nothing I'd expect you'd be proud to admit.