apologist vs ????

[Warwick]

What the hell did you just say about my sister? I'LL KILL YOU!

No, just use the cream. No need to see a doctor about it yet.

 

[Black*]

I was content to leave this thread open, as it was exploring the nature of some posters to pigeonhole others into neat little categories, whether that be the perceived tags of negative or positive posters and somehow inferring that posters in said categories are somehow less of a supporter.

Why do I feel like i'm going go blue in the face saying this: It's up to you to check your behavior and how you relate to others, not us mods. You're all apparently grown-ups, start behaving like it. We don't want any "but they started it" stuff. We don't want any name-calling.

We're never going to get new posters in here if they come in and find the same set of posters continually butting heads over something that really doesn't have anything to do with this season. Yes, I know the history of it all, but it's time for a clean slate.

If you're offended by positivity then don't respond to a positive post unless you can do so without condescension. Likewise negative ones. Don't read stuff into posts that aren't really there but you perceive. Otherwise weevil will be forced to get medieval on all of your arses.

I'm starting to ask myself why I even bother going on this board . I have been a member of other forums and have had no problems with them, this place on the other hand.....

 

[Hollow Knight]

I'm starting to ask myself why I even bother going on this board . I have been a member of other forums and have had no problems with them, this place on the other hand.....

Long story full of unpleasantness.

Reading the board guidelines may give you an idea as they developed around sorting this place out.

 

[weevil]

...So, indulge me a little here. I’m curious, can anyone from either side come up with a list of things they think their own side may have done (or been perceived as) wr-wr-wrong?

Does anyone on either side understand why the other side is so upset?

Or are you all just a bunch of Fonzies?

 

[Hollow Knight]

...So, indulge me a little here. I’m curious, can anyone from either side come up with a list of things they think their own side may have done (or been perceived as) wr-wr-wrong?

Does anyone on either side understand why the other side is so upset?

As Homer Jr and I both agreed, no one is able to claim the moral high-ground.

With our thoughts, we build the world, Weevil.

So said Buddha.

 

[weevil]

As Homer Jr and I both agreed, no one is able to claim the moral high-ground.

With our thoughts, we build the world, Weevil.

So said Buddha.

And weevil says that that is all lovely...and vague.

weevil also says he wants to know if anyone in this actually understands and can articulate the oppositions point of view?

 

[Hollow Knight]

And weevil says that that is all lovely...and vague.

weevil also says he wants to know if anyone in this actually understands and can articulate the oppositions point of view?

I see what you are trying to do, but I think that in this environment, no good can come of it.

 

[John]

And weevil says that that is all lovely...and vague.

weevil also says he wants to know if anyone in this actually understands and can articulate the oppositions point of view?

I will give it my best shot. I believe that this is a Lions supporters board. I have no issue with differing opinions over team selection etc but I do over the trashing of present players in inarticulate ways and the continued support of Akermanis who demonstrably trashed our team when playing for us and is now an opposition player. If one had a differing opinion on that they could have stated their case and moved on. But they did not. They consistently sprouted anti club mantra over and over, not only on this board but had the bad manners to do it on the main board and the boards of apposing clubs. I also do not like that some supporters of Akermanis refused to back their case with logical replies but were able to sprout the same rubbish over and over and hide behind the weak "attack the post not the poster" mantra when they could not back up their arguments with hard solid facts. If one cannot support the team they supposedly love without making snide remarks that they do not have to be accountable for then IMO they should give it a miss. If some who contribute on here have gripes against the club learn that attacking the club will not make it any better with the fellow posters who bleed maroon blue and gold are not interested in their petty grudges. I know it is only footy in the end but I do not relate to this snide attacking of the club I pay good money to watch week in week out. I have heard this other rubbish about some no longer posting because they supported Akermanis. Well for me they never supported the club anyway so good riddance to them. I stopped posting here for a good while myself in disgust at the pro Akermanis faction and it only now that yourself and TFB are mods that I am trying to get back to talking about my team with like minded people. This split is not easy to overcome but lets hope that time will heal but at this point in time it has not with me. Call that immature but that is the way that it is.

 

[Grimreepah]

weevil also says he wants to know if anyone in this actually understands and can articulate the oppositions point of view?

The opposition's point of view is that they are not breaking BigFooty rules so they should not be criticised. They think they should be able to say whatever they like about the club and others should respect that.

I should note that when I use the term 'opposition' I am only referring to one or two troublesome posters.

 

[John]

I misunderstood the question. The answer would be that I can not understand the opposition point of view as I do not relate to that behavior.

 

[beatnik]

Having re-read it, it seems as though everyone is trying to turn this place is split. I though we just got told not to go down this path by the new mods.

it was a simple question relating to the recent use of the term apologists appearing to refer to anyone making moderate/positive opinions

it was a very general question...no-one was singled out or personally criticised...it was a topic of interest to me at the time that i wrote it and while it relates to an possibly emotive issue, it was written in calm tones and (for me) succinctly...honestly, i can't see how someone could take issue with my original question

that said, if you can explain to me exactly what your issues are, i will try to clarify or modify my original post accordingly

i will even try to empathise (if not agree) with your point of view as Darth Weevil has commanded


now i would humbly ask you to consider my perspective...

Maybe you just misread my intentions, or try to assume too much. But I can't fault that, its common.

technically speaking, this largley harmless comment of yours could be reported as a 'personal attack' on TBD if someone was very senstive to implied or imagined personal criticism

i know it seems crazy but some posters have had equally innocuous comments reported as personal attacks eek causing significant friction on the board and an annoyingly unecessary burden for moderators

from memory you have corrected other posters in the past for making 'personal insults' (which is your right) but i hope that the above example highlights how easy it is to cross the line into 'discussing the poster and not the post'

peace

 

[weevil]

I see what you are trying to do, but I think that in this environment, no good can come of it.

Look I agree it is very difficult to get anything out of this.

I’m trying anything I can because I see the time that all this stuff is going to end very, very badly for a whole bunch of people. The mods have thrown everything at this and it still keeps coming back.

I think it will get to the point where the big guys will say enough is enough; they will chuck a blanket over it and permanently ban a bunch of people from both sides.

They won’t give a shit who said what, who was right or whatever, they will just line up who they think are the prime movers from both camps and they will take them down. And anyone else who bleats about it will be going down too.

I’m not saying there has been any discussion along those lines yet. But if we keep on going over and over the same ground then I don’t think they are gong to be left with much option.

You gotta be able to take this discussion to a higher level or drop it all together.

 

[weevil]

The opposition's point of view is that they are not breaking BigFooty rules so they should not be criticised. They think they should be able to say whatever they like about the club and others should respect that.

I should note that when I use the term 'opposition' I am only referring to one or two troublesome posters.

I think they are saying that they get picked on. That they are constantly harassed and bullied by a gang that scrutinises every single comment they make, and who then try to paint whatever they say in the worst context possible.

That they can make numerous completely neutral posts which are pretty much ignored and the instant they say anything even slightly glass half full the gang jump down their throats.

 

[Grimreepah]

I think they are saying that they get picked on. That they are constantly harassed and bullied by a gang that scrutinises every single comment they make, and who then try to paint whatever they say in the worst context possible.

Why would people want to do that? That suggests they think people are creating conflict just for the sake of it.

That they can make numerous completely neutral posts which are pretty much ignored and the instant they say anything even slightly glass half full the gang jump down their throats.

For people that this applies to I agree, but for the one or two posters who continually twist things into a negative, criticise, throw insults, exacerbate the worst, portent doom, provoke fellow supporters, and in general try to bring the club down, then there is no discernable difference to an opposition troll, and I can understand why people get pi$$ed off by this.

 

[danielcan]

Rather than start threads/topics which seem to focus on the same few players over and over again (this gives the impression that certain players are constantly being picked on - Sherman, Brennan etc), it might help to raise these in the main post-match analysis thread, along with constructive suggestions concerning other players as well.

Having a little bit more faith in Leigh, the coaches, trainers and players wouldn't go astray.

Every time there is a loss, calling for Leigh to be replaced etc is a tad of an over-reaction. It's little wonder that the responses to such suggestions would be met with similar sentiments.

 

[weevil]

Why would people want to do that? That suggests they think people are creating conflict just for the sake of it.

That is a question they would be asking you. Why can’t the ‘gang’ just leave them alone?

For people that this applies to I agree, but for the one or two posters who continually twist things into a negative, criticise, throw insults, exacerbate the worst, portent doom, provoke fellow supporters, and in general try to bring the club down, then there is no discernable difference to an opposition troll, and I can understand why people get pi$$ed off by this.

I think they would argue that the ‘gang’ displays this exact same sort of behaviour to them that the gang trolls them. And that that sort of behaviour pisses them and other people off.

I very much believe that they think their concerns about the club are valid. I think they are very upset about some aspects of the club and that they feel they are expressing their legitimate concerns.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I very much believe that they think their concerns about the club are valid. I think they are very upset about some aspects of the club and that they feel they are expressing their legitimate concerns.

That's all fine, but bear in mind that this is a supporters' board and any criticism about the club is likely to draw a hostile reaction unless it is backed up by some solid evidence and a cohesive argument.

Its not a neutral environment, and nor should it be, its a supporters' board and that should be taken into consideration when expressing an argument.

Otherwise its the equivalent of walking into a P.E.T.A. meeting in a fake fur coat and then complaining of being bullied when they throw buckets of red paint at you, simply because you refused to explain that it was a fake fur coat.

In the context of this board, continual negative comments wihout evidence will continue to be perceived as real fur.

 

[BigCat2]

I think that's where different definitions of 'supporter' can cause problems.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I think that's where different definitions of 'supporter' can cause problems.

I agree BigCat.

But for all intents and purposes, on an online Brisbane Lions forum, it would be reasonable to expect there will be a fairly large contingent of supporters who are reasonably positive about the club and its direction and would appreciate comments to the contrary to be presented in a critical, constructive way, as opposed to hit-and-run axe-grinds.

 

[Grimreepah]

That is a question they would be asking you. Why can’t the ‘gang’ just leave them alone?

Could be different reasons:

1. Some people may find it difficult to sit idle while something one is passionate is being attacked.

2. Maybe there is a perceived agenda, and there is a desire to put controversial comments into context by raising the issue of that agenda.

3. Maybe the hit and run style of posting that has happened in the past means people might push the boundaries to get people to back up their controversial comments before they run off.

4. Maybe there is frustration at being goaded with cryptic comments, which can become an issue if in conjunction with point 2.

5. Maybe when people claim inside knowledge, the validity of that info rests on the info provider's reputation, and that becomes the point of interest.

 

[Grimreepah]

I very much believe that they think their concerns about the club are valid. I think they are very upset about some aspects of the club and that they feel they are expressing their legitimate concerns.

It comes across to me that they want us to fail.

 

[weevil]

That's all fine, but bear in mind that this is a supporters' board and any criticism about the club is likely to draw a hostile reaction unless it is backed up by some solid evidence and a cohesive argument.

Its not a neutral environment, and nor should it be, its a supporters' board and that should be taken into consideration when expressing an argument.

Otherwise its the equivalent of walking into a P.E.T.A. meeting in a fake fur coat and then complaining of being bullied when they throw buckets of red paint at you, simply because you refused to explain that it was a fake fur coat.

In the context of this board, continual negative comments wihout evidence will continue to be perceived as real fur.

I agree, but it can’t be a sanitised, ‘only nice things must be said’ forum either.

Also I think that there is a uniqueness to this situation.

It’s my understanding that rules about unsubstantiated negative posting about the club evolved after the AkaGate conflicts of last year.

Those rules did not exist at that time because none of us had encountered that sort of situation before.

Once it was established that it was an issue the new rules were put in place to deal with it.

Since then some people have been asked to modify their posting style. Which they by enlarge they have done. They are not a glass half full, bright side of life posts, but they aren’t hit and run attacks either.

I know George W doesn’t have a problem with it but I’m really not into the idea of putting people on trial for breaking rules that did not exist at the time.

I think a lot of the crankiness on the “gang’s” side is about the hit and run stuff that happened during AkaGate. I think with out that most of you guys would be mildly annoyed rather than furious.

 

[weevil]

Holy smokes!!!!! Guys I gotta go to bed...and go to work in a few hours.

I can see a serious bout of RSI on the way tomorrow night.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I can see a serious bout of RSI on the way tomorrow night.

Girlfriend going out for the evening?

 

[weevil]

It comes across to me that they want us to fail.

Before I go to bed I’ll say one thing.

Perceptions, perceptions, perceptions. It is what 99.999999999999% of all this bellyaching (on both sides) is about.