# Lets jettison the insane asylum!



## The Last Legionary (Sep 5, 2012)

Take the entire Study, toss it. Every political rant, every agenda, all of it.  Spin it off into it's own site "crazytinfoiltalk.com".

Who's with me?

:hmm:


----------



## Steve (Sep 5, 2012)

I'm in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Tames D (Sep 5, 2012)

Why hasn't this been done already?


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 5, 2012)

ok I'll byte.

Suggestion:
 Spin off the entire Study and subsections onto stand alone site.
 All "Study" type topics are banned from MT.  Want to argue politics or social issues? Sign up over there.
 All existing threads will be moved over to new site.

Any current MT/KT supporting member who also registers at the new site will receive a 1 yr. supporting membership there.


I need to raise $500 to cover the costs of the software license, domain name (tbd), and hosting setup.


Anyone donating money to fund this will receive an extension of SM status on the new site comparable to the amount spent (ie $125 gets you a lifetime SM there)


No money now. I'll take pledges until we raise $500.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 5, 2012)

The Last Legionary said:


> Take the entire Study, toss it. Every political rant, every agenda, all of it. Spin it off into it's own site "crazytinfoiltalk.com".
> 
> Who's with me?
> 
> :hmm:



While I can understand the desire to clean up the festering pile of refuse that is the Study, I think that, realistically, any active forum will need something like it. It keeps (most of) the crap confined to a limited area, and allows those (like me) who are generally uninterested in the sort of futile mud slinging that goes on to easily ignore it.
I'd be more inclined to get rid of posters who only post in the cesspool (which might be a better name for the Study...) without contributing to discussions about martial arts, since that IS the purpose of the site.


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 6, 2012)

Bob,

Seems you've entertained this possibility before. There are a lot of opportunities out there to rant politic. What really sucks are the people who come here for the limited, captive audience and NEVER post in the arts forums. I almost wonder if there could be an option to limit the percentage of posts a member can post in the Study alone? 

I think you have a handful of martial artists (plus one or two others) who keep the Study active ... but likely not enough to really seed a political forum to financial success.  I think you'd be happier leaving the Study here.


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 6, 2012)

Or even better if you don't like the stuff posted in the Study then don't open the threads and read them.  Pretty easy right.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 6, 2012)

:lol:  If only it were that easy


----------



## elder999 (Sep 6, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> . I almost wonder if there could be an option to limit the percentage of posts a member can post in the Study alone?
> .



Better yet, limit the number of threads that a member can start in the Study, not the number of posts. Say to 5 a month or so......maybe even 2.....that way, you're not limiting discussion......


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 6, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Better yet, limit the number of threads that a member can start in the Study, not the number of posts. Say to 5 a month or so......maybe even 2.....that way, you're not limiting discussion......


Why?  If you don't like what someone posts don't read it.  Its really not a hard concept


----------



## elder999 (Sep 6, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> Why? If you don't like what someone posts don't read it. Its really not a hard concept



Just to ratchet down the volume a bit-it's not as though this is a political forum. I post quite a bit in the Study, and think most of the threads I've ever started are there, but it's still less than half of the total volume of my posts (I think-it was pretty steadily that way when MT regularly offered the information).

Limiting the number of threads a member can start in the study might be a step towards limiting the Study to quality threads of original thought, or interesting information and viewpoints.


----------



## jks9199 (Sep 6, 2012)

Dirty Dog said:


> While I can understand the desire to clean up the festering pile of refuse that is the Study, I think that, realistically, any active forum will need something like it. It keeps (most of) the crap confined to a limited area, and allows those (like me) who are generally uninterested in the sort of futile mud slinging that goes on to easily ignore it.
> I'd be more inclined to get rid of posters who only post in the cesspool (which might be a better name for the Study...) without contributing to discussions about martial arts, since that IS the purpose of the site.


I kind of agree.  Maybe add a two-tier supporting membership.  Give 'em a cheaper one that gets them into The Study, maybe one or two areas, for like $11 a year (about half a normal SM).  No privileges for ads, just access to a few areas.  ('Cause I don't want to deal with "gets one ad a year" meaning we have to track it...)


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

Over at M4Carbine.net, a weapons centered discussion forum; new members cannot post in any of the "study-like" forums until they have made 200 posts in the sections the forum was created for (firearms/tactics/etc.).


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 6, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> Why? If you don't like what someone posts don't read it. Its really not a hard concept



It can be easy not to read a thread started by someone but you can get 'ambushed' in a thread where a discussion is going along fine and someone will post something that you really cannot agree with or that you think really needs rebutting. Putting someone on ignore may save the blood pressure but also allows the other poster free rein to say what they like about you!

I like the idea that as this is a martial arts site one should post on martial arts before one can post in the Study, that is maybe all it needs either to cut down on the endless one sided political ads or to make sure the site fills it's primary function and the Study is just an interesting sideline. I don't think I'm the only one who hits the new posts button when I arrive here, at the moment political threads are the most prominant making it look as though we don't actually discuss martial arts!
The Study does have uses, it shows us the ways that people from different countries can view things, it can generate some very interesting discussions, ( for example the American Presidential election is very different from elections in other countries and it's interesting to have 'real' people's views rather than just what we see on our news, it is covered here but not extensively) it would be a shame to throw the baby out with the bathwater.


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 6, 2012)

Seems like a lot more work for the staff here.  If political threads are the most popular then so be it that's what people want to talk about and brings traffic to the site and money to the owner.  To cut it out or limit its use would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.  The only reason I became a supporting memeber is because of the large amount of time I spend on the study.  Martial art conversations are OK but there are only so many debates you can have on the proper knife defense or listen to teenagers tell us how they broke up armed robbery at a 7-11 with a death stare


----------



## Steve (Sep 6, 2012)

Bullshido has a separate, sister site for political conversation called sociocide, so the concept of setting up a seperate political forum is one that works.  They are also a lot quicker to relegate irrelevant posts or blatant trolling to trollshido.   I think that also works very well.  Trolling posts aren't deleted.  They're just put in the right subforum.  The result is that decent conversation remains decent, and the rest is removed from site unless people want to go into the troll area and have some fun with it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 6, 2012)

Ahh the Study...it use to infuriate me.... but it no longer does

 You know... This topic comes up every now and then and I even brought it up a few times myself and I even had the study hidden from my view as well at one point.

These days my opinion of the study is simply&#8230;it is what it is&#8230;. and if I am in a more of a Monty Python mood it tends to be&#8230;The Study&#8230;let&#8217;s not go there it&#8217;s a silly place.

It is interesting from time to time but mostly I avoid it&#8230;you have to simply realize that in some case, When you are talking about The Study that Mark Twain was right when he said 



> Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.



You may also want to take into consideration what William Hazlitt said



> The world dread nothing so much as being convinced of their errors.&#8221;


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 6, 2012)

Steve said:


> Bullshido has a separate, sister site for political conversation called sociocide, so the concept of setting up a seperate political forum is one that works.  They are also a lot quicker to relegate irrelevant posts or blatant trolling to trollshido.   I think that also works very well.  Trolling posts aren't deleted.  They're just put in the right subforum.  The result is that decent conversation remains decent, and the rest is removed from site unless people want to go into the troll area and have some fun with it.



Just seems like more work and money for a problem that if you don't like you just need to ignore it.  That costs nothing and requires no work for staff


----------



## Steve (Sep 6, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> Just seems like more work and money for a problem that if you don't like you just need to ignore it.  That costs nothing and requires no work for staff


Ultimately, you're right if the only consideration is simply the administration of the site.  There are other considerations.  For example, is the Study what this site wants to be known for?  Does the activity in the Study reflect positively or negatively on the rest of the site?  Do the conversations in the Study positively or negatively impact the entire community?    

It would be different if there were debate in the Study, but I disagree with you.  There is very little actual debate occurring in the Study.  What occurs in the study, on both sides, isn't debate.  It's not even discussion.  It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect.  There's no exchange of ideas.  It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.  

Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now. Suggesting that it's something that people should just ignore is like saying that there's a tumor growing on your arm, but just ignore it and use the other one.  Like a cancer, it needs to be addressed.  Whether that's to get it under control or to excise it completely is a matter to discuss.  But, IMO, ignoring it is not an option.


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 6, 2012)

Steve said:


> Ultimately, you're right if the only consideration is simply the administration of the site.  There are other considerations.  For example, is the Study what this site wants to be known for?  Does the activity in the Study reflect positively or negatively on the rest of the site?  Do the conversations in the Study positively or negatively impact the entire community?
> 
> It would be different if there were debate in the Study, but I disagree with you.  There is very little actual debate occurring in the Study.  What occurs in the study, on both sides, isn't debate.  It's not even discussion.  It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect.  There's no exchange of ideas.  It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.
> 
> Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now. Suggesting that it's something that people should just ignore is like saying that there's a tumor growing on your arm, but just ignore it and use the other one.  Like a cancer, it needs to be addressed.  Whether that's to get it under control or to excise it completely is a matter to discuss.  But, IMO, ignoring it is not an option.



I disagree that its a cancer on the site.  I also disagree that's what this site is known for.  Its a martial arts forum first.  That's how I found it.  I was looking for information on karate and found this and many other sites.  I joined a bunch at the same time.  This is the only one I still visit.  Mainly because I like the ideas presented in the study.  I can get martial arts info anywhere but the people here do put out good ideas you just need to ignore the spam attacks and the nonsense crap.  Not hard to do.  You spend a little time reading you learn who to read and who not to.  To create an entire new forum for it would hurt both this site and that site causing less traffic for both sites


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

You'll notice that my participation has greatly decreased in The Study.  It's a combination of time, caring, and it not being 'fun' anymore, for all the reasons previously posted.

I'm considering locking it January 1st for a month. I've had numerous requests over the years to shut it down, spin it off, put various restrictions in place, and so forth.  I don't have the time myself, and lack the staff who want to wade through yet another 'dead horse' to weed out the bs.  

So, options as I see them are:
1- let it go as is, and it will continue to unbalance as people tire of the redundancy, resulting in a reputation for 1 sided extremism to continue to grow.
2- get more involved and try to rebalance it. No time, and not enough 'passion in the tank' these days. (My FB friends will have noted the decline in political postings by me)
3- shut it down and lose about 8% of content and 5-10 active members.
4- spin it off and let it run unmoderated (to a limit)
5- Make it a "Premium" section. Pay to play as it were.
6- ??

My original idea for the area was to discuss world events in great detail.  It's become a political cess pool, with most arguments being repeats of old arguments under a new heading, with none of the prior discussion noted. Meaning, for example any debate on gay marriage, must, absolutely must, require all parties to repeat all prior links postings, facts, disinformation, and heated argument, no matter what.  Any discussion of Obama must include every previous claim about his birth, schooling, and what not, along with the same 42 links to fact check sites.  Any discussion on terrorism must include at least 10 references to waterboarding and 500 to various arguments about torture.  Any discussion about England must have at least 1 angry exchange concerning who can reply, between the same 3-4 people.   Grab 10 threads from last year, look at 10 from this past month. Wow. 8 repeats.   

And yes, I've 'helped' make a bunch of repeats. 

I don't really want to spin it off. Updating vBulletin sites are a pain in the *** these days, and I've got my hands full with PetLoversTalk.com's launch. (shameless plug, sign up and talk pets) Launching a political forum in the middle of one of the ugliest US elections in recent history isn't on my 'fun wow' todo list.  I'd rather motorboat Ron Jeremy, and I don't 'swing that way'.

Right now, it's all talk on what we do.  I'll let y'all hash it out a bit.  Nothings changing today, or tomorrow.


----------



## billc (Sep 6, 2012)

Yes, if you don't like what is posted for a thread, or on someones post...get rid of the whole thing.  Very big of all the people supporting that option.  Very brave as well.  Been through this conversation before, the people who could simply not read those threads can't live with that, so ban it all.  Having been slagged repeatedly, by many different people, and kept moving forward there is very little respect from me for those who seek that option.  Whatever Bob wants to do, he has my support and respect.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 6, 2012)

Steve said:


> Ultimately, you're right if the only consideration is simply the administration of the site. There are other considerations. For example, is the Study what this site wants to be known for? Does the activity in the Study reflect positively or negatively on the rest of the site? Do the conversations in the Study positively or negatively impact the entire community?
> 
> It would be different if there were debate in the Study, but I disagree with you. There is very little actual debate occurring in the Study. What occurs in the study, on both sides, isn't debate. It's not even discussion. It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect. There's no exchange of ideas. It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.
> 
> Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now. Suggesting that it's something that people should just ignore is like saying that there's a tumor growing on your arm, but just ignore it and use the other one. Like a cancer, it needs to be addressed. Whether that's to get it under control or to excise it completely is a matter to discuss. But, IMO, ignoring it is not an option.




I've said this quite a few times myself, aye.  Indeed, I think I made a bit of a pest of myself when I was a Mod, bringing such reasoning up when the Study boiled over {soto voce}yet again[/soto voce}.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

I find it a bit funny when people who want to legalize drugs lead the charge to ban opinions. 

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## billc (Sep 6, 2012)

The get rid of it option does come from one particular side of the left/right divide and it isn't the right, at least on the study.


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 6, 2012)

billcihak said:


> The get rid of it option does come from one particular side of the left/right divide and it isn't the right, at least on the study.



Let's not turn this thread into a left -v- right rant too.

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## pgsmith (Sep 6, 2012)

> It's not even discussion. It's two parallel rants that seldom intersect. There's no exchange of ideas. It's about two things: who can yell loudest, and who can yell longest.
> 
> Hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't really need to be that way now.



  That sounds amazingly like the current state of politics in the U.S. 

  Sorry Bob, but it doesn't sound like anything you do will make everyone happy. So, do what ever you feel works best for you and the site.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

Paul, I learned a long time ago, no matter what I do here I'll make someone unhappy, lol.  It's why I get paid the big aspirin.


----------



## Steve (Sep 6, 2012)

Billcihak, I'm all for cutting out the tumor, and I consider myself to be conservative.  I know I don't meet your definition of the term, but then, you don't meet my definition of the term, either.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

ok, some stats:

August 2012 activity
MT : 499 topics / 6,867 posts
The Study: 42 topics / 1,065 posts  ( 8.41% / 15.5%)
TKD: 40 / 1,382 ( 8.01% / 20.13%)
General MA: 31 / 718   (6.21% / 10.46%)

So in August it was pretty busy, and averages about 10-12% of our monthly post count.

So here's the questions:

1- is it a negative or positive for the site?
2- will removing it boost traffic in other areas, or just hurt overall traffic and as a result membership and ad revenues?
3- If we keep it, and make it pay-access, will that hurt the site as a whole?


The bigger question is, how can we boost traffic and activity in the art areas to balance the site better? I'm fine with 1,000 posts a month in the Study.  How do we get 1,000 PPM in JMA, CMA, KMA and FMA to balance the site?


----------



## elder999 (Sep 6, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> So here's the questions:
> 
> 1- is it a negative or positive for the site?



A troublesome mostly positive-some good discussions take place there, but there also a few who don't know what that word means: _discussion_.




Bob Hubbard said:


> 2- will removing it boost traffic in other areas, or just hurt overall traffic and as a result membership and ad revenues?



I don't see it's removal boosting traffic, or hurting any but overall traffic. You'll still ahve the same things going on in the tae kwon do forum, for instance....



Bob Hubbard said:


> 3- If we keep it, and make it pay-access, will that hurt the site as a whole?



No, I don't think so. Please consider my option, though-it wouldn't be limiting speech, but-I think- making all of us consider what's really important enough and worthy of discussion, bringing only our best to the table, knowing we were limited to starting 2 or 5 threads per month.

 Then it could still be available to all who are interested.



Bob Hubbard said:


> The bigger question is, how can we boost traffic and activity in the art areas to balance the site better? I'm fine with 1,000 posts a month in the Study. How do we get 1,000 PPM in JMA, CMA, KMA and FMA to balance the site?



Except for affiliating with other sites, I couldnt tell ya-it's part of why I've never even nibbled at those offers to sell the site.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

So instead of Left/Right politics you'd prefer TKD/FMA/Ninjutsu/etc politics?


----------



## J W (Sep 6, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> You know... This topic comes up every now and then and I even brought it up a few times myself and I even had the study hidden from my view as well at one point.



How do you hide a forum? Is that something I can do with a free account? Like Tez, I usually check the new posts section when I visit this site. I get tired of having to sort through all the silly "liberals hate America" threads and whatnot in order to find the actual martial arts threads.

I have no interest in the Study, since it seems to be what most online political "discussion" is: partisans calling each other names. If I could hide it from my view, the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

So looking at the thread titles is "offensive" or do you actually read them? If you are reading them than who is really to blame for being "offended"?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 6, 2012)

J W said:


> How do you hide a forum? Is that something I can do with a free account? Like Tez, I usually check the new posts section when I visit this site. I get tired of having to sort through all the silly "liberals hate America" threads and whatnot in order to find the actual martial arts threads.
> 
> I have no interest in the Study, since it seems to be what most online political "discussion" is: partisans calling each other names. If I could hide it from my view, the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.



Use to be you had to contact Bob and he would do that for you.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

elder999 said:


> A troublesome mostly positive-some good discussions take place there, but there also a few who don't know what that word means: _discussion_.


----------



## J W (Sep 6, 2012)

Tgace said:


> So looking at the thread titles is "offensive" or do you actually read them? If you are reading them than who is really to blame for being "offended"?



Never said I was offended, just gunks up the list of new threads with a bunch of non-MA junk.



Xue Sheng said:


> Use to be you had to contact Bob and he would do that for you.



Bob, if you could hide the Study for me, that would be great. (If you only do that sort of thing for paying members, though, that's fine, I'll understand.)


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 6, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> ok, some stats:
> 
> August 2012 activity
> MT : 499 topics / 6,867 posts
> ...



Why not just repalce the heading of the study from

The Study

_For the serious and non-serious discussion, argument, silliness and general mayhem of non-martial arts topics including world events, social and political issues, or other items not covered in the other forums. Topics in here should stay focused on their topic, with new threads created where topics split. And as always Do not argue with an idiot they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. 

To 
_
The Study

_Martial Arts Talk would like to apologize to everyone in the world for the Study. it was disgusting and bad and thoroughly disobedient and please don't bother to phone up because we know it was very tasteless, but they didn't really mean it and they do all come from broken homes and have very unhappy personal lives, especially bob. anyway, they're really very nice people underneath and very warm in the traditional martial arts way and please don't write in either because Martial Arts Talk is going through an unhappy phase at the moment -- what with its father dying and the mortgage and MT 2 going out with men.' 
_
And after you open it 

have a sticky at the top that says 

_Martial Arts Talk would like to deny the last apology. it is very happy at home and MT 2 is bound to go through this phase, so from all of us here good night, sleep well, and have an absolutely super day tomorrow, kiss, kiss.' 

_
There now no one is happy... everyone is insulted.... problem solved 

That or just rename the whole damn thing "Argument Clinic"


----------



## pgsmith (Sep 6, 2012)

> No, I don't think so. Please consider my option, though-it wouldn't be limiting speech, but-I think- making all of us consider what's really important enough and worthy of discussion, bringing only our best to the table, knowing we were limited to starting 2 or 5 threads per month.



While I think that's a pretty good idea, how much effort does that involve for our beleaguered admin? Can it be easily and automatically programmed in, or does someone need to keep count and block further threads manually? 



> That or just rename the whole damn thing "Argument Clinic"



It is not!


----------



## elder999 (Sep 6, 2012)

pgsmith said:


> While I think that's a pretty good idea, how much effort does that involve for our beleaguered admin? Can it be easily and automatically programmed in, or does someone need to keep count and block further threads manually?



I don't really know, but I would think it could be automatically programmed in (easily?)-I wouldn't ask otherwise, with someone needing to count. I'd imagine it would be no different than the rep function, though, that tells us how we need to spread it around before we can rep a certain individual again-likewise, a poster trying to start a thread could be told that he'd reached his limit for the month, and would have to wait until then to start another thread. They'd still be able to post to threads that had already started, and reply to threads that get started, they just wouldn't be able to start another thread until their time was up......this would at least cut down on the duplication that Bob spoke of.....





pgsmith said:


> It is not!


Is *too!* :lfao:


----------



## elder999 (Sep 6, 2012)

Tgace said:


>



Why would I think that? If anything, Americans of today are mostly incapable of civil political discourse-online or in person-we're that divided on a wide variety of issues. Look how rapidly the recent abortion discussion we were both involved in descended into utter divisiveness over the simple scientific difference between a "fetus" and a "baby."


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

J W said:


> How do you hide a forum? Is that something I can do with a free account? Like Tez, I usually check the new posts section when I visit this site. I get tired of having to sort through all the silly "liberals hate America" threads and whatnot in order to find the actual martial arts threads.
> 
> I have no interest in the Study, since it seems to be what most online political "discussion" is: partisans calling each other names. If I could hide it from my view, the problem would be solved as far as I'm concerned.



Next to the "New Posts" link is a small upside down triangle. Click it, and you can drill in to just check for new posts in a particular area, avoiding ever seeing areas that don't interest you.  It's not an optimum solution, but can help.

As to hiding it, I've been looking at options but none have been easily installed and maintained yet.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

J W said:


> Never said I was offended, just gunks up the list of new threads with a bunch of non-MA junk.
> 
> 
> 
> Bob, if you could hide the Study for me, that would be great. (If you only do that sort of thing for paying members, though, that's fine, I'll understand.)



I'll adjust permissions shortly for ya.


----------



## CanuckMA (Sep 6, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> I disagree that its a cancer on the site.  I also disagree that's what this site is known for.  Its a martial arts forum first.  That's how I found it.  I was looking for information on karate and found this and many other sites.  I joined a bunch at the same time.  This is the only one I still visit.  Mainly because I like the ideas presented in the study.  I can get martial arts info anywhere but the people here do put out good ideas you just need to ignore the spam attacks and the nonsense crap.  Not hard to do.  You spend a little time reading you learn who to read and who not to.  To create an entire new forum for it would hurt both this site and that site causing less traffic for both sites




Same for me. And since I joined, physical issues have forced me to stop my training so I'm not as interested in the MA part of the site. I do have friends here and the discussions can be interesting. Infuriating, but interesting.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 6, 2012)

pgsmith said:


> While I think that's a pretty good idea, how much effort does that involve for our beleaguered admin? Can it be easily and automatically programmed in, or does someone need to keep count and block further threads manually?



May be an add in, wasn't when I looked last time though. Will check again for more options.


----------



## CanuckMA (Sep 6, 2012)

I'd leave as is. Can it be excluded from the 'New Posts' list?

My opinion: anything other than not changing it will likely decrease traffic to the site. Which will decrease ad revenue. 

I'm the opposite. I never click 'New Posts' BECAUSE i don't want to see posts in sections I don't care about. I check out of few sections. 

Bob, you'll never make everyone happy. Do what is easiest for you that will not jeopardize the site's revenue stream.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 6, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Next to the "New Posts" link is a small upside down triangle. Click it, and you can drill in to just check for new posts in a particular area, avoiding ever seeing areas that don't interest you. It's not an optimum solution, but can help.
> 
> As to hiding it, I've been looking at options but none have been easily installed and maintained yet.



Now, I never knew that! I'm computer illiterate so only do the first thing that looks easy and I can remember to do, I shall do as you suggest now! Cheers.


----------



## billc (Sep 6, 2012)

elder, I returned your bad rep.  I forgot to sign it.  I wanted to make sure you knew where it came from.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Sep 6, 2012)

billcihak said:


> elder, I returned your bad rep.  I forgot to sign it.  I wanted to make sure you knew where it came from.



And the kindergarden bull ***** just keeps on trucking doesn't it.

****ing children really.  Grow the **** up already. This is why this has become a ****ing cess pool.  Tit for Tat ******** from little ****ing kids.

Please, just flush it. This is a martial arts site, if you're not contributing to the martial arts, why the fu ck are you here, really? Go over to ********o's no brains allowed cess pool and piss in there already.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Sep 6, 2012)

Just to make bill happy I negged him. Now he can neg me back like a growed up.  bah.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Sep 6, 2012)

:mrtoilet:The Study.


----------



## billc (Sep 6, 2012)

You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, arnisador, aerdasta,  wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.  If elder feels the need to neg rep me simply because he doesn't like what I post, it's on him.  If you neg rep me because you don't like what I post, that's on you.  Less b******* and moaning and more posting of your own, people, and you'll be far happier people.  I keep politics confined to the study, I try to keep political posts to the election and political thread on the study, so grow up.  Instead, you all demand that Bob spend his time changing the site so you don't have to see my threads, instead of...oh, I don't know, not reading them, and putting him to more work, well, that's really on you guys as well.  Make more of your own threads and posts, grow up a little and move on.  I break no rules, I am generally polite to one and all, and take attacks, snide remarks and rude behavior for quite a while before some on here cross the line, and yet, I'm the problem.  Hmmmm...grow up.  Thank you and good night.


----------



## Tames D (Sep 6, 2012)

Dump the Study. This is a Martial Arts forum. **** "The Study" crybabies.


----------



## billc (Sep 6, 2012)

Keep in mind as well, I'm not posting on most of your threads because we don't get along.  I can control my behvior at least that much, which seems to be more control than many others here who are  complaining.  Bob, once again, do whatever you have to do to keep your sanity, and martialtalk.com as you want it.  It is yours after all, "you did build it."

Believe me, neg. reps are some of the least of the childish behavior I have had to deal with.

Yes, dump the study, that would be the adult way to handle it, it seems some of the "tough" martial artists can't seem to handle it like grown ups.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 6, 2012)

billcihak said:


> You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, aerdasta,  wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.  If elder feels the need to neg rep me simply because he doesn't like what I post, it's on him.  If you neg rep me because you don't like what I post, that's on you.  Less b******* and moaning and more posting of your own, people, and you'll be far happier people.  I keep politics confined to the study, I try to keep political posts to the election and political thread on the study, so grow up.  Instead, you all demand that Bob spend his time changing the site so you don't have to see my threads, instead of...oh, I don't know, not reading them, and putting him to more work, well, that's really on you guys as well.  Make more of your own threads and posts, grow up a little and move on.  I break no rules, I am generally polite to one and all, and take attacks, snide remarks and rude behavior for quite a while before some on here cross the line, and yet, I'm the problem.  Hmmmm...grow up.  Thank you and good night.



He does have a point here.

If all you complainers, who I see participating in the Study quite frequently, were all posting in the MA sections instead....


----------



## Steve (Sep 6, 2012)

That's one list I'm happy to be on. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## elder999 (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> He does have a point here.
> 
> If all you complainers, who I see participating in the Study quite frequently, were all posting in the MA sections instead....



No, he doesn't. I'm not complaining-fact is, all I've really contributed to this thread is one possible solution to making it more manageable. I like the Study, and don't want to see it go away......on the other hand:



billcihak said:


> You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, arnisador, aerdasta, wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want. If elder feels the need to neg rep me simply because he doesn't like what I post, it's on him. If you neg rep me because you don't like what I post, that's on you. Less b******* and moaning and more posting of your own, people, and you'll be far happier people. I keep politics confined to the study, I try to keep political posts to the election and political thread on the study, so grow up. Instead, you all demand that Bob spend his time changing the site so you don't have to see my threads, instead of...oh, I don't know, not reading them, and putting him to more work, well, that's really on you guys as well. Make more of your own threads and posts, grow up a little and move on. I break no rules, I am generally polite to one and all, and take attacks, snide remarks and rude behavior for quite a while before some on here cross the line, and yet,* I'm the problem. *Hmmmm...grow up. Thank you and good night.




And, in reviewing this thread, no one has named you or any other individual as a problem. You tried to make it yet another partisan thing by saying that "those on the left" are the ones who complain-and for that I neg repped you, because I didn't feel it added anything to the conversation, and missed the point. 

No one in this thread has complained about *you*, otherwise, billi. Closing the Study, or restricting it or "doing something" about it comes up every couple of years-since before you got here-and will probably continue to come up-_especially_ in election years, something Bob's been anticipating for months-not the calls for shutting it down, but the ratcheting up of partisan rhetoric. 

Frankly, I just don't have the air to waste on such things.......I'd like to see the Study stay, but I wouldn't lose any sleep if it closed tomorrow, and I'd still be here on Martial Talk.


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 7, 2012)

Fascinating.

Bob, being a member since 2004 and having volunteered here, I'm compelled to think of this from a business standpoint and try to balance that with what I know of you and what your ideals are.

I have to agree that there seems to be little *discussion* in the vein of sharing ideas and - yes, I know I've contributed to the polarity, unfortunately - now the Study is mainly Rhetoricville. Perhaps this is part of that cyclic trend we see in various areas of the board and of the board in general, though I have to admit - again - I wonder if that particular element of the Study doesn't drive people away.  This has little to do with courage or "toughness" as has been alleged, rather attractiveness; like picking out a house ... if it doesn't suit you, it doesn't suit you and if the kitchen is crappy the lady of the house won't want to buy it. I do think this is one of the elements you should weigh in creating a separate and new political forum as I don't think this polarity will disappear anytime soon and the trend seems to be that some are starting to seek an absence of party rhetoric. 

I do still think the Study has a place here ... but if, as a businessman, you are finding the Study being an inhibiting factor to newcomers perhaps the thing to do *is* to shut it down temporarily.  OR if the main problem is rhetoric clash, perhaps you should create a rule about posting rhetoric as opposed to exchanging ideas. :idunno:

It's your prerogative to thump anyone you want and to apply the standards you want to set. I think Elder has a nice idea, but with all the thread drift we see in the study, I doubt it will do much to sway people.  

I'll renew a commitment I made before and have sadly strayed from; I will do my best to put forward my posts in the study as more *idea exchange* oriented instead of defensive of the ideals *I* seek politically.  After all, we can't expect our elected officials to pretend to try to do something we ourselves refuse to do and in the spirit of the American Rebel, I'll do my best to put the guns down and extend a hand.  OH YEAH! And to post more in the arts forums again. =)


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> He does have a point here.
> 
> If all you complainers, who I see participating in the Study quite frequently, were all posting in the MA sections instead....



Actually a lot of us do post in the martial arts sections, quite a lot actually and I for one am not crying about the Study, I find it for the most part an amusing place and will post with gusto when I feel like it. Some of us have quite robust discussions on the martial arts sections and some of us manage to keep talking to each other in a civilised and friendly manner. I do post up new threads, some run some don't but I'm aware that to be a postitive contributing member here one has to do more than whinge about others in the Study. Don't tar us all with the same brush.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 7, 2012)

*You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, arnisador, aerdasta, wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.
*
:lol:  Sadly, the threads I start tend to only draw a hand-full of replies .  Guess I'm just not controversial enough .


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 7, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> *You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, arnisador, aerdasta, wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.
> *
> :lol:  Sadly, the threads I start tend to only draw a hand-full of replies .  Guess I'm just not controversial enough .



Your too damn smart for me to comment you start posting stuff about nuclear biophysical mechanical physics I feel like homer Simpson "uhhhhh ummmm oh look donuts"


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 7, 2012)

The Last Legionary said:


> And the kindergarden bull ***** just keeps on trucking doesn't it.
> 
> ****ing children really.  Grow the **** up already. This is why this has become a ****ing cess pool.  Tit for Tat ******** from little ****ing kids.
> 
> Please, just flush it. This is a martial arts site, if you're not contributing to the martial arts, why the fu ck are you here, really? Go over to ********o's no brains allowed cess pool and piss in there already.


So I guess you can't control yourself enough to not look at study so you post this crap.  Maybe if practice some self control and act like a grown up we would not need to even have this discussion.
If you don't like the study don't look in and leave it to the people that like it.


----------



## yak sao (Sep 7, 2012)

I don't believe that I have ever posted on the study, in fact, I seldom even go to it. It seems to me that it serves as a sort of pressure valve to give people a place to rant and let off steam that otherwise would spill over into the MA forums.
So as someone who never posts here, I say keep it, it has its place. It doesn't bother me one way or the other, I find it very easy to ignore.


----------



## The Last Legionary (Sep 7, 2012)

billcihak said:


> You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, xue sheng, arnisador, aerdasta,  wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.  If elder feels the need to neg rep me simply because he doesn't like what I post, it's on him.  If you neg rep me because you don't like what I post, that's on you.  Less b******* and moaning and more posting of your own, people, and you'll be far happier people.  I keep politics confined to the study, I try to keep political posts to the election and political thread on the study, so grow up.  Instead, you all demand that Bob spend his time changing the site so you don't have to see my threads, instead of...oh, I don't know, not reading them, and putting him to more work, well, that's really on you guys as well.  Make more of your own threads and posts, grow up a little and move on.  I break no rules, I am generally polite to one and all, and take attacks, snide remarks and rude behavior for quite a while before some on here cross the line, and yet, I'm the problem.  Hmmmm...grow up.  Thank you and good night.



Your posts are :Obama Bad. Democrats Bad. Bush Good. Torture Excellent. Yay Republicans are our Saviors. Beirfart was always right!
Lather, Rinse, Repeat. Lather, Rinse, Repeat. You aren't here for discussion or debate, just posting the 'same old stuff'. I've seen people correct you a dozen times on incorrect 'facts', yet you continue to push wrong FUD again and again and again. Your mind is made up, an immovable object.

We're tired of trying to engage in a debate with an agenda troll. It's pointless. The Study has become your political advertisement and agenda nest. Why the **** would we keep beating our heads against the wall ad nauseum when it's pointless?
I'm glad for a debate, **** I love a good argument, but this isn't fun for many of us anymore. This isn't a "Study" it's an "extreme conservative propaganda network", and I feel I need a good shower after wading through it all.

As to the rep, I negged you for being a ****ing child about it all. Elder needs to grow the **** up too and stop hounding you like a little school yard bully.  But just like you are incapable of intelligent debate or an open mind, he won't grow up and stop acting the fool either. This long ago became "Bills Study", and most of us just don't care for the cranial rectal constipation and crap. We'd welcome someplace to actually have real conversations about things that have nothing to do with your agenda, and copy-pasting.  Why don't you take the rest of September off and just avoid posting any more political BS? Or make 1 thread "Bills political stuff" and post it all there? See how many people follow you?  Let some topics that don't have to do with the latest drippings from Beirfarts pipes percolate here a while.

And someone open some windows and break out some fabreeze.  ****!


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 7, 2012)

Steve said:


> That's one list I'm happy to be on.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Me too. Especially since I RARELY post in the Cesspool. Maybe my few posts have hit a nerve...

On the other hand, Billcihack, nobody, other than you, has specificed any particular user. Some reason why you'd think the generic 'problem user' is necessarily you?


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 7, 2012)

billcihak said:


> You know you have....last legionary, elder, pg smith, sukerkin, granfire, random phantom, steve, omar b, canuckma, flying crane, harlan, master dan, tez, blind sage, empty hands, dirty dog, wc lun, *xue sheng*, arnisador, aerdasta,  wo fat, bill mattocks, and a lot more who, if they spent their time creating their own threads, and stopped b******* about how I post, what I post, didn't read what I post, and stopped crying to the administrators, and spent more time creating threads where they "discussed," things the way they want, then you would have the study you want.  If elder feels the need to neg rep me simply because he doesn't like what I post, it's on him.  If you neg rep me because you don't like what I post, that's on you.  Less b******* and moaning and more posting of your own, people, and you'll be far happier people.  I keep politics confined to the study, I try to keep political posts to the election and political thread on the study, so grow up.  Instead, you all demand that Bob spend his time changing the site so you don't have to see my threads, instead of...oh, I don't know, not reading them, and putting him to more work, well, that's really on you guys as well.  Make more of your own threads and posts, grow up a little and move on.  I break no rules, I am generally polite to one and all, and take attacks, snide remarks and rude behavior for quite a while before some on here cross the line, and yet, I'm the problem.  Hmmmm...grow up.  Thank you and good night.



:lfao:

And all that just because you didn't know what you were talking about in the Global Warming bits :lol:

Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.

I likely have given you a bad rep in the past...but unlike some... I always sigh them. 

Now a note to Bob, the Mods and the staff at MT

I am guessing this won't end well so you may want to lock it now and save yourself the trouble later


----------



## Carol (Sep 7, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> :lol:  Sadly, the threads I start tend to only draw a hand-full of replies .  Guess I'm just not controversial enough .




I LOVE your posts.  But so many are so darn thought provoking its sometimes tough to comment.  More like something to think about.   

Sometime back you posted a link to the BBC's "Global Weirding" show. I liked that so much I sent it to several other people.  That was some fascinating work.


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> He does have a point here.
> 
> If all you complainers, who I see participating in the Study quite frequently, were all posting in the MA sections instead....



but but but....

it IS billies fault I even come here!
Seriously!
His memorable post about the pilgrims.....
he did it! (ok, and his prolonged claim that the Nazis were socialists keep be coming back for more, too)


As sentinent being we can pick and choose (at least most of the time) what we click on or who's contribution we read. 

TKD is the most used MA section and it is slow. 
So I pass time in the study. 
I try the library, but currently I don't get to read much.
But without the off topic sections I would not look in as much. 

Oh, yeah, and sometimes you just have t walk away form it a bit and not hit send.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 7, 2012)

I was just reading the title of this thread Lets jettison the insane asylum! and I realized I find the title HIGHLY offensive. :disgust:

 It should be Lets jettison the Psychiatric Unit!

Insane asylum just ISNT PC :uhyeah:


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 7, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> I was just reading the title of this thread Lets jettison the insane asylum! and I realized I find the title HIGHLY offensive. :disgust:
> 
> It should be Lets jettison the Psychiatric Unit!
> 
> Insane asylum just ISNT PC :uhyeah:



No no no.

"Insanity" is a legal defense - you don't hear of someone being "psychotically incapable" or "Unable due to psychosis" - it's "reason of insanity" ... you know ... the kind of reason we see a lot in the Study. ;-)

You're confusing "insane" with "retarded."  Retarded is not PC, even diagnostically now.  

Annnnd with that, I shall shut my mouth.


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> I was just reading the title of this thread &#8220;Lets jettison the insane asylum!&#8221; and I realized I find the title HIGHLY offensive&#8230;. :disgust:
> 
> It should be &#8220;Lets jettison the Psychiatric Unit!&#8221;
> 
> Insane asylum just ISN&#8217;T PC :uhyeah:





shesulsa said:


> No no no.
> 
> "Insanity" is a legal defense - you don't hear of someone being "psychotically incapable" or "Unable due to psychosis" - it's "reason of insanity" ... you know ... the kind of reason we see a lot in the Study. ;-)
> 
> ...




LOL

But replacing retarded can have it's own pitfalls:
The Knights of Columbus in one town here changed their vests from 'retarded' to 'the intellectually handicapped' :roflmao:
That covers sooo much more now!


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 7, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> No no no.
> 
> "Insanity" is a legal defense - you don't hear of someone being "psychotically incapable" or "Unable due to psychosis" - it's "reason of insanity" ... you know ... the kind of reason we see a lot in the Study. ;-)
> 
> ...



The problem is not with Insanity...it is with ASYLUM... and again I am offended by the lack of PC in association with the study  :flammad:

That's it I now want the Study Eradicated from history itself :uhyeah:


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> The problem is not with Insanity...it is with ASYLUM... and again I am offended by the lack of PC in association with the study  :flammad:
> 
> That's it I now want the Study Eradicated from history itself :uhyeah:



you are intellectually handicapped! 

:slapfight:
:uhyeah:


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 7, 2012)

Anyone have $100,000? You can have the whole site.  Cash only.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 7, 2012)

:chuckles @ the string of posts above:  Proof that a sense of humour goes a long way to dealing with things sometimes .

I have to say that TLL makes some pertinent points up in post#64 - but I also have to say, TLL, that you can make your point without the ... erm ... colourful ... language {tho' it is also a good example of letting the profanity filter do it's job (as the site regs state) rather than evading it :nods:}.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 7, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Anyone have $100,000? You can have the whole site.  Cash only.


I left it in my other pants


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Sukerkin said:


> :chuckles @ the string of posts above:  Proof that a sense of humour goes a long way to dealing with things sometimes .
> 
> I have to say that TLL makes some pertinent points up in post#64 - but I also have to say, TLL, that you can make your point without the ... erm ... colourful ... language {tho' it is also a good example of letting the profanity filter do it's job (as the site regs state) rather than evading it :nods:}.



Only one point he got WRONG
Bill and billie are not the same person, even if elder is going to capitalize the name from now on....
Bill is the guy with the original thought.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 7, 2012)

Big Don said:


> I left it in my other pants



I'm not wearing any pants.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 7, 2012)

Now *that* I did not need to know, Cap'n Bob! :lol:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 7, 2012)

granfire said:


> you are intellectually handicapped!
> 
> :slapfight:
> :uhyeah:



WELL..I NEVER!!!!......umm well there was that one time in Singapore....but it was only once I swear. That is If you dont count that time Antarctica... and Paraguay :uhyeah:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 7, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Anyone have $100,000? You can have the whole site.  Cash only.




Well...I do... but I need it for my evil plan of World Domination


----------



## pgsmith (Sep 7, 2012)

> Why would I think that? If anything, Americans of today are mostly incapable of civil political discourse-online or in person-we're that divided on a wide variety of
> issues.


It is not so much that we are divided on issues as it is the fact that Americans as a whole are being trained to let others think for them. Every petty dictator the world over knows that the easiest way to ensure that the people support you is to give them an outside enemy to focus on. That's exactly what our leadership does, create divisiveness in order to focus people on 'the enemy' to keep them from thinking about what a bad job that leadership is doing. It's not even just the political leadership that's doing that, it has become the defacto rule of leadership in all things in the U.S. Even the internet has ceased to be the opener of minds that it once was, and is now some place for like-minded people to huddle together and talk bad about other groups and other ways of living/thinking.

Oops, sorry about the off-topic rant. It's one of my soap box topics.  



> I'm not wearing any pants.



  That was way more information than I needed there Bob!


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 7, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I'm not wearing any pants.



Some people in asylums don't.


----------



## yak sao (Sep 7, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> I'm not wearing any pants.




Would this be an example of inmates being in charge of the asylum?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 7, 2012)

granfire said:


> Only one point he got WRONG
> Bill and billie are not the same person, even if elder is going to capitalize the name from now on....
> Bill is the guy with the original thought.



Ya know what...if the guy is breaking the rules take appropriate measures. This constant stream of personal shots at the guy...to include threads devoted to razzing him is juvenile and almost a sort of bullying. Can you not simply ignore him?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## elder999 (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> Ya know what...if the guy is breaking the rules take appropriate measures. This constant stream of personal shots at the guy*...to include threads devoted to razzing him *is juvenile and almost a sort of bullying. Can you not simply ignore him?
> 
> Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2



????

"Threads devoted to razzing him?" Where?

I mean-personal shots-maybe. Of this I'm guilty, sure. Tryin' not to. Kinda hard for me when dealing with the factually challenged, but ok. 

"Threads devoted to razzing him," though? *Never*.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 7, 2012)

elder999 said:


> ????
> 
> "Threads devoted to razzing him?" Where?
> 
> ...



http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=105100
Billie 

Maybe not blatant "razz", but there's certainly a flavor of piling on starting around here.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## billc (Sep 7, 2012)

Yeah, thanks guys for demonstrating what whiners and complainers you are...


> *Thread: Lets jettison the...*
> OK, here's another negative for the huge whine. I think you seriously need to try and develop a real life. - pgsmith
> 09-07-2012 01:20 AM​*Thread: Lets jettison the...*
> This is a really self-centered post.You want others 2 grow up but this has got to be one of the most juvenile responses I've ever read from you; even tho we rarely agree, I'm disappointed in its quality. Why so sensitive? - shesulsa
> ...


----------



## billc (Sep 7, 2012)

I post facts.  The group listed may not like the facts I post but I always cite sources, and I "copy and Paste," to make it easier to see where I found my facts. 

When I post on national socialists, I originally just stated what I read, people said I didn't know what I was talking about.  I then "copy and pasted from Jonah Goldberg, Thomas Sowell, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Hayek, and several other economists and others in various fields who supported the fact that German national socialists were in fact national "socialists."   Then the goal post was moved.  I was told the nobel prize winning economist and the other PH.D in economics the Ph.D in political science and the Master in behavioral science didn't know what they were talking about because 1) the econonmists come from the Austrian School, and 2) anyone can get a Ph.D.

On manmade global warming.  I agree, that the earth warms and cools, in fact I have pointed out that I live where a mile high glacier used to be.  I am then told that all the scientists agree the earth is warming and all the "real" scientisits agree.  I "copy and paste" evidence that the report that all the "real" scientists use to make their judgement on the issue was written by "scientists," who destroyed data, tried to destroy the reputations and careers of scientists who disagreed with them, tried to get journalists and editors from the leading scientific journals fired...and everyone ignores it.  They say these guys were cleared.  I "copy and paste," the fact that Mann was cleared by the same guy who cleared Jerry Sandusky of the child abuse allegations at Penn state and that the british version of the investigation also cleared their guys without looking at the evidence.  

I also point out the fact that the computer models used to predict future global warming can't predict current climate when the information for current climate is punched in.  And yet I don't have facts.  I  "Cut and Paste,"  to point out that the guy in the I.P.C.C report that covers glaciers melting lied...for money...and was caught doing it.  I "copy and Paste," an article that shows Green Peace faked a photo of melting glaciers in Norway, and I am told I don't argue from facts.  

I am told the Island of Tuvalu is sinking into the ocean because of the melting of the glaciers.  I "copy and paste" an article that points out that the old measuring equipment used at Tuvalu was not accurate. When new equipment, modern measuring devices, were deployed...they showed no sinking.  But my facts aren't fact.

I "cut and paste," articles about the temperature measuring stations that aren't properly placed, the stations in Russia, in the coldest parts of Russia, that are ignored when computing global temperatures, and I am told my facts aren't facts.

I copy and paste because I cite sources.  Sources from people who have actually done the research that develop "my" facts.  Then I am told that doesn't count.

I post what I post the way I post to add to the "discussion," using facts.  

I support the use of waterboarding against limited terrorist leadership members who are chosen because of the value of their information.  I am called all sorts of names and have my "warrior ethics, " challenged.  I "Copy and paste" articles about 4 former vietnam prisoners of war who were tortured by the international socialists, the communists in North vietnam, two of who were awarded congressional medals of honor, who were there with John Mccain and suffered the same torture he suffered.  They all 4 support the use of waterboarding on terrorists, in limited circumstances, to save innocent lives.  They also differentiate real torture, which they suffered and detail in those "copy and pasted," articles from waterboarding which they all acknowleged they had experienced and did not consider torture.  4 former P.O.W's who were actually tortured by the communists, not me, them.

So please.  I have facts as well, I cite my facts with sources to support my facts, and will not be brow beaten into ignoring those facts.

If you don't like the way the "discussion" is handled in the study, then either start your own threads, which all of you are capable of, or don't read or participate in mine.  You are all welcome to post there, just stop your B******g and choose one or the other.  I am polite, in the face of personal jabs and attacks, and I actually follow the rules, which some here actually try to skirt or who have broken them, and yet  I still welcome them to post.  Get over yourselves, and grow up.

CBS cares. (Craig Ferguson, late night talk show host)


----------



## elder999 (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=105100
> Billie
> 
> Maybe not blatant "razz", but there's certainly a flavor of piling on starting around here.
> ...



I don't know anything about that.

I do know that there's some history here-history that precedes your return to MT, but I'm just gonna let that go.

I am going to point out that the perennial "Junk the Study" thread finally comes along, and Billy takes it personally-thinks it's about him, when we've had that thread here several times. 

You should consider that, before you start thinking of him as being picked on.....


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 7, 2012)

billcihak said:


> I post facts. [SNIP]
> I support the use of waterboarding against limited terrorist leadership members who are chosen because of the value of their information.  I am called all sorts of names and have my "warrior ethics, " challenged.  I "Copy and paste" articles about 4 former vietnam prisoners of war who were tortured by the international socialists, the communists in North vietnam, two of who were awarded congressional medals of honor,



I'm going to ignore most of your diatribe, and simply point out that someone who "post facts" really ought to know that no such medal exists. It is the Medal of Honor.

I don't think it ought to be closed, but I really DO think it should be renamed the Cesspool, and that access should be limited to those who are active in the MA forums as well. This IS a martial arts site, after all.


----------



## billc (Sep 7, 2012)

Yes, for all you lovely people, I scroll down the martial arts topics each time before I end up in the Study.  I practice the FMA and there is little or no real activity in that Forum.  I also look at any sword related Forums and threads, again, nothing going on.  I have a Nidan in Kenpo, not much going on there either.  Yeah, not interested in what carry knife you are carrying either.  Not into MMA, results in brain cell damage due to repeated choking out and blows to the head.  Hey, that might be an interesting thread, why don't one of you go there and post "facts" about it.  I recently posted in the library and I also post on the rec room, so maybe if you wonderful people would start more interesting posts in the martial arts Forums, I might have more things to post over there...oh yeah, your too busy being offended in the study.  Very mature.  You guys do realize that there are over a hundred threads in the martial arts side.  You have to actively seek out the study, click on it, look for my posts, or whoever you guys want to B**** about that day, decide to click on that thread, click on it and then read it.  Wow, that is a lot of purposeful activity for a bunch of adults to engage in in a place they B**** about all the time.  Once again, if you like the martial arts threads, post there.  You never have to even see the study, let alone my threads that you all complain about but can't seem to stop yourselves from going to.  Are you sure you are adults?

Your post on the Sword arts Dirty Dog...



> You mean Olympic Fencing?
> 
> I prefer other forms of fencing. Forms that are more applicable to real weapons. Olympic fencing is fine, just as Olympic TKD is fine. But I personally prefer forms that are more applicable to real weapons.​




Doesn't exactly enliven the thread does it?  Perhaps you could post more and make it more interesting...oh that's right, you're too busy complaining about the study...


----------



## billc (Sep 7, 2012)

For the record, I have about 8  threads in the rec room.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 7, 2012)

Someone presented me with a solution to my headache a little bit ago that I;ll be discussing with them shortly.


This is a martial arts site. When someone hits 'new' and 9/10 posts are political, and mostly what could be considered 'biased/extreme', it can give people an incorrect view of the site.  This is not a shot at Bill...I've been guilty of going on passionate tears myself, and had to reign myself back to focus attention on the core.

I no longer do any martial arts. That makes it hard for me to participate in those areas.  If everyone active in the study made a few posts a week in the art areas, we'd rapidly triple our activity there.

The bickering in this thread is an example of the problem with the area. It's not supposed to be a NHB free for all, but someplace to focus intently on a topic.  That means tangents go in a new thread. That means attack facts not people. My view was of someplace educational, and maybe scholastic.  What we have is a Roman Senate, and I'm feeling a right bit like Julius. 

You have the Ignore option, you can do specific searches, and so forth.  I'm just, tired, of it all at this point. So if the discussion goes well, I'll be divesting myself of the headache, in a manner, shortly.  How that'll effect MT, will be announced soon.


----------



## arnisador (Sep 7, 2012)

TLDR.

My experience, going way back to Usenet, is that you need a way to let people vent about these things. It's better to section off an area and warn normal people away from it than to see these arguments busting out all over the site...which they will. (That's why The Study is here, in part.) People won't go to the other site because they know the audience of people won't follow them and their insights won't be read--they'll go to bed yet someone will still be wrong on the Internet. 

It's nice to be able to chat politics with those who get your martial arts analogies--as I like chatting politics with colleagues who get my math. analogies in another setting. But yeah, it's kind of nuts here. Unless you're prepared to simply suspend people who won't play nice, this is what you'll get.

Keeping it here is the least bad option, IMO.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 7, 2012)

elder999 said:


> I don't know anything about that.
> 
> I do know that there's some history here-history that precedes your return to MT, but I'm just gonna let that go.
> 
> ...



Its not a question of if its "deserved" its an issue of people stomping around in the pig pen then blaming the pig for the mud on their shoes. Either you jump in knowing the consequences or you stay outside the gate. 

If you are participating in a thread you are part of the problem yourself.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Omar B (Sep 7, 2012)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Someone presented me with a solution to my headache a little bit ago that I;ll be discussing with them shortly.
> 
> 
> This is a martial arts site.* When someone hits 'new' and 9/10 posts are political,* and mostly what could be considered 'biased/extreme', it can give people an incorrect view of the site.  This is not a shot at Bill...I've been guilty of going on passionate tears myself, and had to reign myself back to focus attention on the core.
> ...



The very reason I hardly post anymore.  It's no longer a MA site.  It's some weirdo forum where they bible thumpers and other flavors of nut job come to start a million threads in the study.


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Tgace said:


> Ya know what...if the guy is breaking the rules take appropriate measures. This constant stream of personal shots at the guy...to include threads devoted to razzing him is juvenile and almost a sort of bullying. Can you not simply ignore him?
> 
> Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2




Well, for the most part I do.
But for personal reasons and not because I dislike the guy.
With a very few exceptions - and I mean very few - he does not hurt a fly. 
but the stuff he posts is for the most part bias the least, untrue at worst. 
Bias I skip, because you can't argue with that.
Truth is another, especially when it pertains to Adolf the Unnecessary. 
Yes I do pick on him. I don't dislike him. If I did...well, I'd be ugly and probably banned. 

Yes, I have lost my cool before and gotten my warnings. 

I think I have cut and pasted a set of rule from a forum I am actually moderating (well, i should be but hey...) especially set for the heavy hitters in the debate field. By teenagers no less. 
According to those rules billie would have gotten a few disappointed looks from the staff a long time ago.
Why?
Because it's not a debate.
Dem's = bad is not an argument.
A link is not an argument. Nor is an excerpt of an article.



> 1. No swearing or name calling. There are other ways to  get a point across than swearing. Petty name calling and insulting  someones ideas or arguments is an answer for lazy debaters, and it  serves as a substitute for a real answer to the issue presented. There  will be no more of it.
> 
> 2. No derogatory religion-based comments or racism. While it hasnt been a huge issue yet, it may pop up in the future.
> 
> ...



Considering we are all adults here...I think that set of rules put together by a bunch of kids is impressive!
And yes, those guys would have been running circles around billie!
And Bill on some subjects. (Gosh I miss them...)


----------



## elder999 (Sep 7, 2012)

billcihak said:


> I post facts. The group listed may not like the facts I post but I always cite sources, and I "copy and Paste," to make it easier to see where I found my facts.



Well, that's it, Billy-no, you don't. An example:



billcihak said:


> I am told the Island of Tuvalu is sinking into the ocean because of the melting of the glaciers. I "copy and paste" an article that points out that the old measuring equipment used at Tuvalu was not accurate. When new equipment, modern measuring devices, were deployed...they showed no sinking. But my facts aren't fact.



The facts are in the images I posted elsewhere-images of people walking the streets of Tuvalu shin deep in water where there wasn't any before. The fact is that there is sea water in their cisterns, where there wasn't any before. The fact is that they are preparing to evacuate the islands at some point in the near future-for Australia, or New Zealand or Indonesia, or some combination thereof, because they realize their home will  become uninhabitable.

As for "scientific instruments," and their accuracy. Well, as you know, I have a boat. I can use the GPS to figure out where I am and chart a course where I'm going-that's the new way, and it'll get me there. I was raised on LORAN C beacons, though, and most of them are still in operation (look 'em up) and I can use those to get where I'm going. I was also raised on a chronograph and sextant-I can use the time of day, sighting on a star, an ephemeris and charts, to determine where  I am, and where I'm going. Any of these ways will get me there, with a varying degree of accuracy-GPS within 30 feet, and sextant to where I can see my destination and make my way there, usually. 

Put another way: I've been going to the doctor for at least once a quarter _all of my life._ They take the same numbers they always have: blood pressure, weight, etc.-it's all digital now, of course, but an old fashioned sphygnanometer will get your blood pressure fairly accurately, if you can count. I go to the doctor, a nurse sticks a digital thermometer in my ear, and it beeps and gives her my body temp. almost instantly.......

....but if I took an old-fashioned anal thermometer, and shoved it up your ***, it'd probably read 98.6F just as accurately after a couple of uncomfortable minutes....:lfao:

What I'm saying is, sure, "the instruments used were outdated, and newer ones showed the island wasn't sinking" may be a fact, but doesn't have nearly the meanings of the rising water level and salt  water in cisterns. Btw, the islands aren't "sinking," the water around them is rising-another *fact* that allows those who'd deny climate change to spin things-_of *course* the islands aren't *sinking*_ who ever said they were? :lfao:


So, no, Billy, all too often, your facts haven't been facts at all-Nazis, global warming, Thanksgiving, economics (btw, one of your go to guys, the one Ryan admires so much, Hayek? He thought *everyone* should get a salary from the government-that's a *fact*-look it up; and if it's not "socialism," I don't know what is....:lfao: ) you name it, and odds are you're factually challenged-and I really didn't want to do this in this thread (because, even if it feels like it is, this thread isn't about you-the frustration with the Study crops up every two years or so, election or not, but moreso in election years) but you went there, so I'm calling you on it.

No, Billy, your facts aren't always *facts* at all.....all too often, they're just spin pieces from partisan webpages. We've seen you tell relatives of concentration camp survivors the true nature of Nazism, and we've seen you tell me-quite insultingly and heavy handedly-about the nature of my ancestors (as if I, who gut-shot a coyote just so I could savor its screams while having my coffee, didn't know all about the strain of utter cruelty and depravity that runs through my blood-as though I even needed reminding from a _Slovak_ about such things) and, frankly, it's all very insulting, condescending, and just downright erroneous-if not deliberately fallacious. In another thread, you've managed to convince yourself (and, trust me, no one else at all) that there was no "southern strategy" in American politics, and that the Democrats have been and will always be the "party of racism," and that the Republicans are the "party of equality," and all that's right and just with the world, and, frankly, Billy, that's just plain out to lunch-as in, down the road, around the corner where the busses don't go anymore nuckin' futz. 'M'kay? Trust me, if there's one thing I know, what with the rampant Native American bloodlust coursing through my veins, it's 'nuckin' futz. :lfao:


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Well, that's it, Billy-no, you don't. An example:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




shhhh
think about your apology! 

(no wait, that was about the inappropriateness of your responses to him....


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 7, 2012)

elder999 said:


> ....but if I took an old-fashioned anal thermometer, and shoved it up your ***, it'd probably read 98.6F just as accurately after a couple of uncomfortable minutes....:lfao:



Rectal temps will generally register 1F higher than oral, so your example ought to say 99.6F. I'm just saying... 


Folks, let's try to remember that this isn't about ANY INDIVIDUAL, and we need to keep it that way. And yes, I know I've been guilty too, so there's no need to point it out.
Let's keep this on topic: The Study is, generally, a mess. Moderating it might cause the thermometer mentioned above to be snapped by the tension of the sphincter. What can/should be done about this?


----------



## granfire (Sep 7, 2012)

Dirty Dog said:


> Rectal temps will generally register 1F higher than oral, so your example ought to say 99.6F. I'm just saying...
> 
> 
> Folks, let's try to remember that this isn't about ANY INDIVIDUAL, and we need to keep it that way. And yes, I know I've been guilty too, so there's no need to point it out.
> Let's keep this on topic: The Study is, generally, a mess. Moderating it might cause the thermometer mentioned above to be snapped by the tension of the sphincter. What can/should be done about this?



well, yeah, it isn't about one individual...
But it would help if the individuals would not jump up and scream 'HERE' when some misdeed is mentioned....


----------



## seasoned (Sep 7, 2012)

I don't really go into the study that much, but I do enjoy the rational discussions at times that happen there. Me, not knowing that much about politics, at times get value from different opinions, and would hate to see it go entirely. 

I believe Tgace makes a good point, that has been made many many times before. 

I say "Ignore, stay out, comment and debate intelligently", but, if you do get involved, play nice and don't get personal. Life is to short to get so worked up over other people's opinions. 

The open apology that was given by Elder999, I feel was sincere, but I don't think it was excepted by offending parties. That would be a good place to start.

From Bob's post, it may be to late to have business as usual, and changes are coming. Whether you're a supporting member or just a free loader, the rules pertain to you the same. This is the best site on the net because of the set up and caring people, lets stop ruining it, because I can't imagine what else I would be doing at 12:43 am on a Friday night.

Time for bed... see ya.


----------



## Tames D (Sep 8, 2012)

Wow. How long does this stuff (********)have to keep coming up before Bob gets rid of the Study. This is a Martial Arts Forum right? Let the kids find another playground.


----------



## arnisador (Sep 8, 2012)

seasoned said:


> Whether you're a supporting member or just a free loader



Wait--I'm a freeloader?


----------



## Tames D (Sep 8, 2012)

arnisador said:


> Wait--I'm a freeloader?



You are no freeloader. You are a valuable contributor to this site. I enjoy reading your posts.


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 8, 2012)

You guys crack me up.  You have no self control.  You cry about how bad the study is yet you post here in the study daily.  If you don't like the study don't read it don't post in it.  Have some self control and stay away from it.  If you are cry its a martial arts forum then go.post there.  But noo we can't expect anyone to act like adults and exercise self discipline.  Its easy you don't like the study don't come here


----------



## Dirty Dog (Sep 8, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> You guys crack me up.  You have no self control.  You cry about how bad the study is yet you post here in the study daily.  If you don't like the study don't read it don't post in it.  Have some self control and stay away from it.  If you are cry its a martial arts forum then go.post there.  But noo we can't expect anyone to act like adults and exercise self discipline.  Its easy you don't like the study don't come here



The problem isn't a lack of self control by those of us who rarely visit the Cesspool. It's a lack of self control by those who DO spend a lot of time in here.


----------



## Tgace (Sep 8, 2012)

Dirty Dog said:


> The problem isn't a lack of self control by those of us who rarely visit the Cesspool. It's a lack of self control by those who DO spend a lot of time in here.



That makes no sense. If they were put on ignore or just not responded to there would be no problem. Y'all are obsessed with proving that someone is wrong on the internet.







Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 8, 2012)

Dirty Dog said:


> The problem isn't a lack of self control by those of us who rarely visit the Cesspool. It's a lack of self control by those who DO spend a lot of time in here.



How would you know if you didn't come to the cesspool?  And I would hardly consider you someone that rarely visits so if your so bothered by it stop posting in it.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 8, 2012)

So here is what seems to be going on in the thread
there are those that are for the study
those that against the study
bob is fed up 
bill is defending himself
and Arni is a freeloader 

But with all of this I cannot figure out if it all about the study or all about bill


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

Okay, I've watched this over the last day or two, and here's my take on the current situation...

The Study is meant to be for serious discussion of non-martial arts related topics. We're all agreed on that, yeah? The essential problem is that, really, that isn't what it's being used for. It has become a home of single agenda ideals and for the spouting of rhetoric. That's not discussion. Bill has taken the brunt of the blame for this, both from other members, and from himself (by taking the approach that this thread, although incredibly similar to others from the past here, predating his arrival), and has come up to defend his stance. Unfortunately, for better or worse, this defense has simply shown the biggest problem I currently see in the study... namely, that it is not being used for it's purpose: discussion of non-martial arts related topics. 

Oh, don't get me wrong, there's plenty of non-martial arts related threads in there.... but very little discussion. Instead, we have Bill (sorry to single you out, but hey, you did that yourself to begin with here) posting what he considers "facts"... which really are little more than highly biased and misleading spins on facts, more in line with the concept of opinion, rather than the actual simple facts themselves. People take those opinions, and argue facts against them... but Bill doesn't answer the counter argument. Instead, he posts more of his "facts". From the way he described it here (and correct this if it's wrong, Bill), he feels that he's providing credible sourced information, and is using that to express his argument. But the thing is, that's not discussion. It's parroting, it's spouting rhetoric, it's hiding behind someone else's opinion. If you have an opinion yourself, or a reasoned thought about something, put it down. And be willing to hear others.

Recently I decided to get involved in a thread (in the Study) on guns "saving lives". I was on the side of more gun control, but looked at a larger impression, based on my observation of the US, the membership here, friends on facebook, and my personal study (as well as scholastic study) of history, psychology, cultural sociology, and so on. My posts were my opinions, and my take on the entire situation. There were a few things that other members called me on, with them either asking for me to present a solution to the issues I'd identified (in my opinion), or to challenge my interpretation of some facts in historical and legal aspects. Each of the people who engaged me in that manner did so in the form of a discussion... which lead me to realize, for one thing, that in some areas I had been given a more "idealized" version of some history, that had other interpretations. So I learnt from that. And hopefully others might have gotten some food for thought out of my posts as well. 

This thread (the guns-save-lives one) was started by Bill. However, he didn't supply any counters to the discussion being put forth, he simply said (essentially) "Oh yeah? Here's more examples of the one thing I'm talking about". That's not a discussion. And that is the common trait we see.

There is a lot of talk in this thread about "well, just don't go in there.... just ignore it..." But here's the thing. A lot of us like good discussion. Some of us thrive on it. We like it when people challenge us, we like it when we're argued with. In my case, it helps me solidify, or clarify my own opinions and beliefs on things... and if my opinions or beliefs don't hold up against the argument, I can change them when armed with better information. So the Study can be a great place to go, for that purpose. But if all you get is "fingers-in-the-ears" parroting of others highly skewed opinions, spouting extremist rhetoric at you, without there even being the image of listening to what you're saying, why would we visit the threads there? Honestly, I see a lot of Bills threads and posts, and want to add to the discussion, but there's no discussion being had. There's just Bill, spouting a single belief, with his only support being those ultra right-wing personalities (who freely admit that their job fits more into "entertainment" than "information"... so why they're being looked to as "reputable sources" by Bill I can only put down to a lack of critical thinking), completely ignoring every post that demonstrates the issues and problems with what he's presenting. That's not a discussion, it's one person who refuses to listen. Why would I waste my time joining that?

In the end, no matter how much of the content is political, social, welfare-related, gun-control related, or anything else, if there isn't actual discussion being had, that's what's keeping people out of it. Ignoring it, really, doesn't solve the problem. The only thing I can think of is to encourage actual posting of discussion/debate. Because the biggest problem with the Study right now is that that isn't happening. And it's not happening because a few people simply won't engage.

Remember, the Study is for the discussion of non-martial arts related topics... not the badgering of others with them.

Anyway, that's where I sit. I'll wait and see what Bob is doing with it.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

Actually, I do much of both Chris Parker but people seem to be fixated on the articles I cite to put in a researched point of view that doesn't agree with their point of view. I have "discussions" here where people say I don't know what I am talking about, and they will simply state "facts."  Mind you, they are just putting these "facts" into the post and we have to accept them as "facts."  I post my sources so that whoever reads it can decide on the validity of my "facts," versus what I just put on the screen as facts.  I also comment as well...



> Besides our God given right to defend ourselves from human and other predators, there is also a lack of history in some of these arguments. Most of the poster here, if not all, live in stable, countries with the rule of law, a reasonably responsive government with a means of putting grievances before the government....now. To say that these same countries will be i the same condition 50 to 100 years ago is just not right. Would armed citizens be able to defeat a modern army...maybe, maybe not but they stand a much better chance to resist, if they have access to all types of firearms, at a minimum, the same weapon as the common infantry soldier they might have to fight.
> 
> It is not our right to decide for future generations what tools they are allowed to have to secure their freedom or their security, should the central government fail to meet its duties, by banning assault rifles today, and handguns or other firearms tomorrow.
> 
> Do you think the people of Germany foresaw the death camps in 1930? Would the victims have been worse off if they had access to "assault" rifles? Can you garuantee that a situation like that will never again happen in a modern nation? If not, then you don't have a right to disarm future generations of citizens.



This was part of my response to the other side of the "discussion," from the gun thread you wrote about.  It is my own thought on part of the issue.  The post also included really intelligent insights by Larry Correia an author and firearms instructor, so really it was a combination of the two.  I still don't know why how I post, or what I post bothers some people so much.  Many of the people here post things I disagree with, and have attacked me personally as they did it, and yet, I either stopped reading their posts, or I just counter posted.  How hard is that supposed to be?


----------



## Tgace (Sep 8, 2012)

What's keeping you from ignoring Bill and continuing a "discussion" with others?

It boils down to "Bill pisses me off and I have to comment on it".

The ignore user option is here for a reason. You all just lack self-control.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## elder999 (Sep 8, 2012)

Chris Parker said:


> the Study can be a great place to go, for that purpose. But *if all you get is "fingers-in-the-ears" parroting of others highly skewed opinions, spouting extremist rhetoric at you, without there even being the image of listening to what you're saying, why would we visit the threads there? Honestly, I see a lot of Bills threads and posts, and want to add to the discussion, but there's no discussion being had. There's just Bill, spouting a single belief, with his only support being those ultra right-wing personalities (who freely admit that their job fits more into "entertainment" than "information"... so why they're being looked to as "reputable sources" by Bill I can only put down to a lack of critical thinking), completely ignoring every post that demonstrates the issues and problems with what he's presenting.*That's not a discussion, it's one person who refuses to listen. Why .



QFT. :asian:


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

Another example.  In my Thread on the Republican national convention Master Dan put out a list of "Facts," one of which was that George Bush caused the 2008 financial meltdown.  Now, I can say, no he didn't.  Then everyone would say, "you're an idiot, yes he did, everyone knows that."  I choose to go to articles that support the "discussion," of the issue that shows that no, he didn't cause the mortgage meltdown, and in fact he tried to reign in Fanny and Freddy and was blocked by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, and some republicans.  Now, if I just state that, the response I get is, "you're an idiot, everyone knows George Bush caused the financial collapse."  When I link and quote articles, by people paid to research these topics and write about them, it isn't just me saying it, it is an actual professional journalist or academic saying it, or a blog that links to a professional journalist or academic researcher that leads to the information.  Yet this isn't seen as being part of the "discussion," just me copy and pasting.  It is far easier to say I am a troll, or an idiot, when I just say, "No, Bush didn't cause the financial meltdown," without supporting evidence.  I choose to support my "facts," with actual sources, and then let the reader decide to believe it, disregard it or see that perhaps, there is more to the argument than one side saying "everybody knows..." when in fact that isn't true.

Instead, everyone complains about what I post, how I post it, they say I intentionally go right up to the line of breaking the rules "but know how not to cross it," or call me a troll in actual word or insinuation.  Yes, that always adds to the discussion, doesn't it.

On the issue of national socialists, I cite world leading Ph.D's in economics, one of whom is a Nobel Prize winning economist, I also cite Jonah Goldberg, and John J. Ray ( behavioral sciences) and other Ph.D's in complimentary fields such as political science.  Yeah, that is a weak way to discuss an issue since everyone just takes my word for everything.  I give hard opinion from experts, and I am a troll...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Sep 8, 2012)

OK my questions has been answered...its all about bill


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Actually, I do much of both Chris Parker but people seem to be fixated on the articles I cite to put in a researched point of view that doesn't agree with their point of view. I have "discussions" here where people say I don't know what I am talking about, and they will simply state "facts."  Mind you, they are just putting these "facts" into the post and we have to accept them as "facts."  I post my sources so that whoever reads it can decide on the validity of my "facts," versus what I just put on the screen as facts.  I also comment as well...



Bill, I'm going to be blunt. Your "facts" aren't facts. They are opinions with the facts either distorted, or removed. That's why your sources aren't taken as reliable... that, and the detail that you always only go to the one (type of) source. There's no balance to your take on things, which is where the other people's opinions can come into it. But as you don't ever actually take on board anything anyone says that even slightly contradicts your take on things, or even parts of what you post that contradicts your take on things, then there's no discussion. Really, you're fine to have nothing but ultra-right wing ideals and opinions... but if you don't actually engage in dialogue (which, for the bulk of your postings, you don't), then there's no point.

I mean, we could talk about your post on "Actor Doesn't Like Southerners" thread... you completely missed the context of the comments that the actor was talking about (as did the article you cited), despite everyone pointing it out. You went on to complain that Jeff Bridges doesn't like the US because a particular speech a character of his gives in a TV show was "gold" for him as an actor... let me tell you, as someone with a slightly theatrical background, I'd love to have had things with that emotion and power to say.... and did you hear the second half of the speech? Or see the program at all (this was before the program had even debuted, from memory)? The character you were lambasting is written as a Republican, not another "evil Alan Sorkin Democrat"... so you should have been on his side. In fact, he describes himself as such in the show, but he separates himself out from those ultra-conservative identifying souls as he believes "tornadoes are caused by high barometric pressure, not gay marriage". And the second half of the speech (the first half basically saying that no, America is not the greatest country on the planet) essentially was a rallying cry to all that America has achieved in the past, and what it could achieve again... a cry to the great potential that exists in the land... a call for people to rise up and be what they idealize themselves as, rather than seeking to blame others for all that is wrong, to achieve, rather than rest and wait to be given. Honestly, if you didn't see it, go back to the thread, and watch the clip Elder put up... it has it in full. As an actor, it's gold.



billcihak said:


> This was part of my response to the other side of the "discussion," from the gun thread you wrote about.  It is my own thought on part of the issue.  The post also included really intelligent insights by Larry Correia an author and firearms instructor, so really it was a combination of the two.  I still don't know why how I post, or what I post bothers some people so much.  Many of the people here post things I disagree with, and have attacked me personally as they did it, and yet, I either stopped reading their posts, or I just counter posted.  How hard is that supposed to be?



Disagreeing isn't the thing, Bill... it's that you come across as not listening to a thing anyone else says, instead only interested in putting your agenda across. And yes, it becomes agenda when it is constant, consistent, and doesn't allow any deviation or discussion.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

Actually, I don't think I have ever mentioned Jeff Bridges in a post.  This is a great example of me stating my "opinion," on the subject and people not agreeing with it so I am a troll for discussing it.

then there is this...



> *completely ignoring every post that demonstrates the issues and problems with what he's presenting.*That's not a discussion, it's one person who refuses to listen. Why .



_I don't ignore those posts, I disagree with those posts and go on to post what I think and the opinions and research that I agree with.  I will not be brow beaten into agreeing with something I believe is false or wrong just because "Everybody Knows..." when they actually don't know.

The character in the Sorkin show is written as being a Republican because they are trying to pretend to be "fair and objective," by having a Republican go on diatribes against Republicans.  Yeah, that's fair and balanced.  Oh wait, would that be my opinion, I guess it would be.
_


----------



## Tgace (Sep 8, 2012)

Sigh...

You cant even ignore him here....


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

That's just the thing.  He disagrees with me.  I accept that.  Post your own thoughts, your way, in your own threads, as many as you like as long as you don't break the rules or are rude or impolite.  Or, and this is just as fine, come to my threads and post the things that you think should be posted.  Don't expect me to agree with you just because "Everyone knows..." but post what you want, on my threads, the way you want.  Be a grown up.  Stop complaining.

Sorkin is a hard left guy, and he made the character a Republican because he thinks that makes his hard left agenda more acceptable.  Amazing that he didn't make the guy a Democrat who decries the democrat party, the labor unions, or the NAACP or Jesse Jackson and their  attacks on the republicans and the country isn't it?  Instead the "Republican" commentator attacks the Tea Party.  Wow, that was original wasn't it.  You agree with this, I don't.  Go post on it yourself.


----------



## elder999 (Sep 8, 2012)

Xue Sheng said:


> OK my questions has been answered...its all about bill




Like I said earlier, no, it's not-we have this "get rid of the Study" thing every couple of years, especially election years. While I don't care for Billy's posting style, or his "go to guys," or his copy-pastas, or his dogmatism, or how he seems to be factually challenged, or ignores proven facts that contradict him, it's not about him-I've been accused of picking on him, but I just can't stand it when people refuse to acknowledge proven *facts*-if I really wanted to pick on him, I'd be pursuing his threads all over the place, instead of pointedly ignoring some, and simply ridiculing others.....fact is, though, if we look at the Study, there's very little discussion going on, and very few threads that aren't political in nature-I'd enjoy some discussion around ethical or philosphical issues, and occasionally scientific ones (get that enough at the damn dinner table, even, dammit...:lfao: ) I enjoy discussing the political issues of the day, but on that, we've all mostly had our minds made up for us, and the "arguments" just get stale, and go around and around-witness the whole "abortion" thing in the "Romney picks Ryan" thread, which really just looked like this:

_It's a *baby*!
It's a *fetus!*
t's a *baby*!
It's a *fetus!*
It's a *baby*!
It's a *fetus!*
It's a *baby*!
It's a _*fetus!
Baby!Fetus!Baby!Fetus!*

Without even getting into the all around ethical issues, because, as far as the "It's a baby!" side goes, that settles it, and anyone (me) who even says, _Hey, wait a minute-*this* fetus can't be a "baby," it's lungs won't work_" is accused of "jumping through hoops to justify abortion," when they've already _repeatedly stated their opposition to abortion on ethical grounds., _and were just stating that one couldn't (scientifically) call a "fetus" a "baby." 

Maybe Tgace is right-maybe we shouldn't bother talking to each other, since our minds are already made up-as in, _completely closed_. :angry:


It's not "about Billy," it's about quality in general.


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Actually, I don't think I have ever mentioned Jeff Bridges in a post.  This is a great example of me stating my "opinion," on the subject and people not agreeing with it so I am a troll for discussing it.
> 
> then there is this...



http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/sh...ike-southerners-but-see-my-movie-anyway/page4 

Post #49


billcihak said:


> Well, here is more on HBO a whole network that doesn't seem to like the U.S. How can you tell, well the programming for one thing...
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollyw...Not-The-Greatest-Country-In-The-World-Anymore
> 
> HBO gets dinged for the hit job on Sarah Palin, having a show that playfully puts Bush's head on a pike and now* Jeff Daniels and Aaron Sorkin make a whole show that shows a great dislike for the United States.* Not the best of moves with the competition from Redbox and Netflix getting more and more intense...





billcihak said:


> _I don't ignore those posts, I disagree with those posts and go on to post what I think and the opinions and research that I agree with.  I will not be brow beaten into agreeing with something I believe is false or wrong just because "Everybody Knows..." when they actually don't know.
> 
> The character in the Sorkin show is written as being a Republican because they are trying to pretend to be "fair and objective," by having a Republican go on diatribes against Republicans.  Yeah, that's fair and balanced.  Oh wait, would that be my opinion, I guess it would be.
> _



You don't often actually say you disagree. You say that whoever is giving different facts and information is wrong, and here's more of the same (ultra-right-wing ultra-conservative scare-mongering website unsubstantiated opinion) to back it up. Nowhere do you express an independent thought or opinion, you simply regurgitate what these extremist political commentators (who, again, freely admit that their job is to entertain, not inform) as facts, when frankly Bill, they ain't.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

You mean Jeff Daniels, yeah, I mentioned him.  Jeff Bridges is from True Grit and the Tron movie.  He did recently defend Clint Eastwood's appearence at the RNC though.

Yeah, if I think someone is wrong I'll say "Your wrong," then it is there decision to 1) prove me wrong in their postings, 2)imply I am a troll  3) ignore me and post about TKD 4) ignore me and move on with their life instead of complaining about the study.


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> > *Thread: Lets jettison the...*
> > This is a really self-centered post.You want others 2 grow up but this  has got to be one of the most juvenile responses I've ever read from  you; even tho we rarely agree, I'm disappointed in its quality. Why so  sensitive? - shesulsa09-06-2012 10:33 PM
> 
> 
> ...



Bill:

Discussion of reputation in open forum is against the rules.
Comments made in reputation are considered private communication and posting them without permission is against the rules.
Giving retaliatory reputation (rep wars) is also against the rules.

You have turned the discussion of a section of this board into a discussion about you. I stand by my comment - standing on a soapbox in a room with a bullhorn spouting your opinion louder and louder and louder is not discussion.  Making the entire study discussion about you and your posting habits?  This is thread-hijack and it's ALSO against the rules. It *absolutely is* self-serving, it *absolutely is* juvenile.

THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT YOU - IT IS ABOUT A SECTION OF THE BOARD YOU VISIT. IT IS ABOUT A BUSINESS DECISION FOR THE OWNER, IT IS ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY FORUM AND WHETHER OR NOT IT SERVES ITS PURPOSE TO MORE THAN A HANDFUL OF MARTIAL ARTISTS WHO VISIT HERE. 

NOT YOU.

Get it?

Not you, not me, not any single user. It is about this site and Bill, THIS SITE IT NOT ABOUT YOU.

I'm done with this discussion. Not because I'm "childish" or "not tough" but because I understand that the definition of insanity is continuing the same behavior and expecting different results. I don't expect your toxic behavior to change and I refuse to sacrifice my good air and energy on the lost cause of egoism.


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

Ah... yep, Jeff Daniels. Okay, that was me screwing up... good catch.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

Hmmm...Friedrich Hayek, though he was in a rap video on economics, is hardly an "entertainer," but he did win the Nobel Prize in economics.  Thomas Sowell, another person I quote, one of many of a very diverse pool of thinkers, isn't an entertainer either.   I use a lot of people when I cite articles.  I cite Fred Singer, not an entertainer, a meterologist and author, who wrote " Unstoppable Global Warming, evert 1,500 years." So please, I use many different, highly credentialed sources, and other sources, like Breitbart and PJmedia.  Breitbart does the job the main stream media won't.  

Breitbart covered the fact that the democrats removed the word God from their platform and then held three votes on the floor and still voted down including God in the platform.  The mayor of Los Angeles, who didn't know what to do, just said the ayes have it, when they didn't have it.  The main stream media, ABC, CBS, NBC didn't cover the most dramatic moment at the DNC because it would have embarrassed the DNC and would have alienated the minority voters in the democrat party who are more religious than the DNC delegates.  That is why I cite conservative media alternative sites. 

Face it.  You don't like what I post, or how I post it, and it really irritates you that I won't stop because you say I should.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

Yeah Shesulsa, tell it to someone who believes you.  You and pg smith bad rep me and do it where people can't see it.  You guys are sooooo...brave, and mature. 

I apologize for breaking of those rules.  I didn't mean to do it, not realizing it was against the rules to post it.  I am sure you will also chastize the others who have continued "hijacking" this thread.


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

billcihak said:


> Hmmm...Friedrich Hayek, though he was in a rap video on economics, is hardly an "entertainer," but he did win the Nobel Prize in economics.  Thomas Sowell, another person I quote, one of many of a very diverse pool of thinkers, isn't an entertainer either.   I use a lot of people when I cite articles.  I cite Fred Singer, not an entertainer, a meterologist and author, who wrote " Unstoppable Global Warming, evert 1,500 years." So please, I use many different, highly credentialed sources, and other sources, like Breitbart and PJmedia.  Breitbart does the job the main stream media won't.
> 
> Breitbart covered the fact that the democrats removed the word God from their platform and then held three votes on the floor and still voted down including God in the platform.  The mayor of Los Angeles, who didn't know what to do, just said the ayes have it, when they didn't have it.  The main stream media, ABC, CBS, NBC didn't cover the most dramatic moment at the DNC because it would have embarrassed the DNC and would have alienated the minority voters in the democrat party who are more religious than the DNC delegates.  That is why I cite conservative media alternative sites.
> 
> Face it.  You don't like what I post, or how I post it, and it really irritates you that I won't stop because you say I should.



I'm talking of the Breitbart style internet and radio commentators here. Rush Limbaugh admitted it point blank when caught saying something particularly nasty, and it goes across the board of that ilk. But the point is that yeah, I don't like a lot of what you post. Not because of your posting it, but more down to who you're posting. Because I really don't have much of a clue about you, yourself, Bill. You let these overblown voices speak for you, so I really don't know how to take you. It smacks to me of someone with no ability to have an independent thought, or apply any critical reasoning or thinking... but I don't have anything to base that on either, as you haven't shown enough in any direction to say if you have such traits. The thing is, though, whether I like the opinions you post or not isn't the biggest problem, and really, I have no issue with you posting them, especially if they are what you truly believe. My issue is that you post them, then don't debate. You just negate what anyone else says and continue with more of the same. You don't have to stop, but you really should look at what a "DISCUSSION" forum is... because you're missing the "discussion" part of it. You put up good material that can lead to good discussions from both sides, but there is no engagement. And, in a nutshell, that is why people have a problem with your posting style.

I will say, though, that I'm glad you put down what you martial arts background is here, as frankly, from all your time on a martial arts board, I didn't have much of a clue. How about you come out and see the rest of us where there's daylight once in a while, yeah?


----------



## ballen0351 (Sep 8, 2012)

shesulsa said:


> Bill:
> 
> Discussion of reputation in open forum is against the rules.
> Comments made in reputation are considered private communication and posting them without permission is against the rules.
> ...



So you used an entire post aimed at someone to tell them its not about them?


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 8, 2012)

See what the problem is yet?


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

You need to look more closely at my posts on the other side.  The martial arts side is slow in most of the areas that I am most interested in.  The FMA threads just don't have much going on.  I like the General Self-defense thread, but again, not much going on.  All summer long I posted movie reviews in the rec room.  I also list the books I read in the Library.  Last night, in looking at Dirty Dog posting in the sword thread, I found something to comment on.  I post on what is interesting to me on the martial arts side, but how often can you post about things that aren't moving?  I also studied Mugai Ryu iaido for 6 years but you don't see a lot moving on Iaido either, or japanese sword arts in general.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

I have about 8 threads in the rec room, and no one even acknowledges that, it is just the study they want to complain about.  Keep in mind, I do not bring politics into the other threads on Martial talk, not even the movie threads.  I will talk about movies and T.V. but not from a political point of view.  If there is a political point of view I bring it to the study.  Or try to anyway.

And I rarely mention limbaugh or beck or hannity for that matter.  I prefer Breitbart and PJmedia and powerlineblog.com and Hotair.com.

If I was interested in TKD it seems like there might be something to post on there.  But I'm not.  So I can't.:wink:


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

Then start some discussions in the martial art sections. Ask about differences between Mugai Ryu and Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu/Muso Shinden Ryu, and how the Seitei version of Nukiuchi is different to the way you were taught in Mugai Ryu. Talk about your experiences in FMA, what you like, what you don't, what you found to be a positive in your training, your favourite drills etc. Go to the Kempo technical area and hash things out with the guys there... I've done that a number of times. 

This is a martial arts forum... if you're a prominent member (and you are, Bill), and no-one has a clue what martial arts you do, that's saying something. And it's not a good something.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

I just double checked, the Sorkin thread was a T.V. show discussion but because it was political in nature I posted it in the study.


----------



## Chris Parker (Sep 8, 2012)

Yeah, as I said Bill, what you're posting isn't really the issue, it's how you go about it, both in the initial posting and the follow up. If you want to discuss political issues stemming from TV shows, or movies, you're more than free to... but realize that others will see such posts and point out that you're looking for an agenda where one doesn't necessarily exist. So be aware of what you're starting. If everything is "Hollywood hates America, they only like Democrats, us poor Republicans are the victims... have you seen Batman? It's all about OWS!", then it gets tires pretty quickly. And it gets tired even quicker when you don't hear any argument from anyone.


----------



## billc (Sep 8, 2012)

They can look up my preferences under my name, and I have posted on those subjects before.  However, those topics still don't move, and my real love right now, well since the 1980's, has been the FMA, but it isn't my job to post just to post to make the martial side more popular.  How about the list of characters I mentioned, if they are the ones so hard on for the martial arts side, they should be the ones leading the way by posting tons of material on the martial arts side, thus creating a list of recent posts on the martial arts side that overshadows the tiny Study side...but they don't, do they.  Instead of doing what you suggest, and what they are arguing for and condemning me for...they don't do it themselves...and yet, I need to take their criticism of me seriously.  I like you chris parker, I head over to the sword arts side sometime today and post some more to try and get it moving, that is where my passion for the arts really is...but so is politics...it is martial arts without the pain or travel time or the tuition payments.  If you want to talk anything sword related, I'll pay more attention and we can start talking sword arts and FMA.

  As a side note...as the character Cain says, from the Heroes Die Series, "nobody ever just asks me...they always think they have to bully me." Then he goes on to cause several wars and kill a bunch of people.  The second book was interesting when it focused on the Acting school where he recieved his training.


----------



## jks9199 (Sep 8, 2012)

Thread locked by staff.

You may consider an appropriately sarcastic comment about dogs and playgrounds to be inserted here.

jks9199
Asst. Administrator


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Sep 11, 2012)

*Administrator Notice.*

A reminder concerning the proper use of the reputation system, and if you feel there has been abuse.

From our Terms of Service:

*5.3.2 Problem involves comments in the Reputation system.

*Please use the "Contact Us" link at  the bottom of all forum pages. Give as much information as possible  about the matter so that we can locate the correct "ding".   _Please see *Section 12 *__ for details on the Rep System_


*
* *Section 12* *What is the Reputation System, How It Works, Policies, Etc.* 

*What is reputation?*
The reputation system is very similar to the Karma system seen on other  popular websites and forums (Slashdot.org, for example). Its purpose is  to hopefully give users an idea of how respected, knowledgeable,  helpful, gracious, etc., a person is. It is a system in which you rate  your peers. It is a system that, hopefully, will make you think twice  about your posts. Try to help others by giving reputation to the people  you believe know what they are talking about and are the most helpful!  Try to earn more reputation by helping others and giving the most  detailed answers, while avoiding being disrespectful to others.

*What are good and bad things to give negative reputation for?*
Negative reputation should be given if the person is posting something  that detracts from the conversation. If the post is rude, inappropriate,  breaks forum rules, is not gracious, etc; these are all good reasons to  give negative reputation. If you have a personal grudge with someone,  their art, teacher, etc, is it not appropriate to give them negative  reputation for no reason. Giving negative reputation because you don't  agree with what was said is not an appropriate use of the reputation  system. People are entitled to their own opinions, and just because you  don't agree doesn't mean the user was wrong or not contributing to the  conversation. If you are disagreeing, it is considered polite to explain  why.

*How much reputation can I give out? Are there any limits?*
There are quite a few limits in place to prevent minor abuse of the  reputation system. Obviously there cannot be a flawless system, but  these limits try to curb any intentional abuse. You must have 10 posts  and 10 reputation points in order for your reputation to count on other  people. Until you meet those requirements, your reputation will show up  as grey dots (see below). Everybody is limited to giving out 40  reputations per day; you cannot give the same person reputation until  you have given reputation to 40 other people. This prevents friends from  giving 10 reputations to the same person every day. Use them wisely!

*What are good and bad things to give positive reputation for?*
Reputation should be given to people who post meaningful, helpful, and  thoughtful posts. Any post that contributes to the thread in a positive  way probably deserves positive reputation. This does not mean that you  agree with what was said; the point brought up may be completely  opposite to what you believe, but it may be a good point nonetheless,  and worthy of a pat on the back. Giving positive reputation to someone  because they are your friend and deserve to have a few more green dots  next to their name probably isn't a good reason to give positive  reputation.

*What the Reputation system is:*
* A way to indicate your approval or disapproval of someone&#8217;s post in a polite manner.

*What the Reputation system is not:*
* A popularity contest
* A private message system
* A place to hurl anonymous insults
* A place to flirt/harass or otherwise bother
* A place to air personal/political/religious agendas
* A place for advertising (This is an immediate site ban)
*All messages left with reputation points must conform to our normal content guidelines.*

*Reputation System Abuse*
If you believe someone has crossed the line, please contact the Admin  Team (use contact link at bottom of page) and give us specifics on what  rep is in question. We will investigate it.

If you are found guilty of abusing the rep system, you may receive a  warning, infraction points and/or lose permission to use the system for  up to a year.

In addition, the offending points will be reversed, which is defined as the following:
- Your negative points become positive points thereby boosting the person you intended to slam
- You may take a negative hit on your own reputation




We have reviewed the rep given the past 11 days, and are reversing, negating, and penalizing those who have been determined to have abused the system. 
Warnings and Infractions are also being issued.

The Rep system is here to provide a fun extra way of giving people feedback. It's not a stick to smack people with, and use must conform to our posted TOS.
Tit for Tat abuse will NOT be tolerated.


----------

