Happy birthday, buddy!!! Hope you have the BEST birthday ever, and many more!!!! :heart: 🎂🥳💃🎈🎉🎊🪅
Resorting to "attempting insults" with an overly-emotional fueled response usually only comes across in a debate as irrational or will be seen as illogical fallacy
1st,there is no such thing as illogical fallacy.fallacy by itself meant invalid/faulty reasoning. therefore,the word illogical is redundant.its just a friendly reminder.
Thank you kindly for this reminder. I appreciate your helpful efforts to further my improvement in executing combinations of these specific nouns and adjectives consecutively within a sentence so no more time and space has to be wasted on such trivial matters within response formats such as this. :)
2nd.i am not the one who started the altercation.
My initial response was not to shift blame toward either party regarding the subject matter in question (to which I am not part of the debate itself); but rather to offer constructive and friendly advice in a welcoming manner amid what seems to be a continual unnecessary escalation of drama to which tempers and stress are likely running high. This of course being only an observation regarding posts of instigating nature from yourself that spontaneously appeared in an unrelated topic, to which I will address further below within this response. My aim was simply to be helpful to you, as I am thankful you reciprocated in kind with the friendly reminder you stated above.
i dont remember being confrontational in any way whatsoever.
I understand, but you must be able to see how it could appear as such intent from yourself when rather consistent insults such as "name-calling" began without provocation in an unrelated topic.
but,as you can see,this semi literate buffoon,@The-Mods,
⬆ An example of the "name-calling" I mentioned above. In regards to, as you stated: ⬇
i dont remember being confrontational in any way whatsoever.
went on engaging in ad hominem attacks towards yours truly on the very next reply,unprovoked.
Just as insults of name-calling would also be seen as confrontational attacks resulting in provocation toward any individual user you tag.
my FIRST PRINCIPLE is to treat others how they treated me.i responded in kind,
I, personally, would rather advocate the principle of level-headedness, maturity, and "taking the high road" to disregard whatever may be deemed unnecessary (or without function) to the actual matter of debate and not worth an escalating response rather than meeting negativity with likewise negativity. Two wrongs do not make a right. However, continual "jabs" of insults or hatefulness will only prove to be a hindrance for resolve and understanding of valid points to be addressed on the subject matter itself. Thus straying from the core matter at hand and only prolonging fruitless attacks for the sake of drama, toxicity, or needless "revenge".
and the whole gang got the wind of this and they decided to gang up on me. that is how the legendary internet feud between the lone freedom fighter(me) against a group of goons led by @Janet began.
so,if you truly are advocating for civil dialogue or being able to control one's emotion while engaging in a debate,why dont you send the same comment towards these people as well?
all these people are guilty for being overly emotional and engaging in uncivilized dialogue as well as severely lacking in decorum,right?
now,show me that youre not bias,and lecture them about your version of 'morality' like you did to me.
To address all the above sections of quotes: No one else is responsible for your own decision to respond in what manner you will. To blame others for ones own conduct, in my opinion, is seen as an excuse to exhibit lack of maturity and not taking responsibility for playing a role of instigating retorts or continual escalation resulting in whatever may come back at you: tarnished reputation, or no longer being taken seriously.
you can do that,right?
I am not part of this debate. I responded solely to you on the grounds that you began posting in an unrelated topic seemingly with the intent to needlessly instigate further drama, attacks, and provocation to which you spoke of. Nonetheless, to whatever your goal was, that thread began to be filled with the same hateful "back and forth" from this thread. I would certainly hope your intent was not to hijack another user's topics thread out of spite or pettiness. To answer your question, all the users you mentioned will see this. I can assure you, this is guaranteed.
Through my experiences on this site, I have seen this very thing happen in the past to which one user seems to gain a lot of attention (which is usually their intent) through toxicity and drama to which groups of regular known users of this community will almost always respond by taking action, sometimes through unity, in efforts to try to put an end to drama. Or at least through downvotes and reports, bringing altercations, such as this, to the attention of staff members and representatives of this site.
Taking a look at yourself, no matter what anyone else says or conducts themselves (they are responsible for their own actions); is it really worth all this? I believe you are passionate to your view of the subject matter that should be debated. There are just better ways to go about educating or informing people of what you may know through your own education or experience. Staying cool and calm will very much be efficient to get a point across or to spread the information you wish. For those who choose not to listen, why bother? It's definitely not worth the stress. This is the internet, this is only a chat site. Nothing to get worked up over. :) I humbly ask that you please enjoy yourself more and not worry so much over anyone else. It's a far more desirable experience without the unnecessary stress. 👍 Hope this helped in some way!
Take care! :wave:
2). The sanctions/actions by the mods are not clearly indicated/stated here. There is no "ban on sight" order here. So make it clear. If you want to impose a stricter rule, then mention here explicitly.
Clearly, who laid out these rules are bunch of amateurs pretending to be good users.
The role of a moderator is an appointed position. The screening process for a user under consideration to be appointed involves a prerequisite level of observed and applied behavior as well as responsibility. After consideration for any particular user to enter the process of training to become a moderator, TalkWithStranger and the moderation team will already have a level of trust established with the candidate user through already said:
That having been said, any actions of enforcement executed which would not be stated in writing under any rules or terms of service would ultimately be a warranted judgement call by the moderator that falls within the expectations and obligations of the position itself. As with any position of authority, these warranted judgement calls are at the discretion of each and every moderator. This is done with any position of authority due to the fact that they were appointed to that position with that very level of trust in their judgement already established by TalkWithStranger and the current staff.
In short, the response to your concerns which you stated in #2 of your post is that within the authority granted by TalkWithStranger through the aforementioned screening process is that moderators can and will impose enforcements at each moderator's discretion.
An example of this discretion would be repeated offenses that show obvious signs of impending encroachment of users or chat and infractions on rules clearly stated. This is a quality that is obligatory for anyone within the appointed position.
I hope that helped to clarify your concerns in these regards. Thank you.
@CeReal_ HAPPY BIRTHDAY, REALSIES!!!!!!!!! 🎂🥳🎈🎉🎊🪅💃
Very happy birthday!!! Hope it's the best one yet and many more to come!!! :heart:
@ssll-sg Resorting to "attempting insults" with an overly-emotional fueled response usually only comes across in a debate as irrational or will be seen as illogical fallacy; therefore ultimately negating any debate which will then have become an "altercation".
I understand you have a point to get across and that is very much your right. Establishing a manner of civil dialogue without measures in extremities such as clear escalation of emotions or direct targeting with ill intent would aid much more efficiently to your refutations within said debate.
This was only meant to be friendly advice. Hope this could help you out! Take care! :wave: :)
@Morf yep. looks clear to me.
This is one of the problems of this site, which we have pointed out many times in the past.
What I and a few other users brought to light in the past was clique-like behavior, bias, division and drama within the team of global moderators and admin back in 2018. Moderation has drastically improved in cohesion and professionalism since then, with maybe a rare exception or two.
TWS gave too much "power" to the mods, which most of the time leads to abuse of that power. This is not the first time I experience such abuse of power by the mods.
Some users repeat the same infractions of rules and exhibit a pattern of problematic behavior over and over, which in turn results in repetition of outcomes. Which in layman's terms would mean: Repeating an action and then complaining of that action incurring the same reactions.
In regards to TalkWithStranger giving power; it is my belief that the site is instead doing the bare minimum to achieve the goal of the site running on its own without creator input. To which that is from a business standpoint.
How can we, regular users complain about such abusive mods? Clearly, no room for that here because of the so called "trust" by TWS and the mods.
Emailing TalkWithStranger via [email protected]
That is by far the best way I have found to contact or get their attention. I have also found that method to get the quickest turnaround responses.