Not really, I'm bored with this already and might be wrong anyway. I was just trying to explain what they were actually responding to, and why they used the word "harassment" the way they did. Since there is no one from A+ to explain their reasoning I was trying to. But I won't anymore because I don't care enough and don't even understand it all myself.

stijndeloose wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Yes, that is what A+ thinks of as harassment. That is why they seem to use it where it shouldn't be used. And abuse to them is whenever a person feels abused. That is how they use those terms. Some people feel confused how x can be harassment or abuse over at A+ and that is why. Also, once someone says they feel abused or harassed if you try to question them about it that is called "gas lighting" and one can be banned for it.

Eowyn Entwife didn't exactly leave much room for the possibility that it was a matter of interpretation, though. Her post is a fairly straightforward accusation of intentional harassment.

Imagination Theory wrote:So, with the limerick thing 3 people there felt harassed. So Globe (and anyone else who makes someone feel something bad) was suppose to try to understand where they were coming from, not get on the defensive (which some thought was threatening) and then say "sorry".

Then Eowyn should understand how accusation of intentional harassment affect people. Glob the Funct had every right to call her on that.

Surely it must be harassment to keep levelling charges of harassment at people?

Nah. It's like accusing innocent men of being rapists. It's ok.

stijndeloose wrote:Glob the Funct had every right to call her on that.

I'm having bad flashbacks to the days of Usenet. Classic flame with funct and glob.

Imagination Theory wrote:Not really, I'm bored with this already and might be wrong anyway. I was just trying to explain what they were actually responding to, and why they used the word "harassment" the way they did. Since there is no one from A+ to explain their reasoning I was trying to. But I won't anymore because I don't care enough and don't even understand it all myself.

Humpty-Dumpty definitions of 'harassment' are of no fucking general use. Read it and weep,

stijndeloose wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Yes, that is what A+ thinks of as harassment. That is why they seem to use it where it shouldn't be used. And abuse to them is whenever a person feels abused. That is how they use those terms. Some people feel confused how x can be harassment or abuse over at A+ and that is why. Also, once someone says they feel abused or harassed if you try to question them about it that is called "gas lighting" and one can be banned for it.

Eowyn Entwife didn't exactly leave much room for the possibility that it was a matter of interpretation, though. Her post is a fairly straightforward accusation of intentional harassment.

Imagination Theory wrote:So, with the limerick thing 3 people there felt harassed. So Globe (and anyone else who makes someone feel something bad) was suppose to try to understand where they were coming from, not get on the defensive (which some thought was threatening) and then say "sorry".

Then Eowyn should understand how accusation of intentional harassment affect people. Glob the Funct had every right to call her on that.

I keep on getting his name wrong. Not on A+, no. If someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" no one can question that without it being "gas lighting". Also, when someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" that doesn't always mean they are saying "you are an abuser, you are a harasser". That is why one should not get upset. One is suppose to say "sorry" and understand what they did wrong.

This isn't what I think, I actually disagree with it, but those are the rules and guidelines at A+.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Not really, I'm bored with this already and might be wrong anyway. I was just trying to explain what they were actually responding to, and why they used the word "harassment" the way they did. Since there is no one from A+ to explain their reasoning I was trying to. But I won't anymore because I don't care enough and don't even understand it all myself.

Humpty-Dumpty definitions of 'harassment' are of no fucking general use. Read it and weep,

I'm shocked. Just joking, I know that. I don't write well and confused a lot of people by what I meant. I guess I don't do gossip well. I should have at least wrote all the names there, then it wouldn't look as much as "me" talking, but I am lazy.

stijndeloose wrote:Nah. It's like accusing innocent men of being rapists. It's ok.

You know... I don't know why I am complaining. I always fancied being the first xenoanthropologist, and here's the perfect training ground.

Imagination Theory wrote:

stijndeloose wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Yes, that is what A+ thinks of as harassment. That is why they seem to use it where it shouldn't be used. And abuse to them is whenever a person feels abused. That is how they use those terms. Some people feel confused how x can be harassment or abuse over at A+ and that is why. Also, once someone says they feel abused or harassed if you try to question them about it that is called "gas lighting" and one can be banned for it.

Eowyn Entwife didn't exactly leave much room for the possibility that it was a matter of interpretation, though. Her post is a fairly straightforward accusation of intentional harassment.

Imagination Theory wrote:So, with the limerick thing 3 people there felt harassed. So Globe (and anyone else who makes someone feel something bad) was suppose to try to understand where they were coming from, not get on the defensive (which some thought was threatening) and then say "sorry".

Then Eowyn should understand how accusation of intentional harassment affect people. Glob the Funct had every right to call her on that.

I keep on getting his name wrong. Not on A+, no. If someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" no one can question that without it being "gas lighting". Also, when someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" that doesn't always mean they are saying "you are an abuser, you are a harasser". That is why one should not get upset. One is suppose to say "sorry" and understand what they did wrong.

This isn't what I think, I actually disagree with it, but those are the rules and guidelines at A+.

Surely this is wide open to abuse?

Can't people just close down everything via this magical word?

Imagination Theory wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Not really, I'm bored with this already and might be wrong anyway. I was just trying to explain what they were actually responding to, and why they used the word "harassment" the way they did. Since there is no one from A+ to explain their reasoning I was trying to. But I won't anymore because I don't care enough and don't even understand it all myself.

Humpty-Dumpty definitions of 'harassment' are of no fucking general use. Read it and weep,

I'm shocked. Just joking, I know that. I don't write well and confused a lot of people by what I meant. I guess I don't do gossip well. I should have at least wrote all the names there, then it wouldn't look as much as "me" talking, but I am lazy.

I think that there is no escaping that it is you talking. Occupational hazard.

Yes, very much yes, that is why there are so many locked and deleted posts and threads (there are threads pages and pages long that just get deleted). It has also happened a few times where two people each say the other is abusing or harassing them, then the mods just choose a side which they aren't suppose to do. It is stupid. I hate how one can't even defend ones self. If someone "feels" something then that is the truth of it. Oh, and say two or more people are talking about a place or thing, the one that doesn't like the place or thing, because they felt bad there is the one who is right it. Always.

Cito di Pense wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:Not really, I'm bored with this already and might be wrong anyway. I was just trying to explain what they were actually responding to, and why they used the word "harassment" the way they did. Since there is no one from A+ to explain their reasoning I was trying to. But I won't anymore because I don't care enough and don't even understand it all myself.

Humpty-Dumpty definitions of 'harassment' are of no fucking general use. Read it and weep,

I'm shocked. Just joking, I know that. I don't write well and confused a lot of people by what I meant. I guess I don't do gossip well. I should have at least wrote all the names there, then it wouldn't look as much as "me" talking, but I am lazy.

I think that there is no escaping that it is you talking. Occupational hazard.

I guessed you or someone else was going to say that!

Imagination Theory wrote:I keep on getting his name wrong. Not on A+, no. If someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" no one can question that without it being "gas lighting". Also, when someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" that doesn't always mean they are saying "you are an abuser, you are a harasser". That is why one should not get upset. One is suppose to say "sorry" and understand what they did wrong.

Saying you feel harassed is one thing, accusing someone else of actually harassing you - as Eowyn did - is another.

Spearthrower wrote:

Surely this is wide open to abuse?

Can't people just close down everything via this magical word?

There is something in operation over there I like to call the Thymarchy (from the Greek "thyma" meaning victim) which determines how and if you can silence dissent by claiming victimhood.

A straight, white, cis-gendered, neuro-typical male person can never claim abuse. All newcomers to the forum are considered to be this. Your rank in the thymarchy depends on how many adjectives you can strike off that list before you commit an infraction.

Imagination Theory wrote:Yes, very much yes, that is why there are so many locked and deleted posts and threads (there are threads pages and pages long that just get deleted). It has also happened a few times where two people each say the other is abusing or harassing them, then the mods just choose a side which they aren't suppose to do. It is stupid. I hate how one can't even defend ones self. If someone "feels" something then that is the truth of it. Oh, and say two or more people are talking about a place or thing, the one that doesn't like the place or thing, because they felt bad there is the one who is right it. Always.

After being abused by the - I would say professional, but presumably they don't make money from it - amateur victims... do people bother coming back?

A+theism looks like an online Lord of the Flies.

scott1328 wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:

Surely this is wide open to abuse?

Can't people just close down everything via this magical word?

There is something in operation over there I like to call the Thymarchy (from the Greek "thyma" meaning victim) which determines how and if you can silence dissent by claiming victimhood.

A straight, white, cis-gendered, neuro-typical male person can never claim abuse. All newcomers to the forum are considered to be this. Your rank in the thymarchy depends on how many adjectives you can strike off that list before you commit an infraction.

What if I am a lesbian, black, transgendered, idiot female who also has the crushing disability of having been born into the body of a straight, white, cis-gendered, neuro-typical male?

I think I've found the chink in their impermeable (to reason) armour!

stijndeloose wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:I keep on getting his name wrong. Not on A+, no. If someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" no one can question that without it being "gas lighting". Also, when someone says "I feel abused, I feel harassed" that doesn't always mean they are saying "you are an abuser, you are a harasser". That is why one should not get upset. One is suppose to say "sorry" and understand what they did wrong.

Saying you feel harassed is one thing, accusing someone else of actually harassing you - as Eowyn did - is another.

Sometimes the mods do say "we know you feel harassed but don't call whoever a harasser ...yet". They didn't this time. Maybe they changed the rules and guidelines again? I think it was wrong to do that and wrong to suspended him for asking what she meant.

So, to anyone who knows, what did the limerick mean? I still don't get what " then she felt ill" means? Ill how?

Dunno. Maybe he mistrusts bankers...

Imagination Theory wrote:
Sometimes the mods do say "we know you feel harassed but don't call whoever a harasser ...yet". They didn't this time. Maybe they changed the rules and guidelines again? I think it was wrong to do that and wrong to suspended him for asking what she meant.

What? More gossip? Why is gossip so useless, IT? Because it is about what people did, instead of about what they believe.

stijndeloose wrote:Dunno. Maybe he mistrusts bankers...

That is how I read it, that the banker made her feel ill because of the lots of stuff bankers do that makes people feel ill. I thought it went well with Buckles limerick.

As a Vogon, I must point out that your poetry is absolutely stunning!

In your honour:

There was a young lady called Buckle
Who lived life with calmness and chill
Until she dealt with a banker
who was a real wanker
and she ended up feeling quite ill.

I'm pretty sure it is the "and she ended up feeling quite ill" line that has the harassment in it, if one views it as harassment.