Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 04:33pm PT
|
I kind of like ants, myself. They're industrious, quiet, useful members of our ecosystem, whether the real world or SuperTopo. Ok, a few kinds bite or sting, and most make a bad smell if you squash them. But most are harmless and functional, albeit a bit dull. Some are even commemorated in Werner's Ant Tree, and a few other routes in the Valley are known for their ants. There are many ants (aka lurkers?) on SuperTopo, who aren't noticed much, but are there when needed.
Ant poo isn't within my knowledge, but I'd never noticed it was a problem. Likewise, ants rarely seem to have unfortunate interactions with my windshield.
There are, sadly, other insects which infest the real world, and SuperTopo, and annoy others. Some merely whine. Some are distracting - if you let them. A few bite and sting, get squashed on the windshield/server, or are otherwise annoying or obnoxious. Almost all have a role in our ecosystem, even if it's only as food for birds or each other. (Yikes - I'm beginning to sound like Werner.)
In normal social interaction, such as a campfire, the annoying insects would soon comply with behavioural norms, or be made to leave. That's not so easily accomplished in a virtual environment - lessons in social interaction learned from parents or kindergarten seem to get forgotten. I don't think there's any easy way to prevent such behaviour without sacrificing other desirable attributes. To take one example, some well-known climbers have wonderful stories, but are shy. They might tell their stories under a pen name, but not if their real name was required.
I simply ignore threads and posters who either have nothing relevant to say, or who say it in an offensive manner. There's sadly too many, although many such threads are easily identified and bypassed. A few weeks ago, a friend died in a rappelling accident. There was a thread about it on another climbers' forum. Two or three idiots marred it with irrelevant insults. I simply posted something asking that all those contributing review their posts, and remove or edit anything that wasn't relevant and appropriate.
It would be nice sometime to have a constructive discussion about old generations giving way to the new, a classic question for the poets, but one relevant to climbing and SuperTopo. The median age here may be 40 or more - many of us are still active, often at a respectable level, but for most of us our best days are behind us. New climbers sometimes see the world in new and different ways, some of which may even be better. No climber has a monopoly on wisdom and knowledge, and if we hope that others might learn from us, or be entertained, we should remember that we also can still learn.
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2007 - 05:21pm PT
|
You guys are too deep for my simple mind, I guess.
I always thought censorship was to suppress or eliminate things that are in opposition to your own point of view. I mean, for example, I cited the Bush administration, where they haven't wanted the world to believe global warming is a reality. So they had some of the best scientists in the world write essays on the subject, thinking they would get some good info on their side of the argument. To their suprise, every one of the essays confirmed that global warming is happening. So the Bush administration edited (censored) every one of those essays. I don't know if you saw the documentary, but every one of those scientists was appalled that his or her words were altered, and they all got together and made a public protest. All the critical things were changed, eliminated, or even rewritten. That is pure self-serving censorship.
I don't want to cut out anyone's opinion or feeling, if even they vehemently disagree with me, and even if some of what they say is really objectionable. I'm not afraid of dissent, discussion, differences of opinion, heated debate, or any of that. I'm hurt by slander and falsehoods and petty criticism that is calculated to injure. I am an artist and have very deep feelings. But I am not destroyed by someone not liking me. And I have to give them that right. But I gave the example above of posts that simply come in out of nowhere, their only possible value being the humor of their utter incongruity, or their obscene non-sequitur nature, such as,
"Welcome, Doug Robinson, to the forum. Good to have you here."
"I loved your Pratt piece."
"I didn't like some of your Pratt piece."
"I don't like you because you were partly to blame for our having to give up pitons. What's this clean climbing stuff? I love my pitons."
"Your mother sucks cocks in hell." (that famous line said by the possessed girl in the Exorcist, sorry for the example).
But you see how this is not an opinion, nothing in agreement or in disagreement with anything, not even pertinent to anyone, just an obscene intrusion. If I start a thread, perhaps it could imply some small bit of ownership? I can choose not to go to other threads started by people I know are offensive. I can do the best I can to read around garbage, and I can sigh when a good thread is hijacked and ruined by a sudden rush of demented bugs, but in my own thread I might be able to do a little clean up, when the exorcist arrives. That was the possibility I was thinking about -- not insisting on. As with John Stannard, I can hardly imagine how it could work, though, with so many opposed, but I wanted to hear what people had to say. To cut out that line by the possessed girl is not removing anyone's opinion. You are eliminating something that isn't anything to begin with. It has to be something of value for you to call it censorship. Even Wes's juvenile blurtings at least verge on some kind of an opinion, undisciplined, illogical, mean-spirited often, shallow as a puddle of bug juice, as they might appear to some readers (certainly not me...). I can live with some of these kids who find fun in contention for contention's sake, but the pure inanity, or less than inanity, cannot really be of value, can it? If it is, then I really need to get a clue, I guess.
Karl said,
"I have to say that you are calling for what amounts to censorship."
As I said, I am easily offended by mean-spirited remarks. That seems to be my nature, but ultimately I can live with them. Snyd said some hot headed things, and then we got to talking, and now I think a lot of him. His initial remarks hurt, but I didn't want to remove them. Censorship is to control others, in order to protect yourself. I don't want to control any person who is any kind of regular person, even if thy hate everything I say and do. I want to clean off the "your mother sucks * in hell" stuff, and only in my own threads, of which I am author. I guess that is a question. Should not an author have some say in what becomes of his "published" discussion? But as I have said, I'm not demanding anything, just thinking aloud.
To me, it's like creating a route in Tuolumne. You place (hopefully) a minimum of bolts, widely spaced, taking care and getting pretty tired making the route the best you can, and then someone comes a long and whams in a bolt right at the beautiful runout section, the really classic testpiece section of this route. Would you chop that bolt? I know a lot of people who would. Others would say the happy bolter has his freedom and the right to do what s/he wishes, that the rock belongs to everyone, and that there is room for all sorts of kinds of people and climbers.
Karl says,
"you'll notice that you've talked repeatedly and at length about 'Small Minds' and compared people and their contributions to very ugly things."
That's a good point, Karl. I should be called to accountability for that. I shouldn't do that. I should be kinder probably, but usually I am very kind, and it does seem small to say some of the things some people say. Maybe I should change the wording to, "They have too much time on their hands." But now, wait. Am I now being censored subtly? This is all getting confusing. I don't often attach those negative descriptive phrases to a single specific person. I let people wonder to whom I refer. They can see if they bear any likeness to those words. Some will not make the connection at all. I am extremely respectful of people who deserve respect. I have a low tolerance for those who are mean-spirited or who are bullies, who want only to harm. I have always tended to be a mirror of a sort and bounce back to people the spirit they send my way. Some people hate what they see in me, and it's because they see themselves. It's a strange quirk of mine that usually serves me well but at times makes things a bit difficult. Those who are flagrantly stupid, want to injure others verbally, or whatever, don't like me much, as they see themselves in that mirror.
Karl said,
"When Melissa asked for specific names and examples of what needed to be removed, you balked and called the thread closed.(at least for yourself)."
I thought I had given examples, such as the "I want to such a dog's purple boner." What I was saying to Melissa is that I was simply getting tired of it all. I was running out of things to say, and nothing I was saying anyway was of much value to anyone. I didn't "balk." I just had reached that "point" of fatigue, at least for that day, seeing little progress, though some have said progress was made. And here I am back at it again, sigh. But at least I took the suggestion and made a post on the 50 year thread. Not a great post, but something.
I appreciate all your feedback, everyone.
Pat
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 06:27pm PT
|
Wes wrote:
And you were completely right for doing it. I would have been right there with you... only they would have been the ones in the hospital.
Right...you look like you could barely fight your way out of a wet paper bag. Talk is cheap and you seem to have a lot of it.
A balding 20-something pebble puller. Everybody run.
Of course this is in the name of good fun!
|
|
MikeL
climber
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 08:37pm PT
|
Welcome, Oli, to the forum. It's good to have you here.
"If you want to make enemies, try to change something."
(Woodrow Wilson)
|
|
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 08:45pm PT
|
Not really on topic, but that rock looks great.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 09:45pm PT
|
Tar...it also looks a little on difficult side...maybe why Wes can't do it!
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 10:21pm PT
|
Was he playing a video game or were they five hostile women bikers...that might explain his success???
Looks about 5.8...145 and balding. He better have something else going for him.
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 21, 2007 - 10:21pm PT
|
He said, "censorship -- the imposition of an "official" standard of what is acceptable by a central authority -- is -not- going to happen"
I am hardly a "central authority," and in no way am I trying to impose an "official standard" of what is acceptable. But few walks of life worth walking are without a few "standards."
|
|
Melissa
Gym climber
berkeley, ca
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 10:44pm PT
|
(Mostly regarding khanom's request...)
Do any of yous really use the killfile feature or tailor your viewing to some rating threshold on other sites? If there's one thing that would be a bigger waste of time than skimming through OT and random crap, it's trying to peice together the non-sequitors that would be pretty much everywhere if some of the more prolific posters were nixed.
As for post rating...I'm thinking that the prom kings of supertopo are already implicit and actually scoring each other will do little more than piss people off.
If the other sites with their killer filters and such are so superior, why is this site so popular? Why did the poobah's eventually settle here?
The best signal to noise that I've ever seen on an internet climbing forum was rec.climbing. It was also the least moderated in a formal sense, but the one where bullshit got shot down the hardest. Part of the reason for it's demise is that when the www beat nntp as a way of using the internet, Supertopo had the best signals...residual noise in whatever quatity be damned.
Isn't it about time for an Ouch! post involving a purple dog dick, Tim Stich, Bear 46, and Crimpie sunbathing? It's all on topic so long as the topic is Supertopo and not necessarily rock climbing!
|
|
Wonder
climber
WA
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 11:14pm PT
|
I hope this hits 300.
|
|
Wild Bill
climber
Ca
|
|
|
Jul 21, 2007 - 11:29pm PT
|
Ouch! That's too much.
Ride 'em cowgirl!
That vomiting ant would be SuperTopo's Wanker-in-Chief, A. Crowley. Say hello to Crowley -
At least Wes can climb.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 12:57am PT
|
"karma points of the user ....."
Hahahahahaha ,,,,,, Oh man .......
You know.....
I like watching good climbers and I like watching poor climbers.
There's just something I always learn from both.
|
|
Oli
Trad climber
Fruita, Colorado
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 22, 2007 - 01:10am PT
|
I don't know these people, or their intent, but in defense of Raimit, he deleted a post that was offensive to me. That showed a little touch of class, in my eyes.
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 01:17am PT
|
A kill function might not be Web 2.0, but Web 2.0 would be overkill.
Try kill function first. Everyone gets to customize their view of ST without censoring the view of anyone else.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 01:33am PT
|
khanom
Don't get me wrong I totally understand your points. I just thought it was funny (user karma points) to me.
Do whatever you like, but me I like to "see" everything.
I don't like wearing sunglasses, unless I'm in the snow.
|
|
MikeL
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 11:22am PT
|
khanom:
Is it your opinion that your method would provide more or another kind of feedback to people who respond to posts? Sort of like: "approve" or "disapprove"?
|
|
MikeL
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 11:57am PT
|
You've done a fine job of making yourself clear. I think I get it. Sorry for being so naive about it and making you repeat yourself.
Thx.
EDIT: It would be a different experience. Not bad or good, just different.
|
|
atchafalaya
climber
California
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 12:00pm PT
|
Dear Webmaster, please dont f*#k with/up supertopo. Love, atchafalaya
|
|
dipper
climber
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 12:10pm PT
|
Slashdot.org uses a system that lets people keep an eye on each other. Not sure how well it works as I am not a member and only rarely browse that board to keep an eye on the uber-geeks of the world.
Maybe Chris Mac et. al. could look into replicating that sort of system or use some parts of it here.
I am not sure how to do so without censoring, but it would be refreshing to not have to wade through the babble when reading an otherwise interesting, intelligent and informative thread.
Do not feed the troll is a good start. But how to keep those with split personalities, or other mental defects from replicating their woes online? That is, one person with multiple handles.
Having a section for adults and another section for...other warrants more thought.
Pat, don't let the bastards wear you down. Please keep sharing your pearls with us.
|
|
Crimpergirl
Social climber
St. Looney
|
|
|
Jul 22, 2007 - 12:58pm PT
|
I looked at the digg thread posted. Interesting concept (though I am in the leave-it-as-it-is camp). What was fascinating is the most of the blocked posts were equally as stupid as many of the unblocked posts. Not sure it accomplished much. My .02 dollars.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!