|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 16:32:11 GMT -6
Here is the discussion
Could you explain how that is racist? It seems to me that 204P has some good knowledge of Sean Combs' work as a producer or watches some really bad reality TV.
So Spouse please give me your logic of comparing that discussion to the Imus quote?
Here is the KKK one \
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on May 23, 2007 18:06:11 GMT -6
In response to Archwinsome: 1/ One suggestion for improvement - don't use this site when elections, referendums, or any other matter with opposing views is on the floor to posture a one-sided point of view. 2/You can't possibly believe your identities are or will remain anonymous. Actually, I have no problem with people knowing who I am and what I stand for. 3/My hope is that this meeting is to truly improve the behavior that was demonstrated during the most recent election. It was ridiculous and totally unacceptable. 4/I see that this Eagledad was very vocal during the election but now is no where to be found. With any luck if he was the administrator he has flown away. 1. So you believe that there should be no opinions made during any time when there is a referendum or other election ? If not, who decides what is one sided and what is a give and take discussion as has always occurred on this board - you ? The purpose of this board is for people to present their opinions and that is what happens - in every thread. Each person is allotted to give their side of the issue - is it supposed to stop if more people from one side or the other start posting ? 2/ There are always ways of finding out who 'anonymous' posters are - in fact many posters on this board know other posters. Few would know the majority, however this sounds amazingly like the Herald article on those who hide behind anonymous posts, all from a reporter who admitted they never visited the site. VERY few people here are anonymous to all others and the identity of most of the more frequent posters is known. There may be some other posters (including those who are not part of your view of the majority) who would not be thrilled to have their identity known - so it is left that way. 3/ If you believe the behavior here was ridiculous or unacceptable, then I don't believe you would add much to any discussion we would have. This is my opinion, not that of anyone else here or the mods, as they can all speak for themselves. I believe the board exists to post facts and details that many others do not get via the papers and do not have because of lack of time to be able to attend SB meetings / referendum debates / etc. This site exists for debate - plain and simple - and if you have ever frequented any other board you would know that this board is moderated to a level rarely if ever found on any other BLOG sites. Visit a Yahoo financial board for any company and tell me what you find; cussing and swearing and personal threats and bigotry and hatred -- supposedly under the guise of a financial information board. The only other site I belong to is a site for fans of all things Disney, and this board is far more civil than that one also.... Try typing in a swear word or anything like it - the site changes that word before it hits -- Do discussions sometimes get heated - yes - and why ? Because there is more than 1 side to most opinion here - and that is a good thing. The best example is one moderator who was anti referendum for a good 6 months of posting, but changed their mind based on facts presented here. This site is a learning tool as most here have the best interest of the community and the children at the heart of their points - regardless of what side of a discussion they take. If one is not looking to debate facts, or present facts, or maybe listen and learn from someone with an opinion different than their own, than this is not the place - I would agree whole heartedly....this is not the official IPSD 204 information site. 4/ There is much more to the Eagledad point than is going to be detailed here - as each person is deserving of their privacy - so random personal shots are not going to draw out anything more on that. ED was/is an excellent administrator that helped keep this board open for ALL opinions, unlike some other sites that restricted admission during the referendum - only allowing for one viewpoint -- so that all opinions could be heard, and had a place, including yours now. I urge you to continue to post and share your thoughts - but as far as trying to tell the board how it should / should not operate -- exclusion of thoughts as opposed to inclusion of everyone I cannot see ever becoming a platform IMHO. I cannot remember one thread in 2 years that was all one sided - and I also would not like to tell any moderator they could not post if they have a 'majority' opinion on the board....they are a part of this virtual community. Also a fact - all the mods do not agree on all the topics. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 18:43:00 GMT -6
Just got a call from Stonethrow after PMing her husband. She is quite confused. Please explain to me why her access is banned because her husband posted his feedback that he was requested to do in a private message once he read the archives. I see that some on this site have asked for response from her husband, but how is that possible if he is banned. And for what? We may not all agree on things but as a community we are entitled to voice our opinions and not have our comments monitored for what is fair and what is not. Are you still planning the suggestions for improvement meeting, because if so I will be there. We need to work better as a community in District 204, more important OUR CHILDREN.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 18:45:56 GMT -6
I would guess personal attacking one of the mods is the reason why. It is their board to moderate.
That is pretty funny after what your friend just posted.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 18:52:02 GMT -6
Just got a call from Stonethrow after PMing her husband. She is quite confused. Please explain to me why her access is banned because her husband posted his feedback that he was requested to do in a private message once he read the archives. I see that some on this site have asked for response from her husband, but how is that possible if he is banned. And for what? We may not all agree on things but as a community we are entitled to voice our opinions and not have our comments monitored for what is fair and what is not. Are you still planning the suggestions for improvement meeting, because if so I will be there. We need to work better as a community in District 204, more important OUR CHILDREN. Just called her back to request that she try again, because I refuse to believe either of them would be banned. Sent him an email and she says that her husband did not get a PM since he cannot access it. Now my outbox says that the mail was sent. Who is the administrator now that Eagledad does not seem to be doing it? |
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 18:53:53 GMT -6
How could he get the PM if he can't access his account?
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 18:55:20 GMT -6
I would guess personal attacking one of the mods is the reason why. It is their board to moderate. That is pretty funny after what your friend just posted. Bob, her husband was asked to provide feedback after reading the archive file (and told he would find it quite informative about Davis). Her husband had no clue about half of this stuff and tried to better understand. In discussion was taking more of your similar stance, and his wife realized that some of the postings she mentioned he never read because they were not there. Now both are banned. Come on...now that is totally unnecessary. All that was needed was an explanation. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 18:58:46 GMT -6
How could he get the PM if he can't access his account? Left her a message at home to have her husband check his private messages for one from me (we all know that men are not always timely with checking non-business email). It was actually one letting him know that all is not bad on this site (if you must know the content). Anyway, she called me back. See how easy it is to explain yourself when one is puzzled about something. Valid question deserves an answer.  |
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 18:58:55 GMT -6
Did you not read his post? It was the exact opposite of my stance , The P. Diddy comment is Imus-like and racist. That was no where near Imus like. |
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 19:11:45 GMT -6
Did you not read his post? It was the exact opposite of my stance , The P. Diddy comment is Imus-like and racist. In my experiences, intent and impact are not one in the same. Life experiences color how we receive messages. What I see as racist, you may see as excusable or you may not. The KK clan comment that I too read is still unexcusable, IMO. Enough said though, moving on with that topic. I would like an answer to my question regarding why the Administrator would ban my friend who did not post anything that would warrant that type of action. And who is the new Administrator? Many questions were asked of spousestonethrow and would leave a person like me believing that no response means they have no basis to back up comment. Enough said. As I told both, you have to take the good with the bad. That is life. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on May 23, 2007 19:17:09 GMT -6
I would guess personal attacking one of the mods is the reason why. It is their board to moderate. That is pretty funny after what your friend just posted. That would be my guess as well -- posting a differing opinion is one thing - attacking the mods and calling the board's behavior among other things ridiculous seems to be done as an ill conceived attempt to discredit all of the things this board has accomplished for new visitors to the site. And the suggestion for improvement - not post comments when there is a referendum or election , if those comments somehow are determined ( by whom ? ) - to be in the majority of opinion, how then does that make this a discussion board ? This site exists for exchange of information and ideas. Far and away the vast majority of people who frequent this site ( pro and con on different topics) do have the best interest of the 204 children and community at the center of their opinions. However there have been a few come and go with other agendas - that is not what this board is about IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 19:28:14 GMT -6
Why don't you PM one of the mods?
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on May 23, 2007 19:31:33 GMT -6
I'll try to find out what's going on and why and get a solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by southsidemom on May 23, 2007 19:31:39 GMT -6
Why don't you PM one of the mods? I would have to now what a mod is and also wish to give it more time and attention. Frankly, I do not. Can't seem to get a direct answer, which is an answer in itself for me. Have a nice evening everyone. I need to catch the end of American Idol...finale. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on May 23, 2007 19:35:51 GMT -6
Spouse today
Spouse:
Re: School Board Meeting 5-7
« Reply #55 on May 8, 2007, 10:30pm »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 8, 2007, 10:25pm, archwinsome wrote:I'm sure someone can shoot you their local archive of it.
Now I am really confused. I am a new poster on this site and you are suggesting that someone can shoot me their local archive? Are you saying that some people have access to the MD thread and others like myself do not and must rely on what those that can see it post as gospel?
[/quote]
So he is asking for an archive on 5/8 when his wife had one already?
|
|
