Watch this one get deleted...

[GateandGarden]

I essentially asked what those other things were earlier and you didn't respond. Care to clue me in to what they might be?Wellllllllllllll (as Stevie would say when she doesn't know exactly what else to say) I don't think I'm ready to get into a big discussion about it (and that's just a general statement--not directed at you) but I have problems with

this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22065

and this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22097

That should give a general idea, anyway.

[sodascouts]

Hey, I've seen in my own family what the death of child does to a person. If her rage, anger, and grief are half of what they've been for my relatives, it's honestly easy for me to see why she's acting this way. In her situation, there is no logic, just basic, raw, primal emotions. See it for what it REALLY is. It's much easier to understand it than to be critical of it. Is it inhumane to challenge her statements? Yes. Not because of her feelings, but because of what it says about us. I'd like to think we're better than that.

So is one who's lost a child permitted to disagree with Sheehan publicly?

[KarmaContestant]

We can't stroll into a library, take off all of our clothes, and curse at everyone who walks past us.

Have you tried this? I have wanted to....but I'm kind of shy.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Hey, I've seen in my own family what the death of child does to a person. If her rage, anger, and grief are half of what they've been for my relatives, it's honestly easy for me to see why she's acting this way. In her situation, there is no logic, just basic, raw, primal emotions. See it for what it REALLY is. It's much easier to understand it than to be critical of it. Is it inhumane to challenge her statements? Yes. Not because of her feelings, but because of what it says about us. I'd like to think we're better than that.

Ok...now I'm really just thinking you are in your own little world now!

So you think that it is inhumane to challenge this lady's statements?

WHAT THE FLYING F*CK!

She lost a son...yes I get that...horrible! But now she is all loopy making statements such as the original topic I brought up...That hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault! And you're telling me that it is wrong of us to challange statements like that...To be a liberal you really are not much a fan of the 1st amendment are you?

To say that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault, to me, is just as insane as saying that it was the fault of the "sinners" down there in the gulf!

So I think that we should be able to challenge statements like that!

[GateandGarden]

Have you tried this? I have wanted to....but I'm kind of shy.I was thinking the same thing when I read that! :laugh:

[dissention]

Wellllllllllllll (as Stevie would say when she doesn't know exactly what else to say) I don't think I'm ready to get into a big discussion about it (and that's just a general statement--not directed at you) but I have problems with

this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22065

and this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22097

That should give a general idea, anyway.

Well, I don't know what to tell you. :shrug: This is a private board and if the owners want the rules to be enforced after quite a long period of "anything goes," it's up to them. I wouldn't be up in arms because someone requested me to post "f*cking" instead of "****ing," and I wouldn't take offense at being told to take the sexual talk down a notch, but that's just me. I think this is all a lot of bluster over some very minor things.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Wellllllllllllll (as Stevie would say when she doesn't know exactly what else to say) I don't think I'm ready to get into a big discussion about it (and that's just a general statement--not directed at you) but I have problems with

this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22065

and this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22097

That should give a general idea, anyway.

haha...I knew that was what else was bothering you! You must have not seen my post a few pages back...

don't worry sweety...those things bother me too!

[GateandGarden]

To say that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault, to me, is just as insane as saying that it was the fault of the "sinners" down there in the gulf!

So I think that we should be able to challenge statements like that!I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with her but I think there's a difference between saying someone is responsible for a catastrope and someone wanted the catastrophe to happen and wanted people to die.

[GypsySorcerer]

I would just like to know why the sudden interest in the FAQ and guidelines. We were reminded to tone down sexual language via a sticky; yet we had several "perv" threads throughout the winter and spring. (To which I had no objections and participated in.) But out of nowhere, we get are requested to tone down the sex talk. Also, seemingly without warning, we were asked to avoid the "foulest" of language. Again, why now?

[dissention]

Have you tried this?

I have and it was quite liberating. They were so stunned at the beauty of my body that they wanted to make me a permanent fixture amongst the other works of art adorning the main hall.

[Johnny Stew]

Wellllllllllllll (as Stevie would say when she doesn't know exactly what else to say) I don't think I'm ready to get into a big discussion about it (and that's just a general statement--not directed at you) but I have problems with

this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22065

and this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22097

That should give a general idea, anyway.You know I love you, Hillary, but why do you have a problem with us cracking down on the excessive language and vulgarity? It is prohibited in the Ledge rules, and always has been.

People used to self-censor, but in recent times things have gotten not just a little out of hand, and many users have complained.

All we're asking is that people conduct themselves with a little bit of decorum again.
It's really not that hard to do.

[GypsySorcerer]

Well, I don't know what to tell you. :shrug: This is a private board and if the owners want the rules to be enforced after quite a long period of "anything goes," it's up to them. I wouldn't be up in arms because someone requested me to post "f*cking" instead of "****ing," and I wouldn't take offense at being told to take the sexual talk down a notch, but that's just me. I think this is all a lot of bluster over some very minor things.
But with the "profanity filter" evidently working, why even start a thread asking us to tone down the language?

[Johnny Stew]

Have you tried this? I have wanted to....but I'm kind of shy.I work in a library... I can only get away with that on "Casual Fridays." ;)

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with her but I think there's a difference between saying someone is responsible for a catastrope and someone wanted the catastrophe to happen and wanted people to die.

I understand that...

But my point of view was...

that there are people who actually think that it was the fault of the "sinners", so I think that blaming President Bush is no worse...IMO!

That's where I was coming from anyways...but I see what you mean.

[GateandGarden]

Well, I don't know what to tell you. :shrug: This is a private board and if the owners want the rules to be enforced after quite a long period of "anything goes," it's up to them. I wouldn't be up in arms because someone requested me to post "f*cking" instead of "****ing," and I wouldn't take offense at being told to take the sexual talk down a notch, but that's just me. I think this is all a lot of bluster over some very minor things.Okay. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. I would rather return to the days of less moderation. I don't think that it was literally "anything goes" before; it was more lax but not that extreme.

We can't have complete free speech but I would like more. To quote Sondheim "Why can't it be like it was? I liked it the way that it was."

I feel it's disrespectful to all of us, frankly. And I think the f*cking versus f ucking thing is just silly. They're pretty much the same thing so I find that whole thing kind of laughable.

These things may seem minor but when they're all put together then they seem offensive enough to me. Yes, I know it's a private message board so it's not my decision but I can certainly disagree.

[dissention]

But with the "profanity filter" evidently working, why even start a thread asking us to tone down the language?

I just posted the word "****ing," so it can't be working very well, sweetie. :laugh:

[Sugar]

Wellllllllllllll (as Stevie would say when she doesn't know exactly what else to say) I don't think I'm ready to get into a big discussion about it (and that's just a general statement--not directed at you) but I have problems with

this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22065

and this--http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=22097

That should give a general idea, anyway.

Wow. I'm really surprised, Hillary.

There were some people who had expressed feeling uncomfortable by some of the excessively explicit talk on the board. We decided that toning it down a bit wasn't too much to ask for the sake of making this board a welcome place for all Fleetwood Mac fans.

I took quite a bit of care trying to word my post in such a way as to not sound preachy or judgemental.

Is toning down the sexual content really so troubling to you?

[GateandGarden]

You know I love you, Hillary, but why do you have a problem with us cracking down on the excessive language and vulgarity? It is prohibited in the Ledge rules, and always has been.

People used to self-censor, but in recent times things have gotten not just a little out of hand, and many users have complained.

All we're asking is that people conduct themselves with a little bit of decorum again.
It's really not that hard to do.I love you too, Brian. I can't help the fact that I have a problem with all of this. It certainly isn't against you.

[dissention]

I understand that...

But my point of view was...

that there are people who actually think that it was the fault of the "sinners", so I think that blaming President Bush is no worse...IMO!

That's where I was coming from anyways...but I see what you mean.

Stop repeating the right wing talking point that she blamed the hurricane on Bush. She did not. She blamed his policies that cut New Orleans funding that would have helped them to brace for such a disaster. There is a difference if you take the time to read what she wrote.

[sodascouts]

I actually agree that it's a good idea to cut back on the graphic sexual language and profanity. For a brief period it was inescapable - spilling over into every forum. I'm glad they're trying to raise awareness about it.

[Johnny Stew]

I would just like to know why the sudden interest in the FAQ and guidelines. We were reminded to tone down sexual language via a sticky; yet we had several "perv" threads throughout the winter and spring. (To which I had no objections and participated in.) But out of nowhere, we get are requested to tone down the sex talk. Also, seemingly without warning, we were asked to avoid the "foulest" of language. Again, why now?Since we now have a new crop of moderators, we're taking the opportunity to remind Ledgies of the rules that have always been in place, but that we had perhaps gotten a little too lax on enforcing in recent times.

[GateandGarden]

Wow. I'm really surprised, Hillary.

There were some people who had expressed feeling uncomfortable by some of the excessively explicit talk on the board. We decided that toning it down a bit wasn't too much to ask for the sake of making this board a welcome place for all Fleetwood Mac fans.

I took quite a bit of care trying to word my post in such a way as to not sound preachy or judgemental...even friendly.

Is toning down the sexual content so troubling to you?I don't think you are preachy or judgemental at all. Far from it. Like I just said to Brian, I don't have an issue with you, never have. You have always been friendly.

I just don't like being limited. I guess I'm surprised myself because I thought people would be expecting identical or similar protests. :shrug:

I'm all for someone's right to complain about sexual content as I'm for their right to complain about anything but I don't agree with prohibiting it on the board. I think the board should be for all FM fans and I think that if certain fans have a problem with two gay guys or a guy and chick flirting with each other incessantly and getting raunchy and such, then they don't have to read those threads. They can put particular posters on ignore. They can skip over certain posts in threads. I skip over a lot of things that I don't like rather than requesting that they be removed completely.

[KarmaContestant]

To say that Hurricane Katrina was Bush's fault, to me, is just as insane as saying that it was the fault of the "sinners" down there in the gulf!



First off - Sorry to everyone, as I am being quite voyeuristic in my reading of this thread when I really don't care about the subject matter. I am being entertained. I admit it. I would like to add my perspective to the above comment in quotes, however, by saying that while, yes, it is 'insane' to blame Katrina on Dubya, there is a deeper meaning to this.... Two words. Kyoto Accord. Our country could do our part to cut back on global warming by complying with the Kyoto Accord - but the current administration feels it (the Accord) is biased in favor of developing industrial nations. Still - two wrongs don't make a right.

Just my 4 cents.

*on edit, I did not actually hear anything that Cindy said with my own ears - only the hearsay repeated in this thread.

[Dreammms]

Stop repeating the right wing talking point that she blamed the hurricane on Bush. She did not. She blamed his policies that cut New Orleans funding that would have helped them to brace for such a disaster. There is a difference if you take the time to read what she wrote.

See this is the debate that was going on before. What is the harm in it?

[sodascouts]

See this is the debate that was going on before. What is the harm in it?

EXACTLY. :)

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Stop repeating the right wing talking point that she blamed the hurricane on Bush. She did not. She blamed his policies that cut New Orleans funding that would have helped them to brace for such a disaster. There is a difference if you take the time to read what she wrote.

I actually did read what she wrote...

and perhaps I should bring that up as well. Because Cindy said...

"Well, George and I are leaving Crawford today. George is finished playing golf and telling his fables in San Diego , so he will be heading to Louisiana to see the devastation that his environmental policies and his killing policies have caused."

OK, I don't understand how this woman, who last time I checked was not an environmental specialist, can make such an off the wall statement...and while not only blaming his "environmental policies" she also blames his "killing plicies", so I'm guessing she means the War when she says this! :confused: :eek: :confused: The woman is somehow thinking the war has something to do with the hurricane too?

SOOOO...essentially I do see it as her basically blaming Bush for the hurricane.

*NEWS FLASH* ----- SH*T HAPPENS ----- IT'S NOBODY'S FAULT -----

we now return to our regularly scheduled program already in progress...GENERAL HOSPITAL!!! OH YEA BABY! ;)

[Brwn_eyes0511]

First off - Sorry to everyone, as I am being quite voyeuristic in my reading of this thread when I really don't care about the subject matter. I am being entertained. I admit it. I would like to add my perspective to the above comment in quotes, however, by saying that while, yes, it is 'insane' to blame Katrina on Dubya, there is a deeper meaning to this.... Two words. Kyoto Accord. Our country could do our part to cut back on global warming by complying with the Kyoto Accord - but the current administration feels it (the Accord) is biased in favor of developing industrial nations. Still - two wrongs don't make a right.

Just my 4 cents.

*on edit, I did not actually hear anything that Cindy said with my own ears - only the hearsay repeated in this thread.

And your point is very well taken...and perhaps there is more this administration could do to help with the environment...that said...

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?

I guess my main problem with her statement was that she is taking every chance she can now to attack the president and even goes as far as to blame a natural disaster on him.

[Sugar]

I'm all for someone's right to complain about sexual content as I'm for their right to complain about anything but I don't agree with prohibiting it on the board. I think the board should be for all FM fans and I think that if certain fans have a problem with two gay guys or a guy and chick flirting with each other incessantly and getting raunchy and such, then they don't have to read those threads. They can put particular posters on ignore. They can skip over certain posts in threads. I skip over a lot of things that I don't like rather than requesting that they be removed completely.

The problem is that it seemed to be spilling into a lot of threads; not just ones that were evident by the thread name and not just on the Chit chat forum. It wasn't as easy as just "avoiding the offending threads."

And we're not talking about flirting, we're talking about graphic, excessive content. Johnny Stew or Marty can correct me if I'm wrong, but I like to think of this as an "R" rated board.

If your mother asked you to watch your language because she didn't want your 13 year old cousin who was in the next room to hear it, would you be this outraged?

[dissention]

OK, I don't understand how this woman, who last time I checked was not an environmental specialist, can make such an off the wall statement...and while not only blaming his "environmental policies" she also blames his "killing plicies", so I'm guessing she means the War when she says this! :confused: :eek: :confused: The woman is somehow thinking the war has something to do with the hurricane too?

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

SOOOO...essentially I do see it as her basically blaming Bush for the hurricane.

And that's absurd.

*NEWS FLASH* ----- SH*T HAPPENS ----- IT'S NOBODY'S FAULT -----

we now return to our regularly scheduled program already in progress...GENERAL HOSPITAL!!! OH YEA BABY! ;)

My mood would be just as foul as yours if I had to put up with that Sonny and Carly bull**** for an hour.

[dissention]

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?


No one knew when it was going to hit, it's ludicrous to even ask such a rhetorical question. The problem is that we knew it was going to hit eventually, and that it would level New Orleans, yet the proper funding to help prepare for it was vetoed.

[Johnny Stew]

How, in the name of all that is good, could ANYONE have known that there was going to be a devistating hurricane to hit the gulf in August of 2005?

I guess my main problem with her statement was that she is taking every chance she can now to attack the president and even goes as far as to blame a natural disaster on him.I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

Ok I can understand what you are saying abou the funds being refused to New Orleans...and as we see now that was a mistake. But my point is how could he have KNOWN what was to happen!?! So to lay the blame on Bush is unfair...but it is her opinion.

My major point is that Cindy has turned into a lying, media whore who will now make any rediculous statement against the president to gain her some attention...is it even about her son anymore?


My mood would be just as foul as yours if I had to put up with that Sonny and Carly bull**** for an hour.

I'm hoping Guza and Pratt are fired soon as head writers of GH! I mean don't get me wrong Carly used to be my fav. character, and I suppose she still is...but now all of her world is wrapped up in SONNY SONNY SONNY!

ABC DAYTIME GET WITH IT!

[sodascouts]

Since when do you have to be an "environmental specialist" to realize that his environmental policies regarding what FEMA called one of the "three most likely US disasters" did a lot of damage when that disaster finally hit? Have you bothered to look up all the funding he refused to give New Orleans that they asked for in order to prepare for such a disaster? If you can tell me those policies didn't add to the devastation, I'd like to trash your crackpipe because you've been tooting it way too much.

It's easy to say "he should've given more money" - but sadly the government's pockets aren't bottomless. And frankly it's doubtful that any amount of money could have made New Orleans come out of this OK.

As for her references to the war, how can you refute that? Our military is stretched so incredibly thin that the rescues down South can be called sloppy at best and utterly incompetent at worst. And that's being kind.

Yes, there would be more national guardsmen don't there if it weren't for the war. However, the lack of then did not "cause" devastation. Katrina did. And there's no getting around that, no matter how hard some try to turn this into a partisan talking point.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

And I totally see your point.

Guess we can always use those millions the celebs have given...oh wait...they haven't...hmmm :rolleyes:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I don't believe Cindy was blaming President Bush for the hurricane, which I realize is how you interpreted her comments.
The way I interpreted them, was that Cindy was expressing the opinion that the devastation of several thousand lost lives (due to an ineffective evacuation system), and of hundreds of thousands of people living in horrific conditions with no food, water, etc., was due to the fact that our national budget is being directed towards this war, when funding should be directed towards avenues that would help protect our citizens from the aftermath of natural disasters, terrorism, and so forth.

Our president isn't tending to his own garden, as the saying goes.

double post...sorry

[dissention]

Ok I can understand what you are saying abou the funds being refused to New Orleans...and as we see now that was a mistake. But my point is how could he have KNOWN what was to happen!?!

BECAUSE FEMA HAS BEEN REFERRING TO IT AS ONE OF THE "THREE MOST LIKELY U.S. DISASTERS" FOR YEARS.

My major point is that Cindy has turned into a lying, media whore who will now make any rediculous statement against the president to gain her some attention...is it even about her son anymore?

Classy. Care to inform me about what lies she's told? I can guarantee you that if she did, they're in no way comparable to the sheer number of lies Shrub has told.

I'm hoping Guza and Pratt are fired soon as head writers of GH! I mean don't get me wrong Carly used to be my fav. character, and I suppose she still is...but now all of her world is wrapped up in SONNY SONNY SONNY!

ABC DAYTIME GET WITH IT!

I'd rather have dinner with Bush than watch ABC soaps. Not really, but you get my drift.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

It's easy to say "he should've given more money" - but sadly the government's pockets aren't bottomless. And frankly it's doubtful that any amount of money could have made New Orleans come out of this OK.



Yes, there would be more national guardsmen don't there if it weren't for the war. However, the lack of then did not "cause" devastation. Katrina did. And there's no getting around that, no matter how hard some try to turn this into a partisan talking point.

Thanks Nancy,

You are wise! haha

[GateandGarden]

The problem is that it seemed to be spilling into a lot of threads; not just ones that were evident by the thread name and not just on the Chit chat forum. It wasn't as easy as just "avoiding the offending threads."That was why I said people should avoid what they consider the offensive posts. I realize that they are in various threads and sometimes pop up out of the blue, but I still think people can ignore them.

...If your mother asked you to watch your language because she didn't want your 13 year old cousin who was in the next room to hear it, would you be this outraged?No, since it's my family and all, but I would be very annoyed. I don't like to censor my language for anyone's sake usually, but then again I don't hang around kids very often. I'm very willing to self-moderate in a classroom or professional setting, of course. But I guess that goes without saying.

But then again this isn't really for me. I'm saying this because it's something I want, but not for my own use, if that makes sense. I don't know of very many sexually explicit things to say. I am a self-professed virgin (I'm thinking that's probably irrelevant but there it is) and I can say that I never talk like a lot of the people on this board talk. I don't have it in me. But I feel that they should be able to do so.

I know that a lot of people want to eliminate all the sex on TV, in movies, and in video games for the sake of young people but I just disagree. I think the U.S. is far too rigid about sex; I think that contributes to some of our rampant homophobia, too. I find it bizarre that we watch sexual content so closely when there is so much violence on TV, in movies, etc. that is out there for kids to see. I find that more disturbing. JMO.

[Johnny Stew]

And I totally see your point.

Guess we can always use those millions the celebs have given...oh wait...they haven't...hmmm :rolleyes:Actually, several celebrities are already donating money to the relief effort, and telethons are in the works to help raise more money.

Beyond that, though, I don't see why it should be left up to celebrities to help clean up this mess. They're not running the government. They're not making the policies that effect our lives. They're not denying critical funding to our communities. They're not spending billions of dollars on a war that's nothing more than an ego trip.
They're just celebrities.

[dissention]

It's easy to say "he should've given more money" - but sadly the government's pockets aren't bottomless.

Tell that to Don Vito Two in the White House.

Yes, there would be more national guardsmen don't there if it weren't for the war. However, the lack of then did not "cause" devastation. Katrina did. And there's no getting around that, no matter how hard some try to turn this into a partisan talking point.

More guardsmen there wouldn't have curbed some of the devastation? I disagree. If there were more guardsmen there, New Orleans wouldn't be nearly as chaotic and devastated as it is right now by gangs, looters, and crooks. More guardsmen would have equated more help, which would have equated less devastation caused by such chaos. No one in their right mind is arguing that the lack of guardsmen resulted in more devastation from the hurricane itself, certainly not Cindy. That's absurd.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Actually, several celebrities are already donating money to the relief effort, and telethons are in the works to help raise more money.

Beyond that, though, I don't see why it should be left up to celebrities to help clean up this mess. They're not running the government. They're not making the policies that effect our lives. They're not denying critical funding to our communities. They're not spending billions of dollars on a war that's nothing more than an ego trip.
They're just celebrities.

Im glad that some are putting efforts together to help...I hadn't heard anything yet so I didn't know.

I also agree with you about the celebs...it is not up to them. The only reason I brought it up is because they were so quick to throw their money into the Tsunami relief effort...which was wonderful because it was needed...but I just hadn't seen the same thing happen here yet...but thanks for clearing it up for me.

[dissention]

And I totally see your point.

Guess we can always use those millions the celebs have given...oh wait...they haven't...hmmm :rolleyes:

I find it tacky for celebrities to tout their charitable donations, but that's just me. Don't assume that none of them haven't donated anything simply because they had enough class not to put out a press release.

[amber]

Tell that to Don Vito Two in the White House.



More guardsmen there wouldn't have curbed some of the devastation? I disagree. If there were more guardsmen there, New Orleans wouldn't be nearly as chaotic and devastated as it is right now by gangs, looters, and crooks. More guardsmen would have equated more help, which would have equated less devastation caused by such chaos. No one in their right mind is arguing that the lack of guardsmen resulted in more devastation from the hurricane itself, certainly not Cindy. That's absurd.
That seems self evident to me. :shrug: I'm watching the news right now, and the leaders of the state are talking about the slow response, and the lack of national guardsmen. It seem ludicrous to say "well, but people being gone at the war didn't cause Katrina" - of course it didn't - it's just contributing heavily to the amount of chaos and carnage, for the reasons Diss just said.
More people to help = more help. pretty simple.

[ShangriLaTroubl]

Too bad I missed most of this thread..the point is we are spending roughly $1000 per second in Iraq..that could be used many different and better places here IN OUR OWN COUNTRY. Sure, the government's wallets have their limits so to speak---but it's about spending wisely, and that they have not. They cut important programs, to keep money pouring into the big mistake of Bush's presidency-Iraq.
And there's nothing to show for the money. For the most part Iraq is not at all safer than even when Saddam was in power, and terrorism is on the rise, why? Is the $1000 a second not doing a damned thing? That's right , it's not. So no people aren't blaming natural disasters on the president, but when you see poverty here in our own country and people doing without, especially in these terribles situations like Katrina--it's natural to think where all the money is going. It's going to an effort the majority of Americans no longer support, an endless effort leading to nowhere. So I think we have every right to blame every lack of money on President Bush.

Chris

[Johnny Stew]

That was why I said people should avoid what they consider the offensive posts. I realize that they are in various threads and sometimes pop up out of the blue, but I still think people can ignore them.

No, since it's my family and all, but I would be very annoyed. I don't like to censor my language for anyone's sake usually, but then again I don't hang around kids very often. I'm very willing to self-moderate in a classroom or professional setting, of course. But I guess that goes without saying.

But then again this isn't really for me. I'm saying this because it's something I want, but not for my own use, if that makes sense. I don't know of very many sexually explicit things to say. I am a self-professed virgin (I'm thinking that's probably irrelevant but there it is) and I can say that I never talk like a lot of the people on this board talk. I don't have it in me. But I feel that they should be able to do so.

I know that a lot of people want to eliminate all the sex on TV, in movies, and in video games for the sake of young people but I just disagree. I think the U.S. is far too rigid about sex; I think that contributes to some of our rampant homophobia, too. I find it bizarre that we watch sexual content so closely when there is so much violence on TV, in movies, etc. that is out there for kids to see. I find that more disturbing. JMO.
[/COLOR]You make good points, and I tend to agree that our country is far too preoccupied with censoring sexual material and far too permissive when it comes to violence.

However, this board doesn't come with it's own little TV-MA rating. Instead, we have rules in place to insure that this is a welcoming forum for ALL ages and sensibilities.
Some will feel we're too strict, others will feel we're too lenient. We'll never please everyone no matter how hard we try, but we do need to "get back to basics" where our forum rules are concerned.

One can still be flirty and a little "naughty" from time to time, without going over the line. We used to do it before, there's no reason we can't do it again.
And if there's something more explicit that one wishes to say to a friend, there are always private messaging systems, including the one here on the Ledge.

[Kelly]

Not really.


The Indigo Girls Official Site BBS was once a thriving, living, breathing thing with all different kinds of people and all different kinds of discussions. Things around there were almost self-moderated. A new moderator took over and started deleting threads. Pretty soon it led to people being banned, for various reasons. Soon there were direct complaints to the artists' management about how much fan support the band was losing because of the board moderation. Over there, there was a lot of grass roots "street team" support of the IG's concerts, releases and appearances- large groups of fans would literally follow them along for long stretches of their tours.

Because of the moderation of that board, the majority of the core supporters left. The artists intervened and altered things a bit, but it was too late. The board was poisoned and it died. There's only little bits and scraps there now- a burnt-out shell of its former self.

Deleting threads and posts that border on censorship (in my opinion) are not a good harbinger for the life of any forum. We are all grown up enough around here (even the Ledgies under 18 are wise enough as far as I'm concerned) to handle "baiting" or "flaming" or whatever you want to call it. There have been many instances in the past where I have seen certain people go too far and, for the most part, those affected have weathered through it. I'd rather have the forum be too challenging then not challenging at all.

Sadly, people are being driven off the Ledge too. We have lost many long term members over the years and it seems like people just become accustomed to the constant turnover of posters. A few core people remain, mostly cliques of people who band together and support each other. The fact that alot of articulate, knowledgable fans who happened to have differing opinions from the masses (or moderators) have been upset enough to leave altogether really saddens me. One of my all time favorite posters, someone who was deeply knowledgable and very articulate, was driven off because she felt no one listened to her opinions because they differed from the stronger board members. (one or two people always ganged up on her and rarely listed to her with an open mind) The sad part was she was really right on with so much of what she said. Unfortunately, she did not share the common views. Another of my closest friends feels totally disheartened by the tone around here lately and has pretty much decided to move on. We are all adults, we should be able to take care of ourselves and we should also be responsible for what we say to one another. Marty and Lis own the board and they can have any rules they want and the rules seem fair enough to me. If the sexual content is too much for some and you are asked to tone it down, so what?? You are not being asked to stop it completely, just tone it down because you do not own this board and the owners requested you to. It is a matter of respect. You are entitled to your free speech but we all have bounderies and rules in life and this board is no different. I could care less about the sexual talk, I am pretty non uptight and it usually makes me laugh but I understand that some people are uncomfortable with it. I accept that and respect the owners enough to just play by the very limited rules. I think sometimes it goes overboard and personally, I do not come to this board to read about people's sexual desires, feelings, conquests, etc but this board has a chit chat section and we are free to discuss whatever we want as along as it doesn't violate any rules. When it spills over into the Stevie forum, I either read it or not, depending on who the poster is and what they are talking about. Certain people seem kind of preoccupied by sex......
Anyhoo, I don't even know why I posted this stuff...I predict some people will say that "it was their decisions to leave the board, they decided to do that on their own, no one forced them off". That is all true but maybe some people will think about how they have treated others around here. Is it really necessary to be so haughty?? Is it really necessary to come after a specific poster with guns blazing because they say certain things about Stevie that you may not like, even if these things might be true? It is really necessary to use the rolling eyes emoticon so much? Are threads really being deleted for valid reasons or are personal opinions influencing that decision? (I am not accusing, I am asking..I really do not know) I can be snarky, too but hopefully I have never run valuable posters completely off the board.
Fire away.

[dissention]

Sadly, people are being driven off the Ledge too. We have lost many long term members over the years and it seems like people just become accustomed to the constant turnover of posters. A few core people remain, mostly cliques of people who band together and support each other. The fact that alot of articulate, knowledgable fans who happened to have differing opinions from the masses (or moderators) have been upset enough to leave altogether really saddens me. One of my all time favorite posters, someone who was deeply knowledgable and very articulate, was driven off because she felt no one listened to her opinions because they differed from the stronger board members. (one or two people always ganged up on her and rarely listed to her with an open mind) The sad part was she was really right on with so much of what she said. Unfortunately, she did not share the common views. Another of my closest friends feels totally disheartened by the tone around here lately and has pretty much decided to move on. We are all adults, we should be able to take care of ourselves and we should also be responsible for what we say to one another. Marty and Lis own the board and they can have any rules they want and the rules seem fair enough to me. If the sexual content is too much for some and you are asked to tone it down, so what?? You are not being asked to stop it completely, just tone it down because you do not own this board and the owners requested you to. It is a matter of respect. You are entitled to your free speech but we all have bounderies and rules in life and this board is no different. I could care less about the sexual talk, I am pretty non uptight and it usually makes me laugh but I understand that some people are uncomfortable with it. I accept that and respect the owners enough to just play by the very limited rules. I think sometimes it goes overboard and personally, I do not come to this board to read about people's sexual desires, feelings, conquests, etc but this board has a chit chat section and we are free to discuss whatever we want as along as it doesn't violate any rules. When it spills over into the Stevie forum, I either read it or not, depending on who the poster is and what they are talking about. Certain people seem kind of preoccupied by sex......
Anyhoo, I don't even know why I posted this stuff...I predict some people will say that "it was their decisions to leave the board, they decided to do that on their own, no one forced them off". That is all true but maybe some people will think about how they have treated others around here. Is it really necessary to be so haughty?? Is it really necessary to come after a specific poster with guns blazing because they say certain things about Stevie that you may not like, even if these things might be true? It is really necessary to use the rolling eyes emoticon so much? Are threads really being deleted for valid reasons or are personal opinions influencing that decision? (I am not accusing, I am asking..I really do not know) I can be snarky, too but hopefully I have never run valuable posters completely off the board.
Fire away.

Great post, Kelly. :xoxo: :wavey:

[SuzeQuze]

Hey, I've seen in my own family what the death of child does to a person. If her rage, anger, and grief are half of what they've been for my relatives, it's honestly easy for me to see why she's acting this way. In her situation, there is no logic, just basic, raw, primal emotions. See it for what it REALLY is. It's much easier to understand it than to be critical of it. Is it inhumane to challenge her statements? Yes. Not because of her feelings, but because of what it says about us. I'd like to think we're better than that.

Calling her a crazy lady is out of line to me for the reasons you stated above, it is a low blow. Everything I read on that site that was linked made me sick, literally. This is probably due to a "liberal bias". So be it. I did not delete the thread nor would I have but I do know why Chris did and I stand behind her decision to do it. It was going to open up a can of worms, we've been down that road before with folks deliberately stirring things up.

Obviously no one was very interested in debating the actual issue at hand and was more interested in pointing fingers as in "you have this belief" and "you have that belief" and nit picking and a whole lot of other BS. If you want to debate the Sheehan issue then debate it. All of this finger pointing is giving me an ulcer and I'm tired of it. Let's talk about the issue, if you are so concerned about it. Please stop making this about personalities and get back to the topic.

[GateandGarden]

Calling her a crazy lady is out of line to me for the reasons you stated above, it is a low blow. Everything I read on that site that was linked made me sick, literally. This is probably due to a "liberal bias". So be it. I did not delete the thread nor would I have but I do know why Chris did and I stand behind her decision to do it. It was going to open up a can of worms, we've been down that road before with folks deliberately stirring things up.Yes, we have been down that road plenty of times, but Brandon was not trying to stir things up. :shrug: He really did just want to discuss it.

If the link was deleted because it was a message board; I'll say as others have said that it isn't a message board. :shrug: But I don't want to keep harping on it.

Obviously no one was very interested in debating the actual issue at hand and was more interested in pointing fingers as in "you have this belief" and "you have that belief" and nit picking and a whole lot of other BS. If you want to debate the Sheehan issue then debate it. All of this finger pointing is giving me an ulcer and I'm tired of it. Let's talk about the issue, if you are so concerned about it. Please stop making this about personalities and get back to the topic.I don't see that. I saw Josh, Brian, Brandon, and others actually discussing the issue. Steve had a point when he said that talk of homosexuality can easily turn into a bad situation on this board, but that doesn't enter into this.

But I am really sorry that this is upsetting you. I really don't want you to be. I would be the same way but so many other things on this board have upset me to the point of being miserable that I just don't have it in me any longer.

[hayley]

While this thread may be dying a slow death, I still feel the need to dredge it all up again because of how incensed I've gotten reading it.

It seems like so far people in this thread are upset with the changes in Ledge moderation for two reasons: A) Free speech, yadda yadda; or B) Feeling that gldstwmn is showing a liberal bias in her moderation and squelching conservative discussion.

My problem has nothing to do with either of these (tired) arguments. It's the absolute disregard Chris seems to be approaching people with. Deleting threads right and left, with moderators contradicting themselves on the reasoning, and then responding to questioning with rude responses IS my problem.


I have the RIGHT to demand an explination about why my post was deleted.
Actually, you don't.

That kind of attitude is ridiculous and blows my mind. And is unspeakably rude to all of the people who have made this their Internet home, some of whom spend their own dollars to help support it.

Sure, there may have been problems with language and all the sex talk and whatever else, due to the laissez-faire moderation that's been going on here for a couple of years. Trying to quelch it by going opposite and killing discussion and treating members like five year olds who need to have their mouths washed out with soap isn't going to help. It will kill this board.

Obviously, most of the moderators are new, and are getting their footing with all of this. I just don't like where it's started off at. It's just a level of sheer gravitas that astounds me to treat posters like that, and to act as if there should be no accountability when multiple threads, including those asking what just happened, are deleted. I, for one, hope that this 'delete first, make up reasons why later' trend is one that doesn't last much longer.

http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/cindy-sez-katrina-bushs-fault/

Btw, I find this article appallingly disgusting, sloppy, and full of distortion. But this BLOG is no more one-sided or distorted than many of the lberal-slanted articles and blogs posted in other threads.

[gldstwmn]

My problem has nothing to do with either of these (tired) arguments. It's the absolute disregard Chris seems to be approaching people with. Deleting threads right and left, with moderators contradicting themselves on the reasoning, and then responding to questioning with rude responses IS my problem.

I have deleted two threads and locked one. One was a duplicate.
Suze and I agree that the thread was flame bait. We disagree on some other issues but agree to try to support each other's decisions as we grapple with trying to strike a balance between keeping everyone happy and implementing what we've been asked to implement. We are still new at this so we ask that if the ride gets a bit bumpy, hang on because we are listening to you and we're still trying to learn how to drive this thing.
I understand that you think I am approaching people with disregard but tone is difficult to ascertain from the written word. My style of writing is fairly direct and while I try to use the emoticons, sometimes I don't so I can understand why you might feel the way you do.


That kind of attitude is ridiculous and blows my mind. And is unspeakably rude to all of the people who have made this their Internet home, some of whom spend their own dollars to help support it.


If you reread the conversation, you will see that the poster is "demanding" things of myself and the other mods, much like a spoiled child having a temper tantrum. Other people seem to be egging on his behavior. So like any good parent would, I set him straight and let him know sternly that as long as he would ask nicely, that is probably the best way to get a response. Would you reward bad behavior?

In closing, I would like to add that for the sake of maintaining peace, if you have any other complaints that name a specific moderator, as opposed to a general complaint which you are free to express on the board, that you (not meaning you specifically Hayley but all of you) take the time to private message them with your concerns. It is much easier to diffuse the situation this way than to publicly call them out on the boards which some people might find humiliating. It's also covered in the FAQ's. :sorry:
Thanks for reading. Namaste'.

[The Tower]

I happen to be for the rights of the GLBT community. And just because I'm a conservative doesn't mean I can't have an intelligent conversation...have you ever thought about the fact that YOU might make those who are conservative on this board feel uncomfortable? Just like you assume that "we" make the GLBT community feel uncomfortable.
Just because you've pulled a switcheroo in the last, what is it four or five days, does not absolve you of the things you have said on this board many, many times over. You have personally made the GLBT community around here feel more than just uncomfortable, but extremely upset.

In general, I don't think that threads should be deleted. I don't think the thread that gldstwmn deleted should have been deleted. I thought it was a poor choice. I don't think the GLBT needs any more protection on the Ledge than any other particular group of people.

[sodascouts]

Sadly, people are being driven off the Ledge too. We have lost many long term members over the years and it seems like people just become accustomed to the constant turnover of posters. A few core people remain, mostly cliques of people who band together and support each other. The fact that alot of articulate, knowledgable fans who happened to have differing opinions from the masses (or moderators) have been upset enough to leave altogether really saddens me. One of my all time favorite posters, someone who was deeply knowledgable and very articulate, was driven off because she felt no one listened to her opinions because they differed from the stronger board members. (one or two people always ganged up on her and rarely listed to her with an open mind) The sad part was she was really right on with so much of what she said. Unfortunately, she did not share the common views. Another of my closest friends feels totally disheartened by the tone around here lately and has pretty much decided to move on. We are all adults, we should be able to take care of ourselves and we should also be responsible for what we say to one another. Marty and Lis own the board and they can have any rules they want and the rules seem fair enough to me. If the sexual content is too much for some and you are asked to tone it down, so what?? You are not being asked to stop it completely, just tone it down because you do not own this board and the owners requested you to. It is a matter of respect. You are entitled to your free speech but we all have bounderies and rules in life and this board is no different. I could care less about the sexual talk, I am pretty non uptight and it usually makes me laugh but I understand that some people are uncomfortable with it. I accept that and respect the owners enough to just play by the very limited rules. I think sometimes it goes overboard and personally, I do not come to this board to read about people's sexual desires, feelings, conquests, etc but this board has a chit chat section and we are free to discuss whatever we want as along as it doesn't violate any rules. When it spills over into the Stevie forum, I either read it or not, depending on who the poster is and what they are talking about. Certain people seem kind of preoccupied by sex......
Anyhoo, I don't even know why I posted this stuff...I predict some people will say that "it was their decisions to leave the board, they decided to do that on their own, no one forced them off". That is all true but maybe some people will think about how they have treated others around here. Is it really necessary to be so haughty?? Is it really necessary to come after a specific poster with guns blazing because they say certain things about Stevie that you may not like, even if these things might be true? It is really necessary to use the rolling eyes emoticon so much? Are threads really being deleted for valid reasons or are personal opinions influencing that decision? (I am not accusing, I am asking..I really do not know) I can be snarky, too but hopefully I have never run valuable posters completely off the board.
Fire away.


Well said, Kelly.

[sodascouts]

Obviously no one was very interested in debating the actual issue at hand and was more interested in pointing fingers as in "you have this belief" and "you have that belief" and nit picking and a whole lot of other BS. If you want to debate the Sheehan issue then debate it. All of this finger pointing is giving me an ulcer and I'm tired of it. Let's talk about the issue, if you are so concerned about it. Please stop making this about personalities and get back to the topic.

Umm... what do you think we've been doing for the last couple of pages? :confused:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

If you reread the conversation, you will see that the poster is "demanding" things of myself and the other mods, much like a spoiled child having a temper tantrum. Other people seem to be egging on his behavior. So like any good parent would, I set him straight and let him know sternly that as long as he would ask nicely, that is probably the best way to get a response. Would you reward bad behavior?

Ok now I'm a child who is being punished...

Jesus Christ.... :laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Just because you've pulled a switcheroo in the last, what is it four or five days, does not absolve you of the things you have said on this board many, many times over. You have personally made the GLBT community around here feel more than just uncomfortable, but extremely upset.

In general, I don't think that threads should be deleted. I don't think the thread that gldstwmn deleted should have been deleted. I thought it was a poor choice. I don't think the GLBT needs any more protection on the Ledge than any other particular group of people.

Actually I have been for the rights of GLBT community now for about the majority of this year...not just 4 or 5 days ago. And about the past, I know that I did upset people...which is why I left for a while. Because my intention was never to upset anyone...as hard to believe as that may sound. And now gldstwmn keeps implying that I was trying to start "trouble" again by posting that thread...and I have no idea where she is coming from. And thank the heavens that I actually have people on my side this time who understand where I am coming from.

Like Nancy said...I'm not just going to sit back while these things happen...I am going to take a stand.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Umm... what do you think we've been doing for the last couple of pages? :confused:

Thank you Nancy...I was just about to say the same thing.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Glad ya stayed!

Thanks... ;)

[SuzeQuze]

Thank you Nancy...I was just about to say the same thing.

Right, I neglected to mention that 10% of the posts were on the topic.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Right, I neglected to mention that 10% of the posts were on the topic.

I think that is because it wasn't until recently that we had just gotten back unto topic.

[sodascouts]

Right, I neglected to mention that 10% of the posts were on the topic.

Well, first we had to determine whether or not we were allowed to talk about it. That has a nasty habit of getting in the way of debate.

[SuzeQuze]

Actually I have been for the rights of GLBT community now for about the majority of this year...not just 4 or 5 days ago. And about the past, I know that I did upset people...which is why I left for a while. Because my intention was never to upset anyone...as hard to believe as that may sound. And now gldstwmn keeps implying that I was trying to start "trouble" again by posting that thread...and I have no idea where she is coming from. And thank the heavens that I actually have people on my side this time who understand where I am coming from.

Like Nancy said...I'm not just going to sit back while these things happen...I am going to take a stand.

It seemed like you were trying to stir things up. Its sort of like when someone says, "don't take this the wrong way but that outfit makes you look fat". Of course the person will get pissed. You knew that particular thread would cause trouble, in my opinion. If that truly isn't the case, then I'm sorry I misinterpreted your intentions.

[gldstwmn]

Since we don't need three separate threads on this topic, I have merged all three threads into one for the sake of clarity and continuity. :)

[sodascouts]

It seemed like you were trying to stir things up. Its sort of like when someone says, "don't take this the wrong way but that outfit makes you look fat". Of course the person will get pissed. You knew that particular thread would cause trouble, in my opinion. If that truly isn't the case, then I'm sorry I misinterpreted your intentions.

I think you just don't get how shocking it was to see all those thread deletions, but honestly, I think the point's been driven home and there's no need to discuss it anymore. So I tried to start talking about Sheehan again... but that's not good enough, apparently?

I really don't mind if this whole moderator thing is dropped now because I truly believe lessons have been learned, and that was the only reason I was talking about it in the first place.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

It seemed like you were trying to stir things up. Its sort of like when someone says, "don't take this the wrong way but that outfit makes you look fat". Of course the person will get pissed. You knew that particular thread would cause trouble, in my opinion. If that truly isn't the case, then I'm sorry I misinterpreted your intentions.

I wanted to get other peoples opinion about her statements. :sorry: for wanting to have a discussion.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I think you just don't get how shocking it was to see all those thread deletions, but honestly, I think the point's been driven home and there's no need to discuss it anymore. So I tried to start talking about Sheehan again... but that's not good enough, apparently?

I really don't mind if this whole moderator thing is dropped now because I truly believe lessons have been learned, and that was the only reason I was talking about it in the first place.

Yes you are right Nancy. I know I have learned a lesson

Lesson #1 Never again try to post a thread that has any political content at all...because if it is coming from me it is automatically assumed to be "causing trouble"

[The Tower]

Actually I have been for the rights of GLBT community now for about the majority of this year...not just 4 or 5 days ago.
Well, I'm really glad that you were a gay rights supporter at the beginning of this year when you referred to homosexuality as an abomination and posted comments that stated that even a dog is smart enough to know what to copulate with, whereas a homosexual is misguided. :rolleyes:

And about the past, I know that I did upset people...which is why I left for a while. Because my intention was never to upset anyone...as hard to believe as that may sound. And now gldstwmn keeps implying that I was trying to start "trouble" again by posting that thread...and I have no idea where she is coming from.
Hmmmm... lemme see. Perhaps it was because your entrance to this board consisted of baiting threads and inflammatory commentary that had nothing to do with Fleetwood Mac and that for the first week or two you were here you racked up approximately 500+ posts, the far majority of which were dedicated to baiting, name-calling, abortion = baby killer, and negative homosexual connotations?? Gee, I wonder why anyone would think that you would be trying to bait people??? They must be craaaazy....

And thank the heavens that I actually have people on my side this time who understand where I am coming from.
I think you presume too much.

Yes you are right Nancy. I know I have learned a lesson

Lesson #1 Never again try to post a thread that has any political content at all...because if it is coming from me it is automatically assumed to be "causing trouble"
Grow up. That comment sounds like something coming from a petulant 10 year old.

[DavidMn]

Well, I'm really glad that you were a gay rights supporter at the beginning of this year when you referred to homosexuality as an abomination and posted comments that stated that even a dog is smart enough to know what to copulate with, whereas a homosexual is misguided. :rolleyes:


Hmmmm... lemme see. Perhaps it was because your entrance to this board consisted of baiting threads and inflammatory commentary that had nothing to do with Fleetwood Mac and that for the first week or two you were here you racked up approximately 500+ posts, the far majority of which were dedicated to baiting, name-calling, abortion = baby killer, and negative homosexual connotations?? Gee, I wonder why anyone would think that you would be trying to bait people??? They must be craaaazy....

[QUOTE]And thank the heavens that I actually have people on my side this time who understand where I am coming from.{/QUOTE]
I think you presume too much.


Grow up. That comment sounds like something coming from a petulant 10 year old.
Hmm, I didnt know that went on. Guess I'm too new here for that. AS far as the baiting goes, I try to have a thick skin and not llet that stuff bother me. What bothered me about that attack I got last week was that the emailer sent it annonymously. That really bothered me. But I'm over it now. :D

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Well, I'm really glad that you were a gay rights supporter at the beginning of this year when you referred to homosexuality as an abomination and posted comments that stated that even a dog is smart enough to know what to copulate with, whereas a homosexual is misguided. :rolleyes:


Hmmmm... lemme see. Perhaps it was because your entrance to this board consisted of baiting threads and inflammatory commentary that had nothing to do with Fleetwood Mac and that for the first week or two you were here you racked up approximately 500+ posts, the far majority of which were dedicated to baiting, name-calling, abortion = baby killer, and negative homosexual connotations?? Gee, I wonder why anyone would think that you would be trying to bait people??? They must be craaaazy....

[QUOTE]And thank the heavens that I actually have people on my side this time who understand where I am coming from.{/QUOTE]
I think you presume too much.


Grow up. That comment sounds like something coming from a petulant 10 year old.

I suppose I'm happy being 10 then. :wavey:

[The Tower]

I suppose I'm happy being 10 then. :wavey:
Obviously. Most of your posts indicate this.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Obviously. Most of your posts indicate this.

Ok, yea...I"m through with the past and most everyone else around here is as well. I applogized again and again for my actions when I first came here, I refuse to do so anymore. Sorry you and a few choice others can't seem to get past it. :sorry: Not my problem anymore.

It seems to me you still enjoy somehow trying to egg me on, by claiming I am acting like a 10 year old. I am not angry with you, and I don't wish to start and argument with you. I am sorry you still feel anger towards me, but there is nothing I can do about that I suppose.

[DavidMn]

Hey, It's just not worth getting that upset over. That's the way I figure it. :D

[amber]

[QUOTE=The Tower]Well, I'm really glad that you were a gay rights supporter at the beginning of this year when you referred to homosexuality as an abomination and posted comments that stated that even a dog is smart enough to know what to copulate with, whereas a homosexual is misguided. :rolleyes:


Hmmmm... lemme see. Perhaps it was because your entrance to this board consisted of baiting threads and inflammatory commentary that had nothing to do with Fleetwood Mac and that for the first week or two you were here you racked up approximately 500+ posts, the far majority of which were dedicated to baiting, name-calling, abortion = baby killer, and negative homosexual connotations?? Gee, I wonder why anyone would think that you would be trying to bait people??? They must be craaaazy....



I suppose I'm happy being 10 then. :wavey:

I think he meant mental age of 10. Or...IQ of 10? But as you've just illustrated, ignorance really is bliss!

[Brwn_eyes0511]

[QUOTE=Brwn_eyes0511]

I think he meant mental age of 10. Or...IQ of 10? But as you've just illustrated, ignorance really is bliss!

I understood what he meant.

[ontheEdgeof17]

Geez.

Let it go. That was forever ago. Why are we still dwelling on it? :shrug:

[The Tower]

Hmm, I didnt know that went on. Guess I'm too new here for that.
Well, if you're looking for interesting reading, you can start here (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17741).

This (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17961&highlight=Coulter) is a hot one, too. I really loved the "What next, watermelons?" comment. That was hysterical.... :rolleyes:

[amber]

[QUOTE=amber]

I understood what he meant.

Oh! forgive me. In that case it's quite heartwarming that you've found happiness in your situation.... :)

[Brwn_eyes0511]

[QUOTE=Brwn_eyes0511]

Oh! forgive me. In that case it's quite heartwarming that you've found happiness in your situation.... :)

I just don't let other people's opinions about what they believe my IQ to be...bother me that much. You can't please everyone I suppose. :shrug:

[DavidMn]

Well, if you're looking for interesting reading, you can start here (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17741).

This (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17961&highlight=Coulter) is a hot one, too. I really loved the "What next, watermelons?" comment. That was hysterical.... :rolleyes:
Not bad. Pretty funny. Oh well, I'm gay, and I dont care if anyone likes it or not I guess. :D

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Well, if you're looking for interesting reading, you can start here (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17741).

This (http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=17961&highlight=Coulter) is a hot one, too. I really loved the "What next, watermelons?" comment. That was hysterical.... :rolleyes:

Oh great the past is coming back to haunt me...oh well guess I diserve it!

[amber]

Geez.

Let it go. That was forever ago. Why are we still dwelling on it? :shrug:

I would think some people have trouble letting things like this:
Well, I'm really glad that you were a gay rights supporter at the beginning of this year when you referred to homosexuality as an abomination and posted comments that stated that even a dog is smart enough to know what to copulate with, whereas a homosexual is misguided

go. But you can be his "abominable" friend, Curtie!

[The Tower]

Ok, yea...I"m through with the past and most everyone else around here is as well. I applogized again and again for my actions when I first came here, I refuse to do so anymore.
I don't recall you ever sincerely apologizing to anyone.

Sorry you and a few choice others can't seem to get past it. :sorry: Not my problem anymore.
As if you ever thought there was a problem to begin with.

It seems to me you still enjoy somehow trying to egg me on, by claiming I am acting like a 10 year old. I am not angry with you, and I don't wish to start and argument with you. I am sorry you still feel anger towards me, but there is nothing I can do about that I suppose.
I'm not egging you on- you are the one who keeps posting on and on about how people are unfairly accusing you of baiting people and what horrors have been put upon you.

Let it go. That was forever ago. Why are we still dwelling on it? :shrug:
I have been ignoring him for quite some time. However, the constant claiming of being a "gay rights supporter" after all that has gone on here was too much to bear.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Not bad. Pretty funny. Oh well, I'm gay, and I dont care if anyone likes it or not I guess. :D

Hope your not upset by that stuff. I really didn't mean to sound hateful in those threads...but I did! Although I'm still very much conservative I do support GLBT rights now, if that makes a difference.

[The Tower]

Oh great the past is coming back to haunt me...oh well guess I diserve it!
You posted that ****- don't complain to me.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

I don't recall you ever sincerely apologizing to anyone.


As if you ever thought there was a problem to begin with.


I'm not egging you on- you are the one who keeps posting on and on about how people are unfairly accusing you of baiting people and what horrors have been put upon you.


I have been ignoring him for quite some time. However, the constant claiming of being a "gay rights supporter" after all that has gone on here was too much to bear.

But no one can really help it if you chose not to believe me...that is totally your decision. You still always have the option to ignore me.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

You posted that ****- don't complain to me.

I'm not complaining. I said I diserved it didn't I? I don't appologize for the articles I posted, but for the way I went about posting with others...I was rude.

[DavidMn]

Hope your not upset by that stuff. I really didn't mean to sound hateful in those threads...but I did! Although I'm still very much conservative I do support GLBT rights now, if that makes a difference.
You know what, It takes alot to upset me. Like I said, I dont really know you personally so its hard to judge you. This is AMerica, and you are entitled to your opinions. If I dont like them, I'll choose to ignore them.

[Brwn_eyes0511]

You know what, It takes alot to upset me. Like I said, I dont really know you personally so its hard to judge you. This is AMerica, and you are entitled to your opinions. If I dont like them, I'll choose to ignore them.

Thanks, I understand and respect what you say. ;)

[DavidMn]

Thanks, I understand and respect what you say. ;)
No problem. I just wish we could all get along. :nod:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

No problem. I just wish we could all get along. :nod:

I am all for that. But I honestly don't see that happening anytime soon. :distress:

[DavidMn]

I am all for that. But I honestly don't see that happening anytime soon. :distress:
Oh well, we can hope cant we? :laugh:

[Brwn_eyes0511]

Oh well, we can hope cant we? :laugh:

Yes we can! ;)

[ontheEdgeof17]

But you can be his "abominable" friend, Curtie!

:mad:

Don't be sarcastic to me. If I want to treat with him with respect, that's my business. If he wasn't to me in the past, that's his business. I'm not swooping down to that level just to bash gay-bashers. I don't get it and never will. I'm sure I did it in the past, but I've grown to realize that doesn't solve anything. I'd rather be as nice as possible and be grown up about it.

[DavidMn]

:mad:

Don't be sarcastic to me. If I want to treat with him with respect, that's my business. If he wasn't to me in the past, that's his business. I'm not swooping down to that level just to bash gay-bashers. I don't get it and never will. I'm sure I did it in the past, but I've grown to realize that doesn't solve anything. I'd rather be as nice as possible and be grown up about it.
I couldnt have said it better myself. BTW you should see the pictures of you Tiffany Anitia and me from Red Rocks, theyre hilarious, especially yours, hammin it up for the camera. :laugh:

[dissention]

:mad:

Don't be sarcastic to me. If I want to treat with him with respect, that's my business. If he wasn't to me in the past, that's his business. I'm not swooping down to that level just to bash gay-bashers. I don't get it and never will. I'm sure I did it in the past, but I've grown to realize that doesn't solve anything. I'd rather be as nice as possible and be grown up about it.

Well said. It was a long time ago and it really doesn't need any more energy wasted on it.

[amber]

:mad:

Don't be sarcastic to me. If I want to treat with him with respect, that's my business.

:mad:

Don't tell people they should forget about it, then.
And if someone else doesn't respect him, that's their business. And I never told you not to treat him with respect, so I don't even know why you said that. :)

Also, I think it's really funny that you told me not to be sarcastic to you, considering how you often address me. :) It's okay, though. Even though I never have before, maybe next time you are sarcastic to me I'll bust the mad face on you. Thanks.

[DavidMn]

:mad:

Don't tell people they should forget about it, then.
And if someone else doesn't respect him, that's their business. And I never told you not to treat him with respect, so I don't even know why you said that. :)

Also, I think it's really funny that you told me not to be sarcastic to you, considering how you often address me. :) It's okay, though. Even though I never have before, maybe next time you are sarcastic to me I'll bust the mad face on you. Thanks.
The mad face. Now that's a scary thing. :laugh:

[amber]

The mad face. Now that's a scary thing. :laugh:
yeah, it is. I can't believe I got one, from Curty no less. :)

[DavidMn]

yeah, it is. I can't believe I got one, from Curty no less. :)
I prefer happy faces :) :) :) :) :)

[ontheEdgeof17]

yeah, it is. I can't believe I got one, from Curty no less. :)


I still love ya. :xoxo: Just hurts my feelings a lil bit when it comes to stuff like this. I'm sure I have many friends, co-workers, hell, even family members who think I'm doomed. I try not to let it get to me, and I can still be friends with them. Kill 'em with kindness.....Didn't Jewel say that? "In the end, only kindness matters." I tend to agree with that. Those who judge will get the wrath! lol

[DavidMn]

I still love ya. :xoxo: Just hurts my feelings a lil bit when it comes to stuff like this. I'm sure I have many friends, co-workers, hell, even family members who think I'm doomed. I try not to let it get to me, and I can still be friends with them. Kill 'em with kindness.....Didn't Jewel say that? "In the end, only kindness matters." I tend to agree with that. Those who judge will get the wrath! lol
AMen my brother........ :angel:

[amber]

I still love ya. :xoxo: Just hurts my feelings a lil bit when it comes to stuff like this. I'm sure I have many friends, co-workers, hell, even family members who think I'm doomed. I try not to let it get to me, and I can still be friends with them. Kill 'em with kindness.....Didn't Jewel say that? "In the end, only kindness matters." I tend to agree with that. Those who judge will get the wrath! lol
okay then. I was sad. Sorry I hurt your feelings, I didn't mean to.
honestly, I wasn't attacking you with my sarcastic joke, or saying that you should or should not do a certain thing. I was spreading light on the fact that this person did at one time essentially call *you* an abomination - also why some people might not be able to forget. I'm not even gay, and in my mind many things he said are pretty serious offenses, and they were about lots of people I like, on this board. :o I'm sorry I worded it poorly - honestly it hit a nerve that you thought everyone should forget and let bygones be bygones.
"Kill them with kindness" is a good philosophy, though obviously not the one I universally subscribe to. :laugh: :xoxo:

:xoxo:
*arguing with Curtie makes me sad :( *

[GateandGarden]

Well said. It was a long time ago and it really doesn't need any more energy wasted on it.I feel the same way. He no longer feels that way about gay people and that's good enough for me.

[gldstwmn]

I think you just don't get how shocking it was to see all those thread deletions, but honestly, I think the point's been driven home and there's no need to discuss it anymore.

Just to clarify, 2 threads were deleted and one was locked.

[michelle2677]

o.k...question..
what's the difference between locking a thread and deleting one. I mean..I know the technical difference..but if you're going to lock it so people can't read it....why not delete it??

or does locked just mean you can no longer post, but can still view?? sorry to interject *L*

[amber]

I feel the same way. He no longer feels that way about gay people and that's good enough for me.
:laugh:
cute - he's still a conservative, therefore will still vote "against" everything you are (and, of course, everything I believe in) - even if he's really changed. But more power to you, If you think that's fine. :nod: Oh, have you been posting on BN lately????

[gldstwmn]

o.k...question..
or does locked just mean you can no longer post, but can still view

Yes.
10 10 10 10

[SuzeQuze]

o.k...question..
what's the difference between locking a thread and deleting one. I mean..I know the technical difference..but if you're going to lock it so people can't read it....why not delete it??

or does locked just mean you can no longer post, but can still view?? sorry to interject *L*

Yes, you can still read a locked thread.

[sodascouts]

:laugh:
cute - he's still a conservative, therefore will still vote "against" everything you are (and, of course, everything I believe in) - even if he's really changed. But more power to you, If you think that's fine. :nod: Oh, have you been posting on BN lately????

Yes, we conservatives are spawns of the devil. Now excuse me, it's dinner time, and I need to go drink the blood of a freshly killed virgin.

[Sugar]

Just a thought...

The things Brandon posted in the past were no less than horrid, and I was right there to call him on quite a bit of it, for those of you who remember. When I saw he returned, you bet I was ready for trouble.

That said, so far he has said that he has changed his views on things...isn't that something we want? If he's lying, it'll become evident soon enough, and we are perfectly capable of dealing with it then, and I'll be right there alongside the rest of you doing so.

But if there's any chance he's come around, shouldn't we try to encourage that?

[strandinthewind]

Yes, we conservatives are spawns of the devil. Now excuse me, it's dinner time, and I need to go drink the blood of a freshly killed virgin.


Well, rhetoric aside, the "Conservatives" currently in charge have done nothing but hurt human rights in this country :shrug: I can honestly not think of one forward step made. On the other hand, they fight any progress tooth and nail. So, it is a little hard to understand why anyone could vote for them when the lesser evil at least does not want to take away rights :shrug:

[SteveMacD]

Ok...now I'm really just thinking you are in your own little world now!
I see more of the REAL world every day than you'll probably ever see.
So you think that it is inhumane to challenge this lady's statements?

WHAT THE FLYING F*CK!
Yep. She's just a grieving mother. Frankly, that she has mobilized people on both sides astounds me. People are either praising her or condemning her, when it would appear to me that she needs to be in heavy-duty therapy. To put it another way, say you're in a big city and there's a clearly mentally ill, most likely homeless/transient individual who is standing on the corner talking/rambling very loudly, spouting off political language in a mostly incoherent way. Say said individual started talking about how Bush, Wall Street investors, and the military were all out to get him. Would you honestly get into a debate with this person? No, you'd probably write him off as paranoid or crazy and move on, hoping this person gets help. For me, Cindy Sheehan is probably not far from this guy, given that her mind is no longer being driven by reason and logic, but by emotion/anger.

[ontheEdgeof17]

"Kill them with kindness" is a good philosophy, though obviously not the one I universally subscribe to. :laugh: :xoxo:

:xoxo:
*arguing with Curtie makes me sad :( *

:lol:

Me, too. Our b(insert * here)tchiness towards each other is over for now. :laugh: All is well in Chiffonland.

[dissention]

Yes, we conservatives are spawns of the devil.

Hey, you said it, not me. :xoxo:

[SteveMacD]

I'm 100% against censorship here. Liberal or Conservative, NO ONE's post should be deleted because the mod thinks the political leanings of the poster(or links provided) might be offensive to other Ledgies. There might be one or two people here who are under 18, but it certainly seems like nearly everyone else here is of voting age. If you can't take reading a post that isn't up your political alley, well, grow the hell up. Life isn't always about "you".
Censorship sucks.
Just don't mention "old what's her name" on Christine's board. :xoxo:

[amber]

:lol:

Me, too. Our b(insert * here)tchiness towards each other is over for now. :laugh: All is well in Chiffonland.
*substitutes singing "Street Angel" for Kumbaya* :laugh:

".....Rhinestone collections all the time....I wonder what Curtie would saaaayyy.."

[Johnny Stew]

Just don't mention "old what's her name" on Christine's board. :xoxo:That retort deserves a big pitcher of beer, Steve! ;) :laugh:

[dissention]

*substitutes singing "Street Angel" for Kumbaya* :laugh:


Shrub already did that when New Orleans went underwater, darling.
http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050830/capt.capm10208301856.bush__capm102.jpg

[amber]

Shrub already did that when New Orleans went underwater, darling.
http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20050830/capt.capm10208301856.bush__capm102.jpg
Shrub sang Street Angel!!!? :eek:
:p

hehehehe. Yeah, I know, the guitar playing. Honestly, I'm running out of words that can adequately describe the "lower than a flea on a snakes belly" qualities of that guy. :(

[Johnny Stew]

That dude looks pretty panicked about Bush manhandling his guitar. :laugh:

By the way, am I the only weirdo picturing Bush in that scene from Airplane, where Lorna Patterson (the stewardess) is singing, and keeps knocking the IV out of Jill Whelan's (the dying girl) arm?

[dissention]

Shrub sang Street Angel!!!? :eek:
:p

hehehehe. Yeah, I know, the guitar playing. Honestly, I'm running out of words that can adequately describe the "lower than a flea on a snakes belly" qualities of that guy. :(

He's lower than the massive genital wart on the crotch of the Grand Diva of Fug, Courtney Love. Words fail when trying to describe that "man." Ed Harris had it right when he said Shrub wasn't even a real man.

[estranged4life]

That dude looks pretty panicked about Bush manhandling his guitar. :laugh:

By the way, am I the only weirdo picturing Bush in that scene from Airplane, where Lorna Patterson (the stewardess) is singing, and keeps knocking the IV out of Jill Whelan's (the dying girl) arm?

Mark Willis is afraid Bush might show that between the 3 of 'em in that picture, That the guitar is the only one with talent :lol:

I keep picturing Bushy in the Airplane scene where Lloyd Bridges keeps saying "I picked a fine time to give up smoking"....But with Bushy ya substitute smoking with "Coking" (As in cocaine!!!)

[amber]

He's lower than the massive genital wart on the crotch of the Grand Diva of Fug, Courtney Love. Words fail when trying to describe that "man." Ed Harris had it right when he said Shrub wasn't even a real man.
:laugh:
:eek: :eek:
wow, insults that shock even me...Wait - you like courtney, right? :shocked: :laugh:
A real man? No, obviously not. He couldn't qualify as a real dog or cat. Maybe a real rat....but actually rats are very smart.

[GateandGarden]

:laugh:
:eek: :eek:
wow, insults that shock even me...Wait - you like courtney, right? :shocked: :laugh:
Yeah, I swear he's said before that he likes her.

[SteveMacD]

He's lower than the massive genital wart on the crotch of the Grand Diva of Fug, Courtney Love. Words fail when trying to describe that "man." Ed Harris had it right when he said Shrub wasn't even a real man.
:eek: Holy Christ, that was vivid!

[michelle2677]

Yes, you can still read a locked thread.


o.k..cool :) thanks for clarifying :)

[SteveMacD]

btw..steve...you're gonna have to change your signature to
"He grew up as a sh*t spark from the old sh*t flame. And then he turned into a sh*t bonfire" etc.... ;)
Don't cross the **** line!
http://www.showcase.ca/trailerparkboys/images/residents/main_lahey.jpg

[michelle2677]

Don't cross the **** line!
http://www.showcase.ca/trailerparkboys/images/residents/main_lahey.jpg


ummm....okay *L*

[SteveMacD]

ummm....okay *L*
Obviously, you don't get the reference:
http://www.tpbtributeclub.ca/TrailerParkBoys.jpg
Trailer Park Boys (http://www.trailerparkboys.com)

[michelle2677]

nope..sorry...look-I lead a sheltered life *L*

[SteveMacD]

nope..sorry...look-I lead a sheltered life *L*
That show is honestly one of the few shows I set my watch to. It's terribly funny. It's a mock reality show, a la the Osbournes. At the beginning of each season, they're released from prison. The rest of the season is about some half-baked scheme they have to make a lot of money, all while dealing with their pain-in-the-ass trailer park supervisor who's an ex- cop and his assistant/lover who is a former gay, male prostitute. And, everybody is either drunk or high. Lot of adult language, but the stupidity factor is to die for. Of course, on the last episode of every season, everything falls apart and the boys go to jail.

[michelle2677]

That show is honestly one of the few shows I set my watch to. It's terribly funny. It's a mock reality show, a la the Osbournes. At the beginning of each season, they're released from prison. The rest of the season is about some half-baked scheme they have to make a lot of money, all while dealing with their pain-in-the-ass trailer park supervisor who's an ex- cop and his assistant/lover who is a former gay, male prostitute. And, everybody is either drunk or high. Lot of adult language, but the stupidity factor is to die for. Of course, on the last episode of every season, everything falls apart and the boys go to jail.

*LOL* aaaahhh....NICE!! I'll have to check it out sometime :)