[DaveyBoy]

Originally Posted by NorCalDoug

I'll not vote.
I'm not a fan of banning in general.
IMO, someone should have to seriously screw up...screw up HUGE...to get banned.

Don't like the use of "foul" language? Block it -- the feature exists.
Avatars too suggestive for you? Turn them off -- the feature exists.
Certain forum members drive you up the wall? -- place them on your ignore list -- the feature exists.
Really guys...it's not that difficult to do. Control your own viewing pleasure.

But that's difficult isn't it -- Self-censorship?
Some people obviously have a very difficult time with it.
It's the "no, I don't want to switch it off" mentalility that's at work here...and it's really sad that it has to affect the rest of us.

Well said.
I didn't vote in the poll, and I'm not a fan of protecting people from themselves either.

Originally Posted by 78-FJ40

she has to make decisions for the good of the business that are annyoing and should be unnecessary. Usually centered around whiney/complaning/idiotic/etc. customers.

Also well said,
2 sides to everything.

Originally Posted by Gumby

78 opened himself to attack because he was either unclear in his intended message, or meant something that was not true. There was no attack intended, just clarification.

One of the biggest problems with an internet forum is confusing conversation and opinion with
"opened himself to attack"

This place needs a lot more "lighten up Francis"


.

.

.

.

[Atticus]

Originally Posted by DaveyBoy

Well said.
I didn't vote in the poll, and I'm not a fan of protecting people from themselves either.






Also well said,
2 sides to everything.




One of the biggest problems with an internet forum is confusing conversation and opinion with
"opened himself to attack"

This place needs a lot more "lighten up Francis"


.

.

.

.

In fairness to Gumby, he was responding to my use of "opened himself up to attack."

[Gumby]

I was. I'm still not sure where the attack was.

[Atticus]

Originally Posted by Gumby

I was. I'm still not sure where the attack was.

It was meant as a figure of speech. It's funny how things that you never even give a second thought end up being the tempest in the teapot.

[Cruisin'Carolina]

Good post NCD. After that, I noted that a ton of people agreed with it.

FJ tried to give a similar example that was mistaken for an analogy. Gumby gives me hell for some position or action he percieves me to be guilty of.

I think the icing on the cake was 5 or six refutes about "that's not the reason" without actually explaining what he thinks the reason is. But even that is not really new, so:

I agree with Whodat.

[BeefBarley]

This thread now brings the suck........

it's crazy that the one thing that brings us all together ends up positioning us to take sides. I for one still think the FJC is fawking ugly.....

[woody]

Originally Posted by NorCalDoug

We all have choices in what we do and do not read. We all have the ability to systematically ignore those who annoy us. Why is it that people don't use the tools that are readily available?

not completely true....in CHAT, it's personal choice to participate....

in TECH, where you may have posted a question and are looking for an answer, you shouldn't have to filter out objectionable images or be forced to simply "turn off" all the avatars for all users.

if there was an option to have Chat avatars and Tech avatars, I would...since there isn't, the family safe rule applies.


bottom line...'MUD is my FULLTIME BUSINESS...if I don't make money, the site closes. Period. The rules are there because they are what I believe creates the best atmosphere for the business to succeed.

if you don't like the music, change the channel.


(PS: I think "the suck" started with the first post....it's done.)