[Ninong]

Someone who is overly exuberant in their expression of their convictions to the point of annoying some sensitive souls who consider it "flaming"...

or

Someone who opens the topic of so-called "flaming" for discussion and then deletes the entire thread with no explanation after several members have engaged in thoughtful discussion.

What's up with that?

If you don't get a stream of congratulatory replies, you simply close the thread, pick up your marbles and go home?

Ninong

[BTL]

Duh! what else are you supposed to do? take the criticizim? sheesh!

Ira

[Ninong]

Yes. Unless, of course, you're not open-minded and only interested in replies from those who agree with your position.

[BTL]

*agrees with you and wants you to know his first post was very scarcastic*

Ira

[Ninong]

What is that supposed to mean in English?

[scubadude]

Ninong,

Im sure you are referring to me deleting the FLAMERS! thread (If not then you should be more specific about what you post) I did so because I thought it appropriate I Did not like the way it was going.....Im sure you can retaliate as many ppl on to this thread as you want....The FLAMERS! thread had 248 views...and only 24 responses.....hmmm....that means that everyone loved to read it but Nobody wanted to voice their opinions on the matter......You can make of this what you want......Im not gonna get caught up in this this debate with you or anyone else for that matter....I started this hobby for fun...NOT to get all stressed out and frustrated at someone if they make a mistake....Yes I started the thread...and the option was left to me to delete it too....I believe it was in the best decision! I stood up for what I thought was right.....You can throw all these grammatically correct words that make you look so sophisticated and prim and proper all you want it still doesnt change the way I or some other ppl feel! Its about feelings.....NOT about science....I guess we all have our different priorities! I hope you understand....Somehow I dont think you do though Who knows maybe you will someday! There was a statement in the thread that spun off into different directions....I created the thread for one reason....asking ppls opinion on FLAMERS!....NOT about other connecting threads...You yourself have came into threads and been very blunt to ppl about them directly or indirectly getting off topic or off base of what the Original post was about....My post had NOTHING to do with Seahorses....and apparently it got associated with that....Start another thread if you want to talk about it I dont care....but when I see ppl associate with something that I didnt want to associate the thread with in the first place You BETCHA im gonna delete that thread!!! But alot of it had to do with making some ppl upset. I didnt want to see it get out of hand. But of course i definately see that me and you have differences in opinions. I would love to say thats all I have to say to this matter.....but I have a feeling you are gonna make me want to keep on addressing it!

[Ltspd]

Originally posted by scubadude
Ninong,

The FLAMERS! thread had 248 views...and only 24 responses.....hmmm....that means that everyone loved to read it but Nobody wanted to voice their opinions on the matter......

I read a lot of threads I never post to. Didnt realize We needed to post to all the threads we read.......

I agree with Ninong, why would one start a thread and then close it if they dont like the answers. Beleive it or not I or someone elese may be following that thread without posting to it and one of us may be trying to learn from that thread. Your original thread of flamers wasnt one of those but I read it anyway

[scubadude]

Originally posted by Ltspd


I read a lot of threads I never post to. Didnt realize We needed to post to all the threads we read.......

You dont paul...thats why I put after that statement...Think of this what you will....merely speculation on my behalf. My thought was that ppl are intimidated.....Even the 24 ppl that responded to it where repeated replies. ( ppl that posted like 2-3 times in that post ).

Originally posted by Ltspd


I or someone elese may be following that thread without posting to it and one of us may be trying to learn from that thread. Your original thread of flamers wasnt one of those but I read it anyway

So whats the big deal then? If it wasnt something you can learn from, but yet it was upseting ppl...I deleted it.....I fail to follow your point Paul

[schrocat]

Originally posted by scubadude


.....Even the 24 ppl that responded to it where repeated replies. ( ppl that posted like 2-3 times in that post ).

I guess I'll have to take your word on that statistic...seeing how the data was destroyed.

later,

[scubadude]

Yes you will have to believe me.....Boy lets see how many other moderators incinuate (sp?) that Im lieing! ( Yeah I know you are enjoying this Ninong )

Why is a person allowed to delete a thread that they create??? This is not conditional! This is an OPTION that solely relies to the poster!! This option was given to my BY you moderators....AND Reefland.....It doesnt say Clik this box if this information is not usable to anyone to delete this.

Ok...Look guys...I can obviously see that im gonna get outnumbered and GANGBANGED , which is fine! Im not gonna sit here and kiss any1's a$$ over this situation.

[schrocat]

scubadude,

I wasn't implying you were lying.

I was just making the statement that a verification of any facts or numbers is hard to achieve in light of the posts now-non-existant status.

I'm sure you meant well.

Regards,

[thezookeeper]

The mere fact that THIS particular thread was started in the first place just gives support to the theory that the deleted thread would have continued to spiral further. There is a first amendment that everyone has the right to exercise. And then there is tact and diplomacy and morals that some chose to entwine into their daily lives and use in conjunction with the first amendment.

Scubadude: Your intent to end the post was your decision and yours to make. I do not question it in the least. Frankly, it's none of my business. Nor anyone else's. I will stand behind your reasons because I know of your character and your good intentions.

Personally, Ninong: I do hope you got to read my reply before it was deleted. But I will forever remember that you ASSUMED incorrectly and drew conclusions based on your assumption. I could not care less what you think. Period. If you feel the need to continue to offer your picture perfect explanations on why your opinion is so above everyone else's, then by all means, continue to dissect and give your two cents to each and every statement certain people make. I have better things to do than explain my morality and my ethics to you. And for the record, Dr. Ron is one of my "heros" in this hobby. Not a flamer. Neither is Eric Borneman a flamer. They are both very smart and dedicated individuals IMO. My point was lost on those who replied and did not understand. I'm just here to learn and try and help others.

Regards,

Joanne

[schrocat]

zookeeper,

I missed something.

I do remember you applying the same heated things you are saying about Ninong to Eric B.

"I don't care..."
"Who does he think he is"
"Don't care how many articles he has written"

I thought the Mods had gone out of their way to address your comments in a civil manner.

regardless...

I am leaning to the closure of all future anti flame rants because they appear to be more destructive than the flamers themselves.

Regards,

[scubadude]

Originally posted by schrocat
scubadude,

I wasn't implying you were lying.

Maybe you werent....but it can be easily read that way when you state

Originally posted by schrocat


I guess I'll have to take your word on that statistic.

[schrocat]

Originally posted by scubadude


Maybe you werent....but it can be easily read that way when you state

"I guess I'll have to take your word on that statistic. "

Maybe I wasn't?

Try...

I wasn't.

As far as the "ease of implication"...not buying that either.

Just stating the facts, or lack thereof now that the've been deleted.
Not implying anything else.

Regards,

[asmith]

May I suggest that we all forget about what happened in the past and move on. The thread in question can't be retrieved so we might as well forget about it. I don't want to see something this trivial cause me to lose respect for everyone involved.

Lets all shake hands, and get back to reefing.

JMO,
Andrew

[scubadude]

Shrocat:

When you said:

You guess that you will just have to take my word on it

That means (in my eyes) that you could OR could not be calling me a liar, thus I took it as an implication.

Really if its all the same to you. I would like to just leave it alone


Joanne I commend you on your posting.....I wont say how much, otherwise some ppl will think im just interested in replies from those who agree with my position.

[thezookeeper]

Schrocat: If you want to quote me, quote in the exact context of what was said. Not snippets. And again, my comments were not directed to you. The meaning of my statements was missed in the first place so there is no reason to go on about it. That is all.

I do believe that everyone should stick to reefing talk. This is far from productive.


Joanne

[schrocat]

zookeeper,

Sorry if clarification of syntax is in question.

I am unable to find your exact quotes.

They were deleted.

[scubadude]

OMG....Shrocat...you love to beat a dead horse dont you!

This is beginning to be too much