EnviroLink Forum
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/

Courtesy
http://www.envirolink.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1570
Page 1 of 2

Author:  RF [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 9:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Courtesy

I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.

Author:  josh knauer [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

RF wrote:
I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.


Courtesy... amazing! The reason posts are deleted is because the poster did not have the courtesy of following the fairly simple rules we have here. It is not always practical to leave a note in its stead and sometimes I just don't have the time.

-josh

Author:  RF [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.


Courtesy... amazing! The reason posts are deleted is because the poster did not have the courtesy of following the fairly simple rules we have here. It is not always practical to leave a note in its stead and sometimes I just don't have the time.

-josh


Wow...you assumed I was addressing moderators exclusively?

Author:  josh knauer [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

RF wrote:
josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.


Courtesy... amazing! The reason posts are deleted is because the poster did not have the courtesy of following the fairly simple rules we have here. It is not always practical to leave a note in its stead and sometimes I just don't have the time.

-josh


Wow...you assumed I was addressing moderators exclusively?


Moderators the only ones who can delete someone else's post? Or are you referring to the author of a post deleting their own posting? If the latter, I think the system does indicate that the author decided to delete their own post, but I could be wrong.

-josh

Author:  Wayne Stollings [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:27 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.


Courtesy... amazing! The reason posts are deleted is because the poster did not have the courtesy of following the fairly simple rules we have here. It is not always practical to leave a note in its stead and sometimes I just don't have the time.

-josh


Wow...you assumed I was addressing moderators exclusively?


Moderators the only ones who can delete someone else's post? Or are you referring to the author of a post deleting their own posting? If the latter, I think the system does indicate that the author decided to delete their own post, but I could be wrong.

-josh


There are several in one thread I seem to remember that just say "deleted" which may the reference being made.

Author:  RF [ Thu Dec 29, 2005 10:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
I think when someone deletes a post, they should leave a courtesy note in its stead.


Courtesy... amazing! The reason posts are deleted is because the poster did not have the courtesy of following the fairly simple rules we have here. It is not always practical to leave a note in its stead and sometimes I just don't have the time.

-josh


Wow...you assumed I was addressing moderators exclusively?


Moderators the only ones who can delete someone else's post? Or are you referring to the author of a post deleting their own posting? If the latter, I think the system does indicate that the author decided to delete their own post, but I could be wrong.

-josh


Hmmm...well I don't think *I* could delete my own post simply as author. But I'll let that one sit awhile.

However, even as moderator if you delete a post because of an alledged rule violation...how is one to even know what rule was violated? Now, where you deleted some posts from the other night where Arc and I were just bull****ing around in this section, I can understand that. And you left a note to that effect even.

Did you delete a post of mine where I responded to NT spasm's announcement that he was "trying" to leave this forum but trying to get other ARAs to go with him? I used words to the effect, "Because they need to show you the way?"

I really don't see how that violates any rules, though I admit to a certain snarky factor in it.

Author:  josh knauer [ Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

RF wrote:
Did you delete a post of mine where I responded to NT spasm's announcement that he was "trying" to leave this forum but trying to get other ARAs to go with him? I used words to the effect, "Because they need to show you the way?"

I really don't see how that violates any rules, though I admit to a certain snarky factor in it.


I did... take the snark factor down a notch. Stick to the debating, which you do well (even if you are wrong most of the time! :lol: ) Ok, snark on... :shock:

Author:  RF [ Fri Dec 30, 2005 12:42 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Courtesy

josh knauer wrote:
RF wrote:
Did you delete a post of mine where I responded to NT spasm's announcement that he was "trying" to leave this forum but trying to get other ARAs to go with him? I used words to the effect, "Because they need to show you the way?"

I really don't see how that violates any rules, though I admit to a certain snarky factor in it.


I did... take the snark factor down a notch. Stick to the debating, which you do well (even if you are wrong most of the time! :lol: ) Ok, snark on... :shock:


Well then why didn't you take the post down in "I'm confused" where I said I thought this was a forum for Phantomuk to whine? Too much accuracy amid the snark?

Author:  Sandra John [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:35 am ]
Post subject: 

RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dylsexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.

Author:  Donnie Mac Leod [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 11:57 am ]
Post subject: 

Sandra John wrote:
RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dylsexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.



Actually he has often done so Sandra but it went Woosh ,right over your head. :lol: In fact the way this is thread playing out I sense RF is making a point and getting a few laughs at the same time. :wink: BTW ,do you think Josh is to slow to meet RF's rather challenging repertoire and you need to be a sacrificial lamb or something.?

Author:  josh knauer [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Donnie Mac Leod wrote:
Sandra John wrote:
RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dylsexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.



Actually he has often done so Sandra but it went Woosh ,right over your head. :lol: In fact the way this is thread playing out I sense RF is making a point and getting a few laughs at the same time. :wink: BTW ,do you think Josh is to slow to meet RF's rather challenging repertoire and you need to be a sacrificial lamb or something.?

I am slow... it's called working. I've already given RF a final warning in another thread. It's not up for debate, so please don't try.

-josh

Author:  RF [ Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

Sandra John wrote:
RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dylsexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.


You're using present tense language, but going back 12 days to attempt to make your point. Josh and I already discussed this, right here in this thread.

I don't know if I have all that much time left here, and I believe it's a little disengenous of you to challenge me in such a manner when I'm under threat of being banned already.

But sure...we can have some fun at FMB.

Need a link?

Author:  Ante Bozanich [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:44 am ]
Post subject: 

Sandra John wrote:
RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dyslexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.


Dear Sandra John

Good, go for it if you have time, Sandra.

After all that has been said here, I have just been called "spasm" which if I understand English correctly means "an abnormal muscular contraction". I am going to protect myself. I think I am going to call my attorney to find out weather under the new federal law signed in last Thursday I can file charges. "Stiff fines and two years in prison" is the only thing some people seem to understand.

Sincerely, Ante Bozanich

Author:  Archer [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 4:01 pm ]
Post subject: 

Nt-Spcssm wrote:
Sandra John wrote:
RF

You just aren't really taking the point are you? "NT-spasm"? Phantomuk's, "whining", and the charming little number on dyslexia. Where does all this come from? We don't have a rule against, "snarking", yet but I wouldn't push it too far. Tell you what, why don't you try your razor sharp wit on me instead. Let's all have some fun.


Dear Sandra John

Good, go for it if you have time, Sandra.

After all that has been said here, I have just been called "spasm" which if I understand English correctly means "an abnormal muscular contraction". I am going to protect myself. I think I am going to call my attorney to find out weather under the new federal law signed in last Thursday I can file charges. "Stiff fines and two years in prison" is the only thing some people seem to understand.

Sincerely, Ante Bozanich

:roll: Unbelievable.

Author:  josh knauer [ Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

Archer wrote:
After all that has been said here, I have just been called "spasm" which if I understand English correctly means "an abnormal muscular contraction". I am going to protect myself. I think I am going to call my attorney to find out weather under the new federal law signed in last Thursday I can file charges. "Stiff fines and two years in prison" is the only thing some people seem to understand.

Sincerely, Ante Bozanich

:roll: Unbelievable.[/quote]
Clearly someone is learning the American way... call in the lawyers! :roll: I can't wait to read the newspaper coverage over the first challenge to this law because someone was called "an abnormal muscular contraction". So many images come to mind... :twisted:

-josh

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/