Subject:
|
Re: April Fools posts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Fri, 6 Apr 2001 00:17:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
142 times
|
| |
|
|
Mark Sandlin wrote:
>
> Frank Filz at ffilz@mindspring.com wrote:
>
> > But never tell anyone what they should find funny,
>
> I agree completely.
>
> > and be careful in
> > complaining about what people don't find funny.
>
> Be careful in complaining about what people DO find funny.
Sure, but I hope no one would get upset if someone complained about
being made fun of.
> > I'm not sure how I feel
> > about your joke because I didn't get to read it untainted, perhaps I
> > would have found it funny. What soured that whole incident for me was
> > that folks who got sucked into the joke were put down for being
> > concerned about your leaving the community.
>
> I assume you're referring to Eric's comment:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/fun/?n=6959
>
> Eric's comment wasn't intended as a put-down. There was much confusion about
> the use of the term "sucker" or "suckered." Unfortunately, you're still
> referring to it as a put-down, even after Eric has specifically stated that
> it wasn't so:
>
> http://news.lugnet.com/admin/general/?n=9052
True, but to me what matters is that people were upset by it. No matter
how you cut, slice, or dice it, folks were upset, and then after they
got upset, people kept telling them "go shush up, it was just a joke".
That attitude soured things for me. Does that matter? That's up to the
whole Lugnet community to decide. Am I going to leave Lugnet over this
one incident? No. Might I leave Lugnet if I continue to feel like my
feelings and opinions aren't valued? Probably. Who would want to
participate in a community which doesn't value their contribution?
> > To me that makes Lugnet very
> > unfun if compassion is looked on as a stupid thing.
>
> Once again, Eric never intended his comment to be an insult, or to say that
> someone's compassion was stupid. This is yet another example of one of those
> things that gets blown all out of proportion because someone takes offense
> at something and it snowballs from there.
>
> In my opinion, the danger to the community is the overreaction to the
> misinterpretation. It's been discussed before my joke came along that all
> the overreacting is a bad thing, and yet it continues.
Well, if people continue to overreact over certain things, one should
examine why they are overreacting. If one of two people always
overreact, perhaps you can ignore them. If a number of people overreact,
perhaps it's worth investigating. If someone who'se contributions are
valued overreacts, perhaps it's worth investigating.
> Is our solution to sterilize all of our posts? I'd hate to see that happen.
No. Please try and understand what my point is. My point is that the
community as a whole will set the tone here. That tone may turn some
people off. So be it. I just want people to understand that there are
people turned off by the trend of Lugnet's tone. I'll also grant that
some of those folks are people turned off by the idea that Lugnet might
be sterilized of all jokes and pranks. I don't want that. What I want is
people to consider the impact of their posts, and acknowledge that they
may upset some people, and to try not to get upset when someone does get
upset at a post.
I'm beginning to wonder why I bother any more though.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: April Fools posts
|
| I understand, and I don't know if it is worth bothering about either. Every post to Lugnet is not a personal communication between two people; it is an announcement to the entire community, or at least the subset that monitors the newsgroup. Before (...) (23 years ago, 6-Apr-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: April Fools posts
|
| (...) I agree completely. (...) Be careful in complaining about what people DO find funny. (...) I assume you're referring to Eric's comment: (URL) comment wasn't intended as a put-down. There was much confusion about the use of the term "sucker" or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Apr-01, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
