For "off topic flaming" read "boaz's compulsion to shoehorn some divisive race-baiting into every thread".

Too many posters make too many assumptions or make fallacious statements about issues/other posters and present them as immutable absolutes but when challenged they resort to personal attacks etc.

Following are examples and no more. (Col is insisting on names. More on that in a minute)

DB ridiculed me for starting each rule with “do not” in my opening post....That was a cut/paste from "rules" section.
My suggested additions/comments were after the rule.
He went on to compare to a ‘mini George Orwell’ (I wish)
His ultimate intention was assert his ‘right’ (?) to say whatever he wants and as often as he wants regardless of others and context. In reality FOS has to be a conditional ‘right’ lest it denies other peoples’ ‘rights’ creating social anarchy.
Note that word “Context” it plays an enormous part in evaluating an assertion.

Assumptions/unqualified assertions can and do lead to miscommunication etc. On OLO we really only have the words of the individual (no visual or voice cues) to judge a comment by.

Personal differences in this environment make it appropriate to at least start with tolerance/sensitivity. Only Col specifically trumpets his distain for these. Others only practice it when addressing challenges/disagreements.
Claims of PC, elitism are most often defensive and contextually erroneous.

Direct questions are ignored in preference to personal attacks. e.g. See the question I posed to Col wasn't answered directly. He did seem to imply he only acts politely to those posts he agrees with.
One is entitled to ask what is their “pay off”.

It is sad to note that both DB and Col automatically assumed that this topic was directed at them and offered themselves up as sacrificial targets. I can’t speak for others ….Sorry but my focus was far beyond my specific issues with either of these two hence the title wording. There are other posters whose antics also contributed to this Topic. I didn’t name them because I didn’t want it to turn personal or an ego game. To paraphrase Clinton It’s the issue stupid…not the individual.

I'll now withdraw the attacks will continue

Examinator

“It is sad to note that both DB and Col automatically assumed that this topic was directed at them and offered themselves up as sacrificial targets.”

I suppose using our names were clues to what was directed at us.

I suppose me not marching to the beat of your drum and having not been told, first, the response expected from the “Lord High Examinator”, it was inevitable.

Doubtless, in daring to respond to his criticism, I am making more points for the “Lord High Examinator” to claim faux-wounding from…

SO BE IT

Unlike some, I do not seek to restrict the words and style of other posters by making convoluted rules defining the exact syntax of engagement in debate, Rules, so constructed to suit a personal bias and expectation.

So all I can say is

Tough Tish

This thread has and continues to be an absolute hoot

It demonstrates the despotic lengths, the likes of Examinator will go, to impose his expectations on us all.

At the end of the day

GY, our host, decides what has gone too far.

Unlike Examinator, I am BIG ENOUGH to submit to the will of the host and accept his / their decision.

I find it shameful for the likes of the Lord High Examinator & Co to parade their pompous hubris around and expect everyone else to Kowtow to their commands and that does include Bronwyn whose arrogance extends to suggesting someone else’s “judgment” is clouded, when we see, time and time again how Bronwyn is such a one-eyed socialist , that she inspires me to religious references

Matthew 7:5 (King James Version)

“Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

And to be "balanced", I will end this post by refering to an Islamic prayer…..

Oh Allah,
No one knows what is in my heart,
No one knows what is in my mind,
But all can see what is sticking up behind..

Consider yourselves MOONED….....

Troll Rouge: << Consider yourselves MOONED…..... >>

Sigh. So much for civil, adult debate.

Thanks for trying, examinator.

Lord High Exam-inquisitor and various others...

Inquistors....searching out the heretics of social discourse and placing them on the rack....

COL says it in one....

"It demonstrates the despotic lengths, the likes of Examinator will go, to impose his expectations on us all."

Exammy...in your opening post you did not give a 'cut and paste' of the rules.. you gave a mish mash of your own opinions mixed in with the rules.

I don't know what your life experience has been, but let me list a few of mine which tend to underly a lot of my passion:

-Experienced violent ambush, explosives being hurled at us, gun butts used against our heads.
-Encountered Malaysian Military police with sub machine guns in our faces on a bus while checking ID documents, not knowing at the time whether they were singling out 'white people'.. (the reality was they were looking for Islamist extremists in white robes who had just carved up the local police
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=NOtXcEmHdjoC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=batu+pahat+police+station+attacked+by+Islamists&source=web&ots=ScWs9l9FuF&sig=B2CdhCjXivzZicwlbKbc-RWd4yU&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result

I've flown into Vietnam during the war (not a pilot).. entered Butterworth (malaysia) as race riots were unfolding.. saw daily a Muslim head man who was tasked to murder men, women and children at our mission...

Had the water cutoff by the Muslims in the village behind us during a water shortage.
Been stopped at borders by angry M16 toting Malay Soldiers...(after an election loss by the Muslim candidate)
-Banned from MuslimVillageForum for asking 'difficult' questions about Mohammad.

So... taken all together.. to me your whining about manners and rules tends to evoke a similiar reaction as Col gave you.

You see.. when the dust settles, it will be wayyyyy 2 late to find you and blame you for your 'tolerance'.

If you want to live under conversational Sharia law..goto Muslim village forums...they have it. And if you raise a question about 'The Prophet' you will be banned. "This" is a reaction to that.

If you spent just 10% of your whining time.. on serious historical study of Islam, and abandoned postmoderenism, you would see 'the light' :)

Dear Col,

It certainly does depend on your point of view...
I was merely expressing mine.

And, I'm happy for you that you're having such a good time,
I don't begrudge you enjoying yourself.
However as you pointed out this is an opinion Forum, and as such there
is an etiquette for communicating online. The same as there is
in dealing as a professional with clients at work, or your fellow
colleagues, or your family members, or simply people in general.
Good manners, politeness rules.

There are an informal "set" of rules for behaviour in computer bsed
conversations. If we comply to codes of conduct (which is all examinator has been suggesting) then it would make the "play"
easier and more enjoyable for everyone not just you.

Remember individuals are reading your posts and it is people at the
other end of the technology to whom you're speaking, not the PC
screen.