If the goodbye note offers condemnation but not a shred of constructive feedback or even honest criticism, then it qualifies. Likewise if it attempts to shame individual members, or similarly holds the author above reproach while blaming nearly everyone else for the slightest indiscretions. If a goodbye note does any of this, then perhaps it shouldn’t be written.
Would it be possible to move the more serious discussion in the “random grins” thread about the asylum reasons into a separate thread, assuming @Wanderfound agrees?
It’s lead to some discussion that’s a bit grim (including from me, sorry).
What is the point of bringing this here - are you flagging/notflagging my post for some reason, or are you suggesting that we need to accelerate the process of developing community guidelines so that we can know what the standards are?
I have a major headache, one that is not caused by board happenings. Whilst I wait for the ferry to the land of Nod, a moment, please.
This ties into what @ChickieD has been exploring, but there is indeed a biological basis for differences in behaviour. It’s not strongly tied to gender, nor to class. I’m speaking of course, about moral matrices and moral languages.
(The You Are Not So Smart podcast has covered this in some fascinating recent broadcasts)
Take, for example, Hobbes and Luther: Hobbes believes it was absolutely wrong to lie for any reason, whereas Luther believed lies could be beneficial and even employed in evangelising.
(For the record, I really admire my male coworker’s eyes and hair - I think he’s missed his calling as a model)
@staff will be able to sort this out. I just wanted to put in my bit and explain my reasoning on the existence of the thread in question:
I am content for the continuation of MO because:
Chris Hemsworth has fantastic abs
I am not in a place of power, nor in a place to create a hostile work environment for the men featured in the thread, nor are the participants
see point 1
Yes, I feel this is an appropriate environment to do this - it’s a hobby board
I flagged the thread, you brought this here without flagging, and you brought my post, not the OP by @Melizmatic. So I read this as you were putting my comments up to moderation, not the Male Objectification thread. Or am I misinterpreting your comment?
Then how is it going to work exactly? You’ve been reported here for disrupting the other thread, you brought a fight here with @Melizmatic, and when @LearnedCoward pointed out (quite rightly) no one was objecting to the Male Objectification thread, not least because it had been dormant for weeks before you decided to muck with it, all of a sudden it’s “personal attacks”.
The reaction to the thread’s unexpected revival has been positive – except from you.
So. Sincerely asking. How do you expect this to work? Because we’ve tried logic and analogy and concrete examples, and they all just seem to bounce off you.
I think they have a point about there being a need for a cheesecake thread (that’s the point, right?) but given the history of the portrayal of women the line between the sexy and the pornographic is pretty thin and easy to step over.
There’s also the idea that you don’t get to choose how and when someone gets offended.
Then there’s the idea that it seems like everyone else was cool with it but no one thought to ask the rest of the community if this is actually true.
Also, everyone on this board will hop on the drama llama like uber started offering free rides. Then they will speak poorly of the other’s llama. Me too, but it needs recognizing.
To sum up my position: I should have hired a model back when I was employed and could afford it.