Questions on Personal abuse & Thread Merging (Cut from another thread)

[Dempsey]

Originally Posted by ellboy

Ok if some/majority/one disagree with a sweeping statement then fine but tell me Dempsey what use to the argument is it to respond in a personally abusive manner. To me this ruins the thread and causes unease and a wariness of certain posters.<o:p></o:p>

In my case, If it a wariness to think harder about your arguement before you post, then I'm happy.

I don't think the word 'muppet' is abusive, nor did I intend it to be but its not about what you say its how its intrepreted. In this instance I have already apologized to him.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by Dempsey

Yes that can sometimes happen. Hence why I'm sick of the countless threads on the same subject e.g. this topic. I know that has alot got to do with and people are sick of each other now because of it

When you see "6 Mergered" in the title, it gives an indication of how many times we've had to join two threads on the same subject and it directly proportional to our patience with people that happen to start the next one that will have to be merged.

Merging threads confuse thread content IMO and somewhat ruin them as posts get lost.

I can understand the difficulty in controlling people creating similar threads. However if there are multiple threads as for instance there has been in this case. Then any new created thread should be deleted instead of merged. As IMO if they have not observed perhaps two or three threads relating to the same subject then they deserve to lose their newly created thread altogether.

P.S. Dempsey I know you apologised mate and good on you for that.I also apologise if it seems I was fingering you specifically. This was not my intention it just seemed a good opportunity to express what I have been seeing for a long time now. It just seems in general that people prefer a personal ding dong than to actually debate a subject matter. I guess it is difficult to regulate as it is so rife.

[Dempsey]

Originally Posted by ellboy

It just seems to me that some are waiting for their moment to attack an individual but don’t contribute to the actual point of the thread. I am not saying you were entirely guilty of this in your response to Tamster. However it is definitely something that is happening on a regular basis all over the forum and to me it is somewhat ruining decent debate.

Yes and we are trying to stamp it out.

[Dempsey]

Originally Posted by ellboy

Merging threads confuse thread content IMO and somewhat ruin them as posts get lost.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I can understand the difficulty in controlling people creating similar threads. However if there are multiple threads as for instance there has been in this case. Then any new created thread should be deleted instead of merged. As IMO if they have not observed perhaps two or three threads relating to the same subject then they deserve to lose their newly created thread altogether. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>

They do but the intial arguement breaks down into the same as before in other threads and 2 or more concurrent threads on the same topic sucks the life out of people trying to have a debate and often we dont wait for it to happen. We know it will from experience.

[Paul67]

Originally Posted by ellboy

Merging threads confuse thread content IMO and somewhat ruin them as posts get lost.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I can understand the difficulty in controlling people creating similar threads. However if there are multiple threads as for instance there has been in this case. Then any new created thread should be deleted instead of merged. As IMO if they have not observed perhaps two or three threads relating to the same subject then they deserve to lose their newly created thread altogether. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p>P.S.
Dempsey I know you apologised mate and good on you for that.</v:shapetype> I also apologise if it seems I was fingering you specifically. This was not my intention it just seemed a good opportunity to express what I have been seeing for a long time now. It just seems in general that people prefer a personal ding dong than to actually debate a subject matter. I guess it is difficult to regulate as it is so rife.

TC SCANDAL.....Ellboy is fingering Dempsey

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by Dempsey

They do but the intial arguement breaks down into the same as before in other threads and 2 or more concurrent threads on the same topic sucks the life out of people trying to have a debate and often we dont wait for it to happen. We know it will from experience.

It must be quite a quandary for you guys. My take on it would be any personally abusive or non thread related content should be deleted unless the thread has evolved to a different subject by the majority perhaps to the 4 or 5 of the most recent posters in that thread.

Just a thought however I am sure you guys have got your own ideas how to solve it. Good luck with that.
LOL Paul 67 PMSL

[Dempsey]

Yep we do

[topbhoy1967]

Iv got no problem with people arguing their case in whatever way they want.

This site would be crap if the posts went like this -

"I think Riorden is good"

"I dont concur old fellow"

"thats OK my friend, each to their own"

"fancy a Werthers Original?"

"why yes, thank you old chap"

"we concur that Strachan is a fanny though, dont we?"

"of course old bean"

[hoopymo]

mmm yes i concurr old boy

[Ham&Jam]

Originally Posted by topbhoy1967

Iv got no problem with people arguing their case in whatever way they want.

This site would be crap if the posts went like this -

"I think Riorden is good"

"I dont concur old fellow"

"thats OK my friend, each to their own"

"fancy a Werthers Original?"

"why yes, thank you old chap"

"we concur that Strachan is a fanny though, dont we?"

"of course old bean"

Werthers Originals suck!

[Reno.]

Originally Posted by topbhoy1967

Iv got no problem with people arguing their case in whatever way they want.

This site would be crap if the posts went like this -

"I think Riorden is good"

"I dont concur old fellow"

"thats OK my friend, each to their own"

"fancy a Werthers Original?"

"why yes, thank you old chap"

"we concur that Strachan is a fanny though, dont we?"

"of course old bean"

To top that off, a Family Guy style drive-by argument.

''Oh Reginald! I DISAGREE!" *Drives off*.

[ellboy]

Originally Posted by topbhoy1967

Iv got no problem with people arguing their case in whatever way they want.

This site would be crap if the posts went like this -

"I think Riorden is good"

"I dont concur old fellow"

"thats OK my friend, each to their own"

"fancy a Werthers Original?"

"why yes, thank you old chap"


"we concur that Strachan is a fanny though, dont we?"

"of course old bean"

I don’t think posters speech should be diluted for example.

You’re talking shit, bollocks, out your arse m8. Comments like these relate to content not directly at an individual.

However I think the personal insults like you’re not a real Celtic supporter, go fuck yourselve, muppet or you’re a cunt. The last two are debatable as they are used sometimes for sarcasm. However at times all and many other statements are made to personally degrade or abuse a member and to me this serves no purpose but to bully. It also causes unease and back and forth insults which ruin the threads.

[ChampionsElect]

Banter ( and abuse) makes the world go round....

[Dempsey]

Originally Posted by ChampionsElect

Banter ( and abuse) makes the world go round....

Until it goes too far and someone has to step in