should ilxors be tempbanned for taking their beefs to other social media? (twitter/fbook/myspace/etc)?

long live beef

can we call beef something else

Stop threatening the jews, dude they have a history of fucked up shit happening to them

jewsplaining

http://henriksenlearning.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/excitement.gif

Also trying to figure out how to overtalk on ilx like technically speaking 'cause I always get these "to slow" messages when I try to do that

At this point I'm kind of staggered this thread's been left unlocked let alone not been half-nuked.

you can lock this thread; the beef will live on in ten thousand others plus a few Twitter accounts.

quincie for mod.

you can't stop the beef. you can only hope to contain it.

the beef goes on
drums keep pounding rhythm to the braiiiin
ladadadi diiii
ladadadi daaaa

http://www.jimbooosbeef.com/images/jim_bucket.gif

Why couldn't we just keep the beef frozen? ;_;

Crossthread beef be like crosstown traffic
Posters be on some real shit
Everyman get scared and prepare for confrontation

ive been run ragged by customers for the last few hours, so this is coming a bit late but I wanted to get some points of clarification out there wrt my thoughts on how this ought to be handled in the future

I agree with stet wrt the official stance of ilx, but I think we should have a system where people that have this happen have a recourse to request a temp-ban. These cases will be tested obviously beyond an auto-ban, if someone tweets "@nudespock u crazy man owl city is the best" thats not going to do it, but a tweet like the one mordy posted certainly would. In this case, this policy was not stated clearly, so nobody is going to get banned, but if this continues off-board after this point, either of you (or anyone else) is welcome to bring it to the attention of the mods. and to be clear, "bring it to the attention of the mods" is a specific statement, basically MRF or IMP or a direct email to us, not complaining in a clusterfuck or waiting for action to be taken on your behalf.

this is a policy that is somewhat in flux basically because it is a very rare occurrence, and because there are lots of variables wrt this that cant be tidily ruled on, but the bar for banability needs to be set fairly high. if it isnt obvious (this being the other problem with mopping this up many days later when no one seems to be able to get the timeline/deleted tweets/etc straight anymore), it can't be acted on, which means that twitter in particular is going to be hard/impossible to police.

"a tweet like the one mordy posted" meaning kates tweet with his twitter handle in it, to make that clear

ah, was gonna say

ive been run ragged by customers for the last few hours

― I'M THE ONLY ON (jjjusten), Thursday, October 18, 2012 7:08 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ha for a sec i thought u meant ilxors who needed moddin

hahaha

brb gonna hardmod this kid that keeps playing the intro to back in black wrong over and over again

*taps shoulder* sry bro... ur banned

If you think that tweet, in response to what he was doing is the absolute worst thing you've seen, on ILX or elsewhere, I mean... all I can say is, my god you have lived a sheltered fucking life.

tempoban

Thks jjj

who the hell said that xpost

xp Yeah but OL that wiki page neglects to mention all the authors that Barthes threatened and then killed.

― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, October 18, 2012 5:38 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

lol

near
far
wherever you are...
the beef will live on

no one said that

leave me out of this xxp

the terrible sins of Mordy, in chronological order

this question seems to be asking if you would make use of a pain-free (to yourself and others) way of committing suicide. i think for most ppl the impulse to stay alive is more than just avoiding pain - it is avoiding death/void/oblivion/nothingness. it is certainly that for me.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:34 AM

i sometimes wonder whether it would be in society's best interest to create a way for people to commit suicide in a responsible (to their families + loved ones + themselves) way. presumably people are going to do it anyway, so maybe if we had some kind of "ethically" sanctioned dystopian way to do it (like those drinks in children of men, or the suicide booths in a mind forever voyaging), it might ease some of the pain. this might be a copout tho, since treatment has got to be the better model, right? (kant would certainly never condone suicide, even under the best most responsible conditions)

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:41 AM

I asked this question. This question is not about suicide. It is about not-existing.

Please can people not use this as a suicide thread, that was not the intention and I'd really rather the discussion did not turn that way.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:46 AM

I don't think anyone in this thread has any right to draw conclusions about the mental state of anyone except themselves. Thanks.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:55 AM

I disagree with the op regarding what this thread is about. Luckily death of the author etc.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:57 AM

srsly speaking tho any question that asks about self-annihilation necessitates a discussion of suicide imho

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 8:59 AM

even if it is super special suicide

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:00 AM

sn't it great that there are people on this thread who can mansplain to me what the thread I started is about! Because I would ~never~ have known what was in my head otherwise.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:01 AM

who cares what you think the thread is about is really the point. i would happily "mansplain" 20th century literary theory to you, but i'll let wiki handle that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_Author

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:05 AM

f you could push a button and authorial intent would simply cease to exist, would you press it?

^^^ yes

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:05 AM

xp I don't see why the thread creator should have any special privilege to police the discussion

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:22 AM

and some dude otm. even if it would be ethically okay for me to wipe out my own existence, i don't think i can make that decision for the life that is dependent on my own existence to exist.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:23 AM

If a thread-starter asks a question which is "do you prefer red or blue?" you don't get to walk into a thread and declare that actually red is yellow for the purposes of this question and claim "ooh, death of the author."

Especially if that means drawing dubious psychological conclusions about what it means for anyone on the thread who chose "yellow" (when they actually chose red.)

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:30 AM

what if the thread-starter asks: 'if you could eliminate yellow or blue, which would you eliminate?' and someone declares that eliminating any one of those colors would also eliminate idk green (if i remember my primary and secondary colors correctly?) and then the thread starter said: "NO. ONLY ELIMINATING THOSE COLORS DON'T TELL ME HOW TO FEEL"

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:35 AM

maybe it's like that dr who thing where the crack in the wall eats you and then everyone forgets you ever existed.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:37 AM

Mordy, you're a total arsehole and I wish you would cease to exist. Or at least keep your unpleasantness off threads that I start. Can you please just go away and just not do this, for once?

If you can't do that, I'm going to ask for the thread to be locked, because I'm really, really sick of this.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:39 AM

Get over yourself.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:40 AM

I'm becoming completely serious, before you start with your "oh noes, women be being emotional" garbage again. Please just stop this.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:40 AM

WCC, any issue I have with you has nothing to do your gender.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:41 AM (6 days ago)

fwiw, I don't really have an issue with you except that you love to escalate ILX arguments. I don't even have a problem with that tho! Go with god.

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:42 AM

also lol @ *my* women are being emotional garbage. i've never said that. but when did you stop beating your inappropriate work crush?

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:43 AM

i don't think i said anything warranting a flag post itt, but do what you've gotta do xxp

― Mordy, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:44 AM

Matt, please can you lock the thread. I'm deeply tired of this.

― White Chocolate Cheesecake, Friday, October 12, 2012 9:45 AM

http://www.theoi.com/image/img_polyphemos.jpg

talking about suicide is actually triggering of suicidal impulses if you are that way inclined

posting to say you don't get to make generalizations like this no matter how bad you want to, Dr. Cheesecake

Yes I have to be honest that one stuck out at me too. Start a thread about "choosing not to exist" but say that suicide cant be part of it because thats "triggering". Can't have it both ways.

For people (plural) to point that out does not make them hateful overtalkers/mansplainers/bullies. Mordy surely coulda chosen his words better, but its not some big thing. Christ Ive had way worse on here.

how the hell is that 'mansplaining'? yeah this is about the most ridiculous clusterfuck ever

the main thing i get from the convo just posted is that Mordy is actually trying to engage with the question on his own terms after making the logical leap most people would make to suicide. That that, somehow, is disallowed by the threadstarter which is frankly ridiculous. discussing the fantasy of not existing without discussing suicide is basically not possible. and i say that as someone who thinks about it a fair bit.

well i'm a bit drunk.

Q: Why Can't the original question be clarified further down, e.g. "This is not about xxxx"?

Because if the discussion goes off, naturally, in that direction, does the OP have to then start a new thread? Or explain why not?

xpost Not Possible? Anything's possible!

i'm not a mansplaining expert but i always thought it was a more specific, patronizing attitude kind of thing where some dude basically commits the appeal to authority fallacy, but it appears that he's drawing his so-called "authority" from the fact that he's a man. i've definitely seen men do this to women many times before, so i actually kind of like the term because when people use it correctly it describes complex in a succinct way. i didn't think, though, that mansplaining referred to situations where someone is a man and talks

The crux of this whole mess revolves around the mental jiujitsu of turning a disagreement into a personal attack.

splain man talkin'

i think she should just get her own board where she starts the topics and deletes replies that do not answer the original question or replies that are triggering, and should see how many people want to be on the board and how many posts are left

The mansplaining and misogynist accusations are completely offensive in this case and WCC can fuck right off with that

harbl with the real talk, btw.

it's not even so much that one must follow the dictates of the threadstarter but that one is virtually assaulting the threadstarter if one disagrees

harbl otm

Automatic thread bump. This poll is closing tomorrow.

stop adding to the pile-on, System

lol

system is always mansplaining

system possibly also an anti-semite

systems are doing it for themselves

sorority is on the twitter