|
1971. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 12:21:01 AM I'm in total agreement with Wabbit. 1972. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 12:24:54 AM Sorry, I was around almost from the beginning of the Fray. I used a different moniker at that time. And it's true that the posts at that time were more erudite thanks to pseudoerasmus and others than they are now. The forum has evolved but I don't think its fair or accurate as you seem to be doing to attribute the changes to Jexter. The obsessive nitpicking of Pelle Nilson was a much bigger turnoff. Experience has shown that, for the most part most of the threads operate about as well with or without a host. Your dedication to the Sports thread is an exception. The others seem to do fairly well without a lot of nitpicking over off topic posts. In my opinion dumping Jexter in favor of getting VonKreedon back would be the equivalent of trading a Great Dane for a Chihuahua. 1973. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 12:42:24 AM Only when measured in terms of posting quantity. 1974. wabbit - 12/5/2008 1:22:28 AM I'll take a thoughtful Chihuahua over a Great Dane that thinks it's a good idea to jump through windows and rip the house apart any day of the week. 1975. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 1:30:29 AM Arky, that's a matter of opinion. 1976. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 1:43:15 AM Further, although I found Pelle irritating at times I would never have suggested that he stop posting, and I would now welcome him back to this forum as I would concerned with whom I disagreed 99% of the time. I don't think we improve The Mote by banning participants. Nothing wrong with jawboning, however. 1977. wabbit - 12/5/2008 2:22:43 AM If you still don't understand the point, wonkers, I don't know how much clearer it can be made. Discussing or arguing a point and trolling are simply not the same thing. Jexster can spam and troll his own thread to his heart's content. That was its purpose. I'm betting he will rise to the occasion in that thread. However, no matter how many times he's been asked to discuss and not troll or spam, he has never had the slightest bit of interest in doing anything but exactly what he felt like doing in any other thread.
If you can't admit that Jexster makes post after post after post, very often with to no effect *except* to disrupt, something Pelle *never* did, then I will accept that no matter what evidence is in front of you, you will not see it. This is not about who is agreeable, or who is objectionable, or who is politically correct. This is ALL about respect for this forum and the other participants here.
We may not improve the Mote by being rid of Jexster, but I seriously doubt things could get any worse. How about this — I've been making excuses to keep him on for a very, very long time now. He has only proven me wrong. Let's say we see how the Mote does without him for a couple years. And face it, this isn't capital punishment. Besides, I no longer believe this forum, or any of its participants excepting you, means anything at all to Jexster. I'm willing to be reviled for making an unpopular decision for a few more years. Won't be the first time.
I admire your defense of Jexster, truly — I know that you are friends IRL. But as I've said, I don't give a rat's ass. Feel free to carry on your defense, but I have said all I have to say. 1978. wabbit - 12/5/2008 2:24:11 AM Calling the typo police… 1979. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 3:57:01 AM When I occasionally attempt analysis of a serious topic I usually don't get a response from anyone.
That's because I usually agree! 1980. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 4:00:57 AM wabb- I don't remember you ever being so infuriated. What, specific post(s) of Jexster's set you off? 1981. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:02:22 AM I have neither admitted nor denied with your characterizations of Jex's activities but rather said that they don't bother me nearly as much as they do you and a couple of others. May I suggest also that his contributions to the political thread in comments, links to serious links such as those of Juan Cole and others, cartoons, etc. have far exceeded those of anyone else. I wonder if you have ever bothered to look at any of them? I don't recall ever seeing a single post from you on the Politics Thread. If someone asked me what your political views are I wouldn't be able to hazard a guess. [It's possible my memory is failing. If so, I apologise.]
And, as I said, I don't think its fair to attribute, as you seem to be doing, the Mote's decline, as you characterize it, to Jexter. I admire your faithful work on the Sports Thread but I am constrained to point out that it does not inspire a great deal of participation compared to the rich variety of comment on the Politics Thread. 1982. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:15:24 AM I will agree in the interest of comity that occasionally when searching for the wheat among the chaff of Jex's quotes, when he's in his manic posting phase, like the proverbial boy digging into a pile of horse shit and commenting, "There's gotta be a pony in here somewhere!" 1983. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 4:19:40 AM Further, without Jex and the Wizard of Whimsy, the Politics Thread would be dull indeed. They are both sources of lots of solid input and humor for that thread. What is spam to one may be gems to someone else. 1984. arkymalarky - 12/5/2008 5:12:47 AM " it does not inspire a great deal of participation compared to the rich variety of comment on the Politics Thread"
Wabbit knows every thread in this forum inside and out and has been an integral part of its function from its inception. She consistently monitors all the threads. Your reduction of that role to this statement about the sports thread is beyond comprehension. But it's irrelevant to the outcome of this issue in any case.
Wiz--back in the International thread, for the most part, but I'll let her speak more to the specifics, tho she referred to them early in this discussion. 1985. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 6:09:10 AM Arky, I am aware and appreciative of Wabbit's contributions to The Mote. BTW, contrary to her comment, I was an early participant in the Fray using the moniker NarbyNorbert, as I recall. We did have more "heavy duty" serious contributors back then. And I wish we could attract more today. But it doesn't seem to be happening. 1986. vonKreedon - 12/5/2008 6:57:19 AM Right, it doesn't seem to be happening and the fact that so many of us who used to post in politics and such have implicated Jex's serial spamming as one of the reasons for our loss of interest in participating might lead you to consider that Jex is a large reason for the lack of serious contributors. 1987. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/5/2008 7:43:09 AM I've learned to ignore most of jexster's many methods of slander and it's likely that I missed yet another of his outrageous insults; but my curiosity is now peaked because wabb's pique peaked. I don't think jexster means to be unkind--though he often is.
I'll check out the thread, but I bet I'll still miss it.
1988. alistairconnor - 12/5/2008 10:43:25 AM I've stood aside from this discussion because my opinion is probably an outlier, and I wouldn't want people to give it any particular weight.
But here it is anyway : I am of the opinion that Jex has mellowed over the years. I enjoy discussing stuff with him, I find him an invaluable news feed, and I even find nearly all of his humour funny, including the professed antisemitism and racism.
OK, not the India stuff.
On the other hand, I completely agree with Wabbit and I'm 100% behind her.
And the more I think about it, the more I think that his perverse dedication to shitting in his own nest is designed to keep the site small. And that pisses me off, because the only thing that keeps us from having frequent erudite discussions here, as of old, is critical mass.
I have always been a pragmatist with respect to forum moderation. Remember, I'm a European, we don't have free speech over here anyway.
So I volunteer to be Jexster's personal censor. I generally check in several times a day, and I'll just delete stuff that I deem likely to be considered offensive or disruptive.
How about that? 1989. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 3:26:51 PM That's an absolutely crazy idea. The Mote don't need no stinkin' personal censors. 1990. wonkers2 - 12/5/2008 3:42:49 PM What "India stuff?"
|
