Squelching

[Laurie]

Oh no, Ed, you mentioned that name! I have to disagree with you on him having some good posts. He had posts that might have been good, but his attacks on others, on the BSA in general, combined with his refusal to consider any other opinion just tarnished everything he posted. That is the problem with continual nastiness or stubbornness: when one just wants to attack a person rather than an opinion, it devalues the posts IMO. When one is refusing to show that he is listening to other opinions/ideas, that also devalues future comments from that person. Around this campfire, like others, discussion is give and take. Without listening to you, I cannot intelligently respond to you. Of course, I may choose who to listen to, but I'm afraid I'll miss too much if I don't listen to all

[packsaddle]

Speaking of the...well whatever, what DID happen to Wheeler? Did I miss some big event along the way?

[evmori]

Laurie,

By good I meant interesting.

 

Pack,

I think Terry booted him when we had out 48 hour sabbatical from this forum.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[OldGreyEagle]

What I find amazing is that the two posters who are after Bob Whites hide with the most vengeance are also ignored by other forum members as well, but its only Bob White who incurs their wrath. One is ignored by 3 users and another by 5 as this posting.

 

Perhaps the quesiton isnt should there be squelching as much as those squelched should ponder why people (plural) dont want to be bothered by their posts?

 

America, what a Country, where you are free to say what you want and others are free to ignore you

[Hunt]

If you miss you-know-who, you can find more of his wisdom at rec.scouting.issues.

 

One suggestion on squelching--if you're truly going to squelch somebody, why not act like they don't exist after that? If you're not going to read their messages, don't critique them.

[evmori]

Why does Bob White incur my wrath? Because of his "holier than thou", "I'm always right", "Don't question anything the BSA does" attitude.

 

I know people have squelched me. Their loss.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[packsaddle]

H'mmm. I was thinking that it was supposed to be 48 DAYS. I wondered why so many were breaking the rule. Duh! Anyway thanks for the clarification.

[EagleInKY]

I don't squelch. I like to read what the different posters have to say. And, with the exception of the previously mentioned wheelie boy-wonder, I think all posters have valid points at one time or another. I tend to scan the updates to the posts, and make judgements on who I pay more attention to than others. If a comment is made in reference to another post, I may go back and read it. Again, I make a judgement call. So, squelch if you want, but I like to know what's going on.

 

What I find amazing is that the two posters who are after Bob Whites hide with the most vengeance are also ignored by other forum members as well, but its only Bob White who incurs their wrath.

 

I'm not in anyone's camp on this subject. I wish FOG would drop it and move on, but that's his decision. I think both of these guys make some good points, from different perspectives. I actually learn from both of them. As for why BW catches the wrath, I think it is because of his style. BW is very precise and likes to parse your words and find the flaw in what you post (I realize that by saying this, I'm inviting him to do that very thing to this post). While I find his knowledge and insights very informative and agree with him a great deal of the time, he tends to assume the worst in others (or at least in me). We recently had an argument over fund raising, he accused me of lying, breaking the rules, misrepresenting the BSA and breaking the law. All of which are not true. But this type of personal attack does get tiring and is what brings on the attack from the "other side".

 

 

I hope the forum continues in the spirit of mutual support and informal education/advice. I hope the mean-spiritedness exhibited by many of us from time-to-time (myself included) will soon cease.

[Bob White]

A little clarification here is needed. EagleinKY's actions were in violation of the BSA policies as they are expressed in the Money Earning Application rules, there is no denying that.

 

The methods they used to raise the funds could put the unit or the donating business in violation of tax laws, I was only warning him of those dangers which he did not seem aware of.

 

I was indeed misrepresented in what I had said, in my posts, and I presented evidence of that. Had those misrepresentations been unintentional then the poster should have said so and apologized. That did not happen.

 

I cannot help the fact that he was offended. The actions were his, I offered only the fact of the BSA rules, and evidence of his own postings compared to what I had actualy written.

 

I did not make the BSA rules or the federal tax laws, or force anyone to misquote me.

(This message has been edited by Bob White)

[EagleInKY]

You see, Mrs. Smith and others new to the forum, Bob has just taken the bait and made my case.

 

But seriously, this is exactly the treatment that makes people upset with Bob. I will stand before any judge and jury regarding the grant funds our troop received. I broke no law, I violated no policy.

 

Admittedly, my first post left a few points out. Once I was able to clarify them, I feel that I vindicated myself. I received several PMs from people who agreed with me. (I can only assume they didn't publically agree for fear of receiving the indictment of Mr. White as well).

 

Anyone who posts on a forum like this knows the feeling of writing what you think is a perfectly clear and concise point, but finding out from the responses it incurs, that it clearly was not the case. I've had many of my posts challenged. That is perfectly fine. FOG once accused me of running my troop like a den. But, based upon the wording I used in the post, that was a fair criticism. Once I clarified my statement, he was okay with it.

 

Consider the fund raising example for a moment. My original post did leave out some points. What if Bob had approached it like this:

 

Eagleinky - I'm confused. It sounds like your unit is requesting money in a manner not consistent with the BSA's Money Earning Application. Can you clarify this for us? How do you have the 501©(3) status required to get a grant? Did your CO make the request, or did the troop? How were the funds given to the troop and were their stipulations?

 

If Bob had approached it like that, it would have been both educational and positive. And, if I had broken any rules, I would have learned and been able to correct my actions going forward. However, Bob's attack created an instant battle that made me look guilty. I was almost expecting a SWAT team and a flurry of government TLA agencies to show up at my doorstep the next day.

 

The other problem this causes is that there are a great number of people who consider Bob's word as "gospel". Therefore, in their minds, I can only assume I am a felon. And, that is what bothers me the most. Bob can think what he wants about me, but I feel that his words have tainted me in the eyes of his minions.

[Proud Eagle]

I have yet to make use of the squelch feature. I do not intend to ever make use of it.

 

However, if some poster decides to make their personal mission in life attacking me, or some other thing such as that, then I would likely be forced to use it.

 

Perhaps everyone who posts here should agree to just forgive and forget the past insults and injuries by other posters, and everyone could also rededicate themselves to the applying the Oath and Law to these forums. Then everyone could turn the squelch off and we could get back to the business at hand.

 

Online re-dedication ceremony anyone?

[buffalo2]

Get a grip folks - This world is full of things that are best ignored and things said for their own sake (and people looking hard to be scandalized by them)

Whether you use an automated computer filter, or just consider the source and your experiences with it and move along is your own business...

And must agree with an earlier poster when it was said:

We are known by the company that we keep

[Laurie]

EagleInKY: I have no less respect for you now than prior to this exchange, and I would hope that others would read what each person has to say and then judge (hate that word in this context) accordingly. I am right now on the receiving end of false accusations, and it is quite possible they will hurt my reputation. However, I know I have not done what I was accused of, and when I contacted the person named in this mess face to face, this person had no clue what I was speaking of and offered to help me out where possible. What it boils down to is this: my reputation really can only be tarnished by what I do. Yes, what others say can effect it but mostly to those who don't know me, and if I can stand before them with a clean conscience, having done nothing deserving of blame, then it is that same reputation that will actually help me through this mess. I hear what you are saying, and I think carefully about what I say of others, for I don't want to hurt or offend or to do harm to someone else's reputation. I love your example of how to approach an issue, but do you know I've been called a manipulator for using that very approach? Honestly, people see what they see--we just have to do our very best to do what we believe to be right, and to apply correction where and when necessary. Hopping off my soapbox now--and talking to myself here as much as to you

[acco40]

Face it, posters on this forum and in life, have very varied personalities. Many (conservatives?) take a hard "you're either with us or against us" type attitude on almost everything. Others like to be adversarial regardless of the topic. Some like to pick on spelling, grammar, etc. It takes all kinds to make up the world. For me, I squelch the squelch. However, I "speed read" a few posters which is a self imposed quasi-ignore on my part.

 

The internet is the antithesis of direct contact. Rules of etiquette seem to go out the window for many. Many will not go through a simple proof read and spare us the spelling and grammatical faux pas they impose on others (another case of my time is more important than your time?). Most post thoughts and ideas they would never verbalize in a face to face situation. That is sad in my opinion.

[packsaddle]

Just a thought. Is it possible to squelch oneself? I'm almost afraid to try...but I wonder what would happen. Anyone know?

Back when I started on computers we used the punch cards. And if anyone submitted a card that said, 'stop' the computer would literally stop (I may not remember the command correctly but you get the idea). It is this ancient anxiety that keeps me from performing this experiment.