CompuServe Thread

#Kevin's Korner

20 messages in this thread
#143871From: Bruce McGlassonDec 27, 1994 10:17 PM
j, Good idear… I totally agree with you. I've been a 3DS forum lurker for a long time, and have only recently become a CIS "regular." I lurk because I find that by the time I DL, read, write a response, and find time to UL my messages, the problem has long since been resolved or the topic has morphed to a different level. With the birth of SC2K, I find myself spending almost as much time in WinCIM as in 3DS. This is a terrific forum! And although Kevin appears much of the time to be possesed by the Demon of Excessive Verbosity, most of his contributions are "must reads." Those who find a contributor's diversions too distracting for the purported intent of this forum can always check the UID of the contributor and move on to the next message. I refuse to defend or attack anyone for what they post here, and I certainly don't believe anyone should be vilified for speaking their minds or for sharing interests, passions, and fetishes. I'll leave that up to the Sysops. Take 5 is boring and inhibiting to us who lurk while waiting for a rare opportunity to contribute. Everyone who has written anything here has done so because this is such an exciting project, and the vast majority of what I've read has been valuable in moving the project forward. I don't understand why anyone would want to limit what anyone else chooses to post here. Diversions are good IMO! "Today I will rely on the language of love and understanding. If that doesn't work, I'll go back to intimidation and fear." — S. Goldstein JMO …B.
#143895From: John EllisDec 28, 1994 1:45 AM
Bruce, What can I add to sentiments so well expressed? Jonas has pointed out however that they do get complaints when things get off topic, which means they must get complaints all the time, as we all have a tendency to stray, at least to some degree. Jonas has suggested that we might create a new charter for the new forum which will be opening up for Studio City. If you have any ideas regarding this, I'm sure everyone would take them into consideration. I have a suspicion however, that ASOFT has probably the most lienent standards as there is a fair amount of self policing. Obviously even then things can get out of hand. And the question is, what do you do then. I think Paul found himself in a tough situation, and Kevin responded to the restraint. Having been in a similar situation, I can tell you that it is not easy to swallow. No one wants to be called down. So how do you keep things from getting to that point? BTW I'm glad you've joined the active role, I do think Studio City will provide an opportunity for alot of others to participate and I really appreciate your input.
#144428From: Bruce McGlassonDec 31, 1994 3:33 PM
je, from one of you earlier postings – <<Seriously, once the new year starts I won't have time to devote to all this, <<though I hope to be able to complete a building for the project. Are you going away or do you intend to poke in daily for a look and a lurk? <<Jonas has suggested that we might create a new charter for the new forum <<which will be opening up for Studio City. If you have any ideas regarding this, <<I'm sure everyone would take them into consideration. My ideas for a charter would only contain one line: Anyone launching a personal attack on anyone else for any reason whatsoever will be banished from the kingdom forever. Personal attacks should be reserved for Take 5 with only a simple notice of the attack posted to the offender in the forum where the offendee was offended. That seems to be what precipitated the section shifting stuff anyway. It's really hard for me to grasp that concept. My brain nearly always outruns my fingers when punching thoughts through wires. How does ones fingers type so rapidly that a message is sent before the brain can control the emotion and edit the message to conform to commonly accepted practices of courtesy and a modicum of diplomacy? <<Obviously even then things can get out of hand. And the question is, what do you do then.>> Take it to Take 5/Want Ads << No one wants to be called down. So how do you keep things from getting to that point?>> Take it to Take 5/Want Ads See? That's my answer to everything except where to put the most interesting threads to come down the forum pipes since I've been visiting CIS! Then, my answer is leave them in SC2K where they began, where they developed and matured, and where they still belong. Thanks for asking …B.
#144451From: John EllisDec 31, 1994 7:17 PM
Bruce, >> Are you going away or do you intend to poke in daily… << Weekly is more likely, as for responding, I find it frequently takes a lot of thought to compose a coherent message, and its rather time consuming. My response to you recent comments is a good case in point. >>Anyone launching a personal attack on anyone else for any reason whatsoever will be banished from the kingdom forever. << So what about someone saying "Mexicans are lazy" and you happen to be Mexican and the other person knows is? And what about people replying with arrogant answers that make other people feel stupid? And for that matter anyone making anyone else feel belittled as I'm sure the thread heading KEVIN STOP IT did? What your suggestion implies is that there is only one sin, that of making a personal attack. In my experience personal attacks only sting when they're true. And there are many ways to define what constitutes a personal attack. I find it much more offensive when someone comes to the forum for an answer and through oversight, or because of an already self professed ignorance gets slammed for not knowing, or is answered in an arrogant manner. That I find very disturbing as it is contrary to the intent and purpose of this forum and has alienated alot more people. I don't have as clear a view of the solution as you, I think common sense and rational behaviour should be the order of the day, and that a tone can be set by the general populace which will encourage that kind of behaviour. I don't believe that either party in the recent spat was in the right, but I wouldn't banish them both for their offenses. And I wouldn't want to try to decide who was more wrong. Its not possible to know all the circumstances that led up to it, as there are factors which maybe outside the perview of the forum. What mind set one takes to the forum can be influenced by a lot of factors. I do agree that emotional thoughts should be put aside, I also agree the wires that guide our fingers on the keyboard should be connected to the rational portion of our brain. But I know from experience, that there have been times when I took more than a few moments to think (at least that's what I thought I was doing) of an appropriate response only to find that my thinking was clouded by my perception (not necessarily emotional) at the time. In time one can improve ones response to negative situations as well. Your solution does not provide for that potentiality, which right or wrong our justice system does. I think its interesting that many times solutions to problems are answered with clear cut answers. Unfortuneately the problems are often not as simple as the solutions would imply. We have 1st Amendment and 4th Amendment rights which people seem very willing to discard in order to maintain a convienent uniformity; life is not convienent, nor are the problems; and the solutions only become convienent, when we have a simple solution like chop off their heads, banish them from the kingdom, etc. etc. The implications are profound. Steven Hawkings would have been thrown over a cliff in ancient Sparta because physical defects were not allowed in that militaristic state. Course they probably could have cared less how the universe was formed. I use this analogy because I see no difference in it as compared to banishing someone for making personal attacks on the forum. Is it not possible that someone can learn what's appropriate and that they're contribution may be greater than this particular flaw in their social skills. Is it not also possible that there are many people out there who would contribute and not lurk if they felt comfortable that they could make mistakes without retribution. Or has it been pre-ordained that only the socially adept and the technically skilled need participate. Yes I suppose, for some that would be very convienent. I don't know you well enough to find a particularly appropriate example but for instance, if someone said to you "Americans work all the time and don't know how to live" and they themselves had a fair amount of inherited wealth from a foreign two class system, would you take it personally? I did, though it doesn't fall under your category of "personal attacks" in the most literal sense. And how would you respond? I responded that it is easy for someone with wealth unearned that has the leisure to "live it" to make a comment like that. That would be a personal attack, no? The point being that defining "personal attack" is as much in the intent as what is said; here we have no tone or inflection. This conversation could just have easily gone on between two people who were ribbing each other in a light hearted manner. Thanks for your response, BTW Happy New Year. <g> John
#144457From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Dec 31, 1994 7:55 PM
>> In my experience personal attacks only sting when they're true. << PMJI, but I worked for many years with people with all kinds of problems, including really screwy relationships, especially in their families. Unless someone is doing a super Zen thang (or whatever), personal attacks can hurt a-plenty when they are false. Otherwise I found your message to Bruce very full of wisdom… Thanks for the consistently level head and calm voice, John. Paul S.
#144463From: John EllisDec 31, 1994 10:53 PM
>> Unless someone is doing a super Zen thang, personal attacks can hurt a-plenty when they are false. << Well I don't think I'm super Zen, but as I said… I suppose if one does not know one's self very well, then personal attacks could be very destructive. Regardless its not a very civilized way to behave and your insight reaffirms the reason, and reinforces awareness. John
#144625From: David GouldJan 2, 1995 1:19 PM
<<Otherwise I found your message to Bruce very full of wisdom… Thanks for the consistently level head and calm voice, John.>> You can see now why I call him "John the Baptist with head intact". This guy never loses his head! (There is two meanings there) David "Worship or warship" Gould
#145085From: Bruce McGlassonJan 4, 1995 11:46 PM
je, Damn you're good at driving a point home! I seem to have misled you, however, into writing a very well stated dissertation regarding keeping one's head well balanced. I neglected sprinkling my message with those pesky emoticons and thingys in brackets <BG> again, which is customary for me, so my message must have appeared more serious than I had intended. I can't say I'm sorry I did it tho' because I thoroughly enjoyed reading your response. <<So what about someone saying "Mexicans are lazy" and you happen to be Mexican and the other person knows is?>> That's not a nice thing to do in public or in private, and I really can't imagine anyone resorting to such a banal remark on the forum. Even I might be provoked into firing off something emotionally erratic and irresponsible to the idiot who UL such a stupid statement as that. I don't think the sysops would allow it to happen more than once without taking appropriate action either. <<And what about people replying with arrogant answers that make other people feel stupid?>> That, unfortunately, has been the case on too many occasions. It can hardly be prevented, but I like to assume (I know, never assume anything) that everyone who reads such statements forms an appropriate opinion of the author for future reference. In every case I can recall where an answer was tainted with arrogance or disdain, some kind hearted soul has rushed in to post an apology and offered a courteous and helpful answer. <<And for that matter anyone making anyone else feel belittled as I'm sure the thread heading KEVIN STOP IT did?>> Well, that started the fire storm, didn't it? Why did that message have to be posted anyway. Wouldn't the more appropriate response be a private e-mail, or a note leading to Take 5? I don't know… maybe that was tried first, and the only recourse seemed to be to blast away in public. I didn't enjoy reading the tantrum any more than anyone else who has commented on it. It was … well, embarrassing for lack of a better term. But heck, why dwell on it any more. It's over. <<What your suggestion implies is that there is only one sin, that of making a personal attack. >> Yeah, I guess it does if you read it without the smily face after it. 🙂 <<I find it much more offensive when someone comes to the forum for an answer and through oversight, or because of an already self professed ignorance gets slammed for not knowing, or is answered in an arrogant manner. That I find very disturbing as it is contrary to the intent and purpose of this forum and has alienated alot more people.>> Amen. I couldn't improve on this statement at all. Very well put! <<I don't have as clear a view of the solution as you, I think common sense and rational behaviour should be the order of the day, and that a tone can be set by the general populace which will encourage that kind of behaviour.>> Again, my intention was along the lines of "A Modest Proposal." Without the emoticons and punctuation faces, everything is so serious. I agree completely that common sense and rational behavior is paramount to this type of communication. <<I do agree that emotional thoughts should be put aside, I also agree the wires that guide our fingers on the keyboard should be connected to the rational portion of our brain. But I know from experience, that there have been times when I took more than a few moments to think (at least that's what I thought I was doing) of an appropriate response only to find that my thinking was clouded by my perception (not necessarily emotional) at the time.>> But in the end, John, did you blast away without restraint? If yes, what were the consequences of your actions. If no, aren't you gald you didn't? <<Is it not possible that someone can learn what's appropriate and that they're contribution may be greater than this particular flaw in their social skills.>> If the flaw in their social skills is uncontrollable rage and rude, insulting outbursts in public places, I can't see how any contribution could outweigh the flaw. I like to believe we exist here for short periods of time in a civilized society guided by a loosely defined code of acceptable conduct. That code includes the requirement of controlling one's emotions even when situations are influenced by factors invisible to the populace. We all have the ability to selectively ignore anything. <<Is it not also possible that there are many people out there who would contribute and not lurk if they felt comfortable that they could make mistakes without retribution.<< Sure, that's a major problem. I've been lurking for years, and still do in many places, but I'm comfortable here and in SC2K, so I contribute my drivel at my own peril. I don't welcome getting flamed for speaking out, but it;'s bound to happen if I continue to leave off the freakin' emoticons! 😉 😮 <<Or has it been pre-ordained that only the socially adept and the technically skilled need participate. Yes I suppose, for some that would be very convienent.>> Well, uhhhhh… a cursory perusal of the many sections of this forum shoots that assumption full of holes. <<"Americans work all the time and don't know how to live" and they themselves had a fair amount of inherited wealth from a foreign two class system, would you take it personally? … And how would you respond? I responded that it is easy for someone with wealth unearned that has the leisure to "live it" to make a comment like that. That would be a personal attack, no?>> Only if they were in my face with a handful of my lapels. I try not to let ignorant people irritate me to the point that I lose my temper and act stupid. I tend to evaluate people by observing them over long periods of time. Everyone has a bad day, and everyone does stupid things. Those who frequently do and/or say stupid things tend to fall out of my field of view rather quickly. There is much to see in this life, and I try not to clutter it up by tolerating inordinate amounts of ignorance. I would probly respond by laughing real loud, calling a cop, or leaving without comment. Who needs to defend the American lifestyle? <<The point being that defining "personal attack" is as much in the intent as what is said; here we have no tone or inflection. This conversation could just have easily gone on between two people who were ribbing each other in a light hearted manner.>> Once again, amen. You've said it all, and I agree. Nice message, je. (no emoticon here, I mean it) …B.
#145107From: John EllisJan 5, 1995 2:47 AM
Bruce, >> Damn you're good at driving a point home! << Over did it, no doubt. <g> Well being a rather prolithic writer yourself you can appreciate the finer points. The funny part of all this is that it started with what I thought was a rhetorical question; "Whata ya do?" but when I got a lengthy answer I felt obliged to respond in kind. Anyway, I hope that our discourse has helped at least in a little consciouness raising. I know it took me awhile to figure out how to handle this medium, so maybe the points we've raised will help highlight the pitfalls so that others new to this medium can avoid them. Actually it would make a pretty entertaining book. "Etiquette on the Internet" <g> Thanks for your thoughts and insights, glad to have you aboard. John
#145403From: Bruce McGlassonJan 6, 1995 7:36 PM
John, <<Actually it would make a pretty entertaining book.>> I've already started extracting some of the more entertaining exchanges from SC2K and here for my personal archives. Maybe much of this will end up in a publication somewhere, who knows? These sections have produced some of the best stuff I've ever read on Cserve. I think it would easily appeal to a much larger audience, even to those who fear and loathe compootin' machines and all the equipment tethered to them. Meanwhile, back at the factory …B.
#145450From: John EllisJan 7, 1995 5:13 AM
So yer startin the book, are ya now? Well ya keep that David agoin, yull hav plenty ta write about. 🙂 John "the Mad Scotsman" <g>
#145483From: David GouldJan 7, 1995 11:58 AM
<<So yer startin the book, are ya now? Well ya keep that David agoin, yull hav plenty ta write about.>> I'm fairly economical to keep running. Each day feed me several pieces of toast washed down with Perrier and I run all day writing absurd messages. I'm much more economical to keep running than your average family car. <<John "the Mad Scotsman">> Oh no! Not another scotsman. I'm starting to feel compelled to wear my kilt even in this cold room in the middle of winter. You won't believe it but the other night at 2am I was tucked up in my room with the heating on overdrive and then I looked outside and it was snowing. That's right, it was snowing in Paris. I went outside and walked the streets in the 5inch snow. It was incrediblely peaceful with the snow gently falling and hardly anyone around. After a few snowball fights with my girlfriend we scurred home. It was absolutely fantastic. David "Eating green and pink, but not yellow, snow" Gould
#145340From: David GouldJan 6, 1995 2:27 PM
<<Even I might be provoked into firing off something emotionally erratic and irresponsible to the idiot who UL such a stupid statement as that.>> McGlasson's grandmother wears army boots! There you go, now I that I have provoked you, I want to see you fire off something emotionally erratic and irresponsible. 😉 <<We all have the ability to selectively ignore anything.>> Sorry I didn't catch that. I was too busy ignoring you. 😉 But seriously, I think that if everyone didn't take everything to heart so often. Just imagine if they had said that to you in person, you would normally just brush them off without a word. But on CIS everyone feels compelled to respond and fight back. Hey, if someone annoys you just brush him off by not responding. Voila, the answer. <<Sure, that's a major problem. I've been lurking for years, and still do in many places, but I'm comfortable here and in SC2K, so I contribute my drivel at my own peril.>> This forum could be like a big cosy sofa that you come home to after work. Just spread out and relax. This is my approach. <<There is much to see in this life, and I try not to clutter it up by tolerating inordinate amounts of ignorance.>> "Inordinate amounts of ignorance", that's a good one Bruce. I'm going to save that one for future reference. 😉 David "Ignoramous ignoring ignorance" Gould
#145343From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Jan 6, 1995 2:37 PM
Hi David, << Just imagine if they had said that to you in person, you would normally just brush them off without a word. >> I usually ask them "are your teeth sweating?"
#145505From: Bruce McGlassonJan 7, 1995 3:24 PM
d "!" g, <<McGlasson's grandmother wears army boots!>> My grandmothers are both dead.:-( Thanks alot, Mr. Gould … …but either one _could_ be wearing army boots. HA! ;-P <<But seriously, I think that if everyone didn't take everything to heart so often.>> …Yes? Go on. Please write complete sentences. I'm easily confused and even angered by people who. <<But on CIS everyone feels compelled to respond and fight back.>> Damn right, Sparky! And one more reference about my dead relatives and I start whinin' at the top of my UPPER CASE! …B " ".
#145638From: David GouldJan 8, 1995 3:24 PM
<<<<But on CIS everyone feels compelled to respond and fight back.>> Damn right, Sparky! And one more reference about my dead relatives and I start whinin' at the top of my UPPER CASE!>> THAT DOES IT! You didn't include an emoticon after that last sentence, so this is fair flame bait. I'll slap you across the face with my virtual glove and demand satisfaction. I challenge you to a duel at at dawn! The weapons are of my choosing: tic-tac-toe. OK. My first move. I put an X in the top right hand corner. Now, it's your turn. David "Bringing out the big guns" Gould
#145723From: Bruce McGlassonJan 9, 1995 10:32 AM
<<THAT DOES IT! You didn't include an emoticon after that last sentence, so this is fair flame bait.>> DOH! I _HATE_ it when I forget those darn things! <<I'll slap you across the face with my virtual glove and demand satisfaction. I challenge you to a duel at at dawn! The weapons are of my choosing: tic-tac-toe. OK. My first move. I put an X in the top right hand corner. Now, it's your turn.>> Gee, I wish I could answer your challenge to a duel, buuuuuuut I don't want to. I always sleep past dawn, and besides, I'm not good at calculating time zone differences so one of us is bound to be late or early and have to wait for the other which always seems to chap one's cheeks. So, I'm sure you'll agree its best not to participate …B. ;-o <—– required emoticon
#144626From: David GouldJan 2, 1995 1:19 PM
<<Anyone launching a personal attack on anyone else for any reason whatsoever will be banished from the kingdom forever.>> And so Gabriel, the most pure angel, after posting a message about his fetish for womens underwear was banished to remain in Hell for eternity 😉 David "Hell is hotter than hell" Gould
#143975From: Kevin C. GibsonDec 28, 1994 2:12 PM
B. "Kevin's Korner…" I won't be painted into a corner. The playing field is much larger than others may be contemplating. "Demon of Excessive Verbosity" You're a riot. Thanks for putting a smile on my face. Came in most handy this morning. I lost my CMOS last night and had trouble getting the system back up. Yo. But I'm here. No wait I'm gone….. "most of his contributions are "must reads." Aw shucks. A fan club. Just kidding McGlassOnion. "the UID of the contributor" The tattoo. "Today I will rely on the language of love and understanding. If that doesn't work, I'll go back to intimidation and fear." — S. Goldstein Ditto on this and everything that preceeded it. B-Man, enlighten me. What's JMO? Pop quiz! 1) What are you doing for New Year's Eve? 2) Who owned the steamship "Foxhall" calling on the docks of New Orleans in 1890? Kevin. -= Rolling On A River =- Animating A Nation SIGGRAPH 1996
#144429From: Bruce McGlassonDec 31, 1994 3:33 PM
k, <<I won't be painted into a corner. <<The playing field is much larger than others may be contemplating.>> Please be more specific. Unlike most of your previous messages, this one is a little vague and begs for amplification. << Thanks for putting a smile on my face.>> You're welcome. Tit fer tat (can I say that here?) You've certainly smiled my face more'n once. Actually, you've forced me to outbursts of laughter from time to time. <<What's JMO?>> Just My Opinion <<1) What are you doing for New Year's Eve? Staying sober at home. The wife and I will visit my parents in the city for supper, and retire to the empire before the drunks start competing for victims. <<2) Who owned the steamship "Foxhall" calling on the docks of New Orleans << in 1890? That would be Sir Oswald Hurt great grandfather of "Big Al" Hurt of the Bourbon Street Cabaret Hurts who hasn't been on a Mardi Gras float since eating a brick several years ago. Right? What happened to Dark Star on Christmas Eve? Did it Light Up the World? "I have the power to channel my imagination into ever-soaring levels of suspicion and paranoia." – S.Goldstein …B. -= Slip sliiiiiiidin' away =-