From: Cocoanut Koala
No, it's not ganging up on me or all about me. I had just posted that was my favorite, and you just posted a counterpoint to what the person who wrote it had said.
Right. However, just as I was making a point, so were you.
From: Cocoanut Koala
I was surprised it was on a totally different thread.
That's because it was still on my mind from the other thread, and it seemed appropriate, at the time. In your thread, I admit, it was about you too, although moreso I had thoughts of two polls that had just read in mind. So in that sense, my reference wasn't wholly appropriate in your thread, and I apologize for that. It's probably because once these threads get a couple pages deep, I often forget which one I am in - they all evolve (devolve?) and start to sound alike for the most part.
From: Cocoanut Koala
If my favorite was a rehash of sentiments I have expressed before, it's not because I'd ever read them there. I went to that site and read some of the entries because you had provided the link to it.
Same goes for me, but I do believe that it's worse to invalidate someone's feelings by banishing their opinions to the "Hive", versus calling someone an alarmist. At least that still affords them their individuality.
I find it far more insulting to be lumped in with a supposed group of people who all act like drones, than to be personally addressed. Hell, I would rather be called an "asshole" than to be marginalized in that fashion. I view it as socialogical dysfunction when someone resorts to those type of accusations to support their argument. If they had a viable argument - they wouldn't have to use such tactics - the merits of the argument would stand on their own.
This is the biggest issue I had with Prokofy - he obfuscated debates with all that divisive jargon, alarmist tactics, and thinly veiled personal attacks. We are still tracing his footsteps here, and I wish it could end. Apparently, some folks are just unwilling to let go of the past - even when they complain that the past shouldn't be brought up when it doesn't suit their argument.
From: Cocoanut Koala
So, I guess you believe in some of those stereotypes, but not all of them. I think they're all pretty funny, and pretty apt. I even found some which could be me! coco
Oh, I actually believe in all of them. Acknowledging that certain character types exist is different than believing it to be true about specific groups or people.
On a side note, I do believe hivelike groups do exist, just not here. I have been using forums for many years, and believe me, this place is like Disneyland, comparatively. I have stepped into REAL hives, and it's pretty daunting.
In this case, I think the Swarm behavior observation does not fit, yet that the Klaxon does. You make predictions. Predictions about how SL will never be what it could be if <insert claim of dubious nature> continues. On a regular basis, you claim that there are major things wrong with the forums and SL, and make those thoughts public to the rest of the SL public. In essence, you are standing on a virtual streetcorner running a campaign fraught with alarmist notions. That, in and of itself, isn't a terrible thing. The problems arise when you don't understand that the type of feedback you receive is, in a way, determined by the nature of your campaign.
