Threats to rpd

Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:
While many consider the flood of spam the only threat to the group, I
think the flamers and foul-mouthed posts are just as much of a threat.
It got pretty bad a few years ago but then people cleaned up their act
and things cooled down. Can't we just disagree with folks in a civil
manner?

Some people seem to have rather limited vocabularies, or they think that
using language in such a way makes their point more forcefully. They
are mistaken, and it leads them to a place in my 'twit-file'. No problem.

"Ron Hunter" wrote in message
...
Don Stauffer in Minnesota wrote:
While many consider the flood of spam the only threat to the group, I
think the flamers and foul-mouthed posts are just as much of a threat.
It got pretty bad a few years ago but then people cleaned up their act
and things cooled down. Can't we just disagree with folks in a civil
manner?

Some people seem to have rather limited vocabularies, or they think that
using language in such a way makes their point more forcefully. They are
mistaken, and it leads them to a place in my 'twit-file'. No problem.

Its obvious !!

He would need to be a real dim wit to even half believe the crap he is
spouting.

Of course he could just be trying to enliven the debate a little, by adding
in some totally outrageous claims, which he knows ro be rubbish.

The clown who started this thread probably knew exactly what sort of
responses would be delivered.

Roy G

"Roy G" wrote

The clown who started this thread probably knew exactly what sort of
responses would be delivered.

Which, when you sit and think about it, is pretty much how The Media operate
these days. Just watched an edition of the ABC's 'Media Watch' programme,
where they exposed a major newspaper's deliberate manipulation of their
readers by declaring in large type that schools in NSW were considering
banning the use of words like 'husband' 'wife' and 'spouse', because they
discriminated against gay students. Turned out to be complete rubbish, this
suggestion was one of 20 listed on a pamphlet distributed in schools by a
gay rights group. It had absolutely no connection with the education
ministry or any school management, but it sold a few more copies, and got
the name of the paper on every talk-back station in the country.

Trolls in newsgroups and forums do exactly the same thing, only not for
financial gain. It just makes them feel important... If only they knew.

Paul

"Don Stauffer in Minnesota" wrote
"Paul Bartram" p.bartram AT OR NEAR mysoul.com.au wrote:

Which, when you sit and think about it, is pretty much how The Media
operate
these days. Just watched an edition of the ABC's 'Media Watch' programme,
where they exposed a major newspaper's deliberate manipulation of their
readers by declaring in large type that schools in NSW were considering
banning the use of words like 'husband' 'wife' and 'spouse', because they
discriminated against gay students. Turned out to be complete rubbish,
this
suggestion was one of 20 listed on a pamphlet distributed in schools by a
gay rights group. It had absolutely no connection with the education
ministry or any school management, but it sold a few more copies, and got
the name of the paper on every talk-back station in the country.
Trolls in newsgroups and forums do exactly the same thing, only not for
financial gain. It just makes them feel important... If only they knew.

No, as the original poster, I must say I did not expect the response
it invoked. It was merely a plea to turn down the heat on the flaming,
as I object to that almost as much as to the spam thing. It was not
meant as a troll, and I honestly did not expect many replies.

Sorry if I gave the impression I was comparing you to the obvious trolls and
flamers we get here, my post was merely to point out that the mainstream
media are also aware how a little controversy can create interest amongst an
audience that have no lives of their own, and interest = sales!

I find it disturbing that virtually every thread in here (but also in other
newsgroups / forums) seems to rapidly degenerate into a 'did not - 'did so'
slugfest usually between just two combatants. The net result is a loss of
face for both parties, and while entertaining for a short while, it gets old
quickly!

Paul