CathyInBlue Shootered??? (Also, what's for breakfast??)

[BigBoxaJunk]

You can't control how others choose to act.

You're wrong on that one. Every woman knows that you CAN control others and you CAN change people. You just have to be persistent.

 

[Expat]

Too much truth in that one....

 

[jamil]

No, i had scrambled eggs this morning

Ah yes. The Serial brand cereal. Says crunchy in milk. Kinda sweet but not too sweet. Yeah.

Obamacare covers that, right?

 

[KG1]

I have no idea what that even means.

Oh I know what it means..wait a minute...Lemme read it one more time.

 

[Snapdragon]

Well, the 'experiment' proceeded exactly as anticipated, with exactly the outcome expected, by exactly the parties predicted.

The failure doesn't lie with the participants, typically. The failure lies with those who neglect (or refuse) to anticipate and plan for the predictable. Subsequent faltering rhetoric in no way tempers that failure.

Until the problem is rectified, open and honest discussion will ever be stifled, free expression denied. The price is paid, but the cost is uncounted.

I have no idea what that even means.

Monday morning quarterback - definition of Monday morning quarterback by The Free Dictionary

[h=2]Monday morning quarterback[/h]n. Informal One who criticizes or passes judgment from a position of hindsight.

 

[HoughMade]

Heck Kut.......where else can you have this much fun.......for free........with your cloths on, or not.

I can't figure out how to turn the web cam on this laptop on.

....but when I do, if you ban me, I'll never be back.

 

[churchmouse]

I can't figure out how to turn the web cam on this laptop on.

....but when I do, if you ban me, I'll never be back.

Will you leave your Bat and Ball.............

 

[indiucky]

I hope cathyinblue comes back.....

 

[PaulF]

I hope cathyinblue comes back.....

Me, too.

 

[SSGSAD]

Will you leave your Bat and Ball.............

I've got one, and a glove too .....

 

[churchmouse]

I've got one, and a glove too .....

Cool but Houghmade has to leave his if he ain't coming back.

 

[halfmileharry]

I've seen quite a few of my favorite regulars get the hammer. I never thought about until now but I guess..."Out of sight...out of mind" goes. I forgot about missing some of those long gone.

 

[HoughMade]

Cool but Houghmade has to leave his if he ain't coming back.

I'll leave one ball, but I'm taking the other one and the bat.

 

[churchmouse]

I'll leave one ball, but I'm taking the other one and the bat.

Very generous.

 

[HoughMade]

Very generous.

I'll leave the right one. I need to hold on to the left one because if Obama has to resign in disgrace, I promised to give it away.

 

[ModernGunner]

So you are saying this is the fault of a small group of people who saw fit to ask the site owner to let the members have the freedom to express their beliefs. To lift a long standing ban and allow free discussion (civil discussion) about religion and how it is shaping the politic's of the world.
You are saying we are the reason this "Experiment" is failing. Is that what you are saying. Be very clear here. Seriously.

When you open up the playground and the usual players cause the first dust up then they are the ones to blame. Am I missing anything.

Keep on the path you are following. I went out on a limb as did a few others to let this "Experiment" take place. If we put our trust in the membership to act like adults and you see that as a failure.....well, do you. Again, be very clear.

You have basically called me out in open forum. That is how I see this.

The 'experiment' was, allegedly, to 'allow' free expression, the free exchange of ideas.

That didn't happen, as anticipated. There were all sorts of 'cautionary rules' stipulated prior to opening up the topic(s) for discussion. That was an obvious clue that it was never intended to 'allow' members to "have the freedom to express their beliefs", just the appearance of doing so. The results were predictable, and predicted. At least by some.

The 'experiment' failed, not because of the members that did, in fact, express their beliefs but because those that set forth the 'cautionary rules' weren't really wanting members to have that 'freedom'. Otherwise, 'cautionary rules' wouldn't have been set forth.

When anyone "opens up the playgound", they should anticipate that the "usual players" will cause the "first dust up". It's known as "pre-planning". Common sense. Therefore, it's not the fault of the 'usual players', as alleged. It is the fault of those who neglected to plan for that obvious circumstance. There was no 'surprise', not when there's prior knowledge that the "usual players" are already present.

'Management 101'.

 

[Double T]

I do not envy anyone who moderates a site this large. It's a major pain to do it for a small group where everyone knows each other. temp bans are pretty easy, it's the permanent bans on people you like that are the hardest.

I'm perma banned from the flat earth society. Oh well

 

[jdmack79]

I do not envy anyone who moderates a site this large. It's a major pain to do it for a small group where everyone knows each other. temp bans are pretty easy, it's the permanent bans on people you like that are the hardest.

I'm perma banned from the flat earth society. Oh well

I agree. I definitely feel for the mods on INGO. I'm sure that they are put into a lot of unpleasant situations. I'm sure if they had their way we would all just play nice and obey the rules, but it just doesn't work like that. Sometimes they have to smack down members who are well liked and contribute a lot but simply broke the rules. I would imagine that they dislike it as much as we do. I appreciate what the mods do and the hard decisions that they make everyday. The mods don't always make the right decisions, but I certainly think that they try their best.

 

[BugI02]

You're wrong on that one. Every woman knows that you CAN control others and you CAN change people. You just have to be persistent.

On my screen this didn't come through as purple

 

[BugI02]

So you are saying this is the fault of a small group of people who saw fit to ask the site owner to let the members have the freedom to express their beliefs. To lift a long standing ban and allow free discussion (civil discussion) about religion and how it is shaping the politic's of the world.
You are saying we are the reason this "Experiment" is failing. Is that what you are saying. Be very clear here. Seriously.

When you open up the playground and the usual players cause the first dust up then they are the ones to blame. Am I missing anything.

Keep on the path you are following. I went out on a limb as did a few others to let this "Experiment" take place. If we put our trust in the membership to act like adults and you see that as a failure.....well, do you. Again, be very clear.

You have basically called me out in open forum. That is how I see this.

At least he hasn't called you a LibTARD (yet)