The Non-Snarkiness Pledge: Are YOU In?

[VRBeauty]

I''m In!

The first suggestions for a non-snarkiness standard seems to be a given:

No personal attacks, comments, or assumptions about other posters (see Ali''s thread).
on other posters, including non-verbal attacks (i.e.

) that are dismissive of another poster''s opinion


I think this would also help keep us on point and keep keep the discussion relatively welcoming to all:

No blatantly dismissive or disrespectful terms for the major candidates, i.e. calling a candidate (rather than their position) stupid, a whore, or any other term you would not call your own grandmother or grandfather to their face. Such characterizations do not contribute to the discussion and would only serve to

some participants or inhibit participation in the discussion.

Comments? Suggestions?

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 10/19/2008 5:57:07 PM
Author:VRBeauty
I''m In!


The first suggestions for a non-snarkiness standard seems to be a given:


No personal attacks, comments, or assumptions about other posters (see Ali''s thread).

on other posters, including non-verbal attacks (i.e.

) that are dismissive of another poster''s opinion



I think this would also help keep us on point and keep keep the discussion relatively welcoming to all:


No blatantly dismissive or disrespectful terms for the major candidates, i.e. calling a candidate (rather than their position) stupid, a whore, or any other term you would not call your own grandmother or grandfather to their face. Such characterizations do not contribute to the discussion and would only serve to

some participants or inhibit participation in the discussion.


Comments? Suggestions?

Well, if you''re in, I''m OUT.
Since you probably don''t understand what I mean by "out" maybe you should read a book! And although I have no idea who you are voting for and why, I"m sure he will be stealing the election. Look it UP!
Lol...Okay. Couldn''t resist.
In!

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 10/19/2008 6:43:44 PM
Author: beebrisk


Well, if you''re in, I''m OUT.
Since you probably don''t understand what I mean by ''out'' maybe you should read a book! And although I have no idea who you are voting for and why, I''m sure he will be stealing the election. Look it UP!
Lol...Okay. Couldn''t resist.
In!

OMG! You got me but good! I wish you could have seen my eyes and moth fly open when I read the first few lines of your response!

It may be a party of two

but I''m glad we''re in it together!

 

[SarahLovesJS]

I am IN IF other people are in. In other words, I can hold myself to a standard, but I really don't want to be defenseless out there either if the personal attacks continue (and I am really not talking about anyone in a non-pointed way I absolutely promise I am speaking generally). I absolutely echo your request for no more blatantly disrespectful statements about candidates. It makes this environment feel very unwelcoming for it to constantly be a Palin or McCain bash-fest and I am sure that the Obama supporters on the board felt the same way when the RNC thread was around. So let's endeavor to try to be respectful of candidates. Does that mean you can't voice your opinion? No, it does not..let's just if possible try to find a kind way to say it. Is going around spouting that either candidate is a complete idiot, etc., really educational? My personal opinion is no. Choose to disagree if you wish.

Here's my other suggestions:

Let's also quit discussions of supporters. Because while the discussions are often meant about a targeted fringe group (e.g. Obots, Mcbots, or McCainiacs) they end up inevitably offending someone that thinks the person is making an overarching statement about the whole group. So to avoid that confusion I will try to avoid the use of the term Obot and I will continue to avoid making overarching statements about Obama supporters. I also ask that other members try to avoid making overarching statements about McCain supporters. All political PSers, both McCain and Obama supporters, are unique and it's a disservice to any of the people on this board to stereotype them into one group. I believe we CAN discuss the issues (yes..the real issues) in an educational way that is not offensive. Let's just do it.


ETA: And if there's a question about the snark of something..well just remember my personal mantra: "Don't flame me, bro!"

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 10/19/2008 7:11:26 PM
Author: VRBeauty


OMG! You got me but good! I wish you could have seen my eyes and moth fly open when I read the first few lines of your response!

 

[trillionaire]

I''m in, but I don''t think I have ever been called snarky either. Actually, I might be too nice, because my comments usually go ignored, lol. Or maybe I am just boring...

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 10/19/2008 7:48:51 PM
Author: trillionaire
I''m in, but I don''t think I have ever been called snarky either. Actually, I might be too nice, because my comments usually go ignored, lol. Or maybe I am just boring...

I don''t think you''re boring!

Hehe.

 

[VRBeauty]

beebrisk, welcome! (and of course I meant to type "eyes and mouth". At least snarking on typos isn't an issue here!)

SarahLovesJS: I like your suggestion! See below -- did I capture your comment correctly?

trillionaire: Boring? Never! Welcome!

So the non-snarkiness standards seem to be:


No personal attacks, comments, or assumptions about other posters (see Ali's thread).
on other posters, including non-verbal attacks (i.e. ) that are dismissive of another poster's opinion.


No blatantly dismissive or disrespectful terms for the major candidates, i.e. calling a candidate (rather than their position) stupid, a whore, or any other term you would not call your own grandmother or grandfather to their face. Such characterizations do not contribute to the discussion and would only serve to

some participants or inhibit participation in the discussion.

No over-arching comments about supporters, i.e., associating all of a candidate's supporters with the beliefs of comments of a particular subs-set or fringe group. In particular, no implying that a candidate's PS supporters subscribe to the beliefs espoused by a fringe group or discussions on other blogs.



BTW I have no desire to be the keeper of this thread or the final arbitor. I'm not a politician, and I don't want that kind of power! But I have enjoyed most of the discussion on this forum, and I thought this might help keep it positive.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Sounds like a good summary to me, great job!

 

[VRBeauty]

How about No. 4, added per Swimmer's suggestion:

No personal attacks, comments, or assumptions about other posters (see Ali's thread).
on other posters, including non-verbal attacks (i.e. ) that are dismissive of another poster's opinion.

No blatantly dismissive or disrespectful terms for the major candidates, i.e. calling a candidate (rather than their position) stupid, a whore, or any other term you would not call your own grandmother or grandfather to their face. Such characterizations do not contribute to the discussion and would only serve to some participants or inhibit participation in the discussion.

No over-arching comments about supporters, i.e., associating all of a candidate's supporters with the beliefs of comments of a particular subs-set or fringe group. In particular, no implying that a candidate's PS supporters subscribe to the beliefs espoused by a fringe group or discussions on other blogs.

No direct or indirect comparisons of the major candidates or their policies to individuals or regimes that support geonocide or other heinous crimes.


Come on in, Swimmer! The water's fine!

 

[SarahLovesJS]

I can get behind # 4, too, yep!

ETA: With one exception, I do believe that the connections directly between the candidates and individuals and groups (when substantiated) are relevant for discussion. For example, McCain and the Keating Five. Obvious connection. Obama and Ayers..there is also obviously SOME connection - the level of connection is disputable but there is a connection. But obviously, for example, going on about Obama and Hamas would not be relevant. What do you think?

 

[diamondfan]

I usually TRY to be non snarky anyway...but agree if we are trying and someone else is NOT, we have to be able to nicely defend ourselves.

Also, I just think certain topics are really tough and no matter how one tries to avoid it, snark creeps in. I just try to avoid those threads in that case, since sometimes certain folks are not going to be calmed down no matter what.

 

[FrekeChild]

I haven''t been snarky in a while anyway, so I''m in. (Plus I''ve just been lurking! It really helps to cut down on the snark factors!)

 

[Kaleigh]

I''m in.

 

[vintagecushion]

I mostly only lurk on the political forums but I''m in without preconditions.

 

[VRBeauty]

Welcome FrekeChild, Kaleigh, and Vintagecushion!

Prior snarking is not a required to take the non-snarkiness pledge -- you don''t even have to admit to

having snarked in your heart (to borrow a phrase from a prior President.)

 

[vintagecushion]

Thanks VRBeauty! I''m plenty snarky in real life and ALWAYS snarky in my heart I''m afraid.

 

[FrekeChild]

I skip over snarkiness in real life and go straight to b!tchiness. But don''t worry, I will mind my Ps and Qs.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Count me in!

 

[pennquaker09]

Date: 10/20/2008 12:56:39 AM
Author: FrekeChild
I skip over snarkiness in real life and go straight to b!tchiness. But don''t worry, I will mind my Ps and Qs.

I love you!

I don''t think I''ve been snarky, but I try to be nice and respectful so I''m in. I don''t take anything anyone says personally, I think that is kind of the key to remaining non-snarky.

 

[joflier]

I''m in. Though I agree with difan - we do need to be able to defend ourselves if the situation arises, although not in a way to start a battle.

 

[VRBeauty]

Date: 10/19/2008 10:11:15 PM
Author: diamondfan
I usually TRY to be non snarky anyway...but agree if we are trying and someone else is NOT, we have to be able to nicely defend ourselves.

Also, I just think certain topics are really tough and no matter how one tries to avoid it, snark creeps in. I just try to avoid those threads in that case, since sometimes certain folks are not going to be calmed down no matter what.

Hi Diamondfan

: thanks for checking this out!

I think you're right that some topics just tend to bring out the snark! But... this is a great place to discuss the issues in this incredibly interesting and important campaign with thoughtful and intelligent people. And it can be a great place to hear from both like-minded people and those who have reached different conclusions than I have. I guess I'm hoping that something like a non-snarking pledge -- or even just identifying rhetorical dirty tricks -- will help moderate the discussion when we get to those hot-button topics.

Go ahead: it won't be the first time I've been called a Pollyanna!

My favorite car forum banned political discussions a long time ago (long before the start of this campaign) because they tended to get heated and overrun with personal attacks. I miss the chance to find out what the people that I "know" over there are thinking about this election. I'm enjoying the discussions here, and I'd like to keep doing so.

 

[VRBeauty]

Welcome, Irishgrrl, Pennquaker, and Joflier!

To recap, we now have the four non-snarkiness standards below, and ten people who have signed on to these standards!

No personal attacks, comments, or assumptions about other posters (see Ali''s thread) including non-verbal attacks (i.e.

) that are dismissive of another poster''s opinion.

No blatantly dismissive or disrespectful terms for the major candidates, i.e. calling a candidate (rather than their position) stupid, a whore, or any other term you would not call your own grandmother or grandfather to their face. Such characterizations do not contribute to the discussion and would only serve to

some participants or inhibit participation in the discussion.

No over-arching comments about supporters, i.e., associating all of a candidate''s supporters with the beliefs of comments of a particular subs-set or fringe group. In particular, no implying that a candidate''s PS supporters subscribe to the beliefs espoused by a fringe group or discussions on other blogs.

No direct or indirect comparisons of the major candidates or their policies to individuals or regimes that support geonocide or other heinous crimes.

 

[starsapphire]

You know, I would love to take this pledge, but, that would be disingenuous of me, because there are at least 2 people on this board that are very snarky. And I feel I have to snark back to defend myself. I simply make a comment, that differs from their opinion, and they get snarky about it. I can''t help but feel like not coming back to this board sometimes. What happened to the Republican and Democrat threads? At least I felt safe there. I did not go to the opposing thread to say anything. It is only in these general threads that the snarking happens. I''m not in at this time. I will have to think about it.

 

[Irishgrrrl]

Date: 10/21/2008 3:15:36 PM
Author: starsapphire
You know, I would love to take this pledge, but, that would be disingenuous of me, because there are at least 2 people on this board that are very snarky. And I feel I have to snark back to defend myself. I simply make a comment, that differs from their opinion, and they get snarky about it. I can''t help but feel like not coming back to this board sometimes. What happened to the Republican and Democrat threads? At least I felt safe there. I did not go to the opposing thread to say anything. It is only in these general threads that the snarking happens. I''m not in at this time. I will have to think about it.

Star, I believe those threads got pulled because . . . they got too snarky! LOL!

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 10/21/2008 3:15:36 PM
Author: starsapphire
You know, I would love to take this pledge, but, that would be disingenuous of me, because there are at least 2 people on this board that are very snarky. And I feel I have to snark back to defend myself. I simply make a comment, that differs from their opinion, and they get snarky about it. I can''t help but feel like not coming back to this board sometimes. What happened to the Republican and Democrat threads? At least I felt safe there. I did not go to the opposing thread to say anything. It is only in these general threads that the snarking happens. I''m not in at this time. I will have to think about it.

Hi Star, I feel you 100%. I miss that thread, a lot. I am thinking about leaving ATW completely until at least the election is sorted out, but I''d be sorry to see you go, too. Someone has to stay behind and "fight the good fight!"

Overall, I just feel like ATW makes PS feel like an unwelcoming place right now..I''m going to do some thinking myself about what direction I want to go in.

 

[hibiscus]

Date: 10/21/2008 6:00:47 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS

Date: 10/21/2008 3:15:36 PM
Author: starsapphire
You know, I would love to take this pledge, but, that would be disingenuous of me, because there are at least 2 people on this board that are very snarky. And I feel I have to snark back to defend myself. I simply make a comment, that differs from their opinion, and they get snarky about it. I can''t help but feel like not coming back to this board sometimes. What happened to the Republican and Democrat threads? At least I felt safe there. I did not go to the opposing thread to say anything. It is only in these general threads that the snarking happens. I''m not in at this time. I will have to think about it.

Hi Star, I feel you 100%. I miss that thread, a lot. I am thinking about leaving ATW completely until at least the election is sorted out, but I''d be sorry to see you go, too. Someone has to stay behind and ''fight the good fight!''

Overall, I just feel like ATW makes PS feel like an unwelcoming place right now..I''m going to do some thinking myself about what direction I want to go in.

You should ask for their phone number see if they want a fist fight rather than hide behind a nickname and be snarky and all.
Just kidding but hey if there''s a fist fight, I''m IN at least as a spectator.

 

[Dancing Fire]

you guys can say anything to me,cuz nothing bothers me on these internet forums.

 

[FrekeChild]

Date: 10/21/2008 6:00:47 PM
Author: SarahLovesJS

Date: 10/21/2008 3:15:36 PM
Author: starsapphire
You know, I would love to take this pledge, but, that would be disingenuous of me, because there are at least 2 people on this board that are very snarky. And I feel I have to snark back to defend myself. I simply make a comment, that differs from their opinion, and they get snarky about it. I can''t help but feel like not coming back to this board sometimes. What happened to the Republican and Democrat threads? At least I felt safe there. I did not go to the opposing thread to say anything. It is only in these general threads that the snarking happens. I''m not in at this time. I will have to think about it.

Hi Star, I feel you 100%. I miss that thread, a lot. I am thinking about leaving ATW completely until at least the election is sorted out, but I''d be sorry to see you go, too. Someone has to stay behind and ''fight the good fight!''

Overall, I just feel like ATW makes PS feel like an unwelcoming place right now..I''m going to do some thinking myself about what direction I want to go in.

I have to tell you that those threads were the reason I was cutting down on my PS time. I''m really really glad they are gone.

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 10/21/2008 7:04:20 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
you guys can say anything to me,cuz nothing bothers me on these internet forums.

Eggs-zac-a-tac-a-ly. Glad to see there are some adults whose self esteem is immune from forum opinions

"unwelcoming, avoiding threads, felt attacked, must defend myself..." Puhleeze. It''s the innurnetz

No silly pledge for me.

Of course I''m going to be dismissive of radicals seeing the end-times around every corner, people who believe everything they read on every self aggrandizing propaganda filled website, and those who are just 2 jokers short of a full deck of cards.