This place used to be so lively...what happened? 9 9

[VintageComics]

On 11/25/2023 at 3:09 PM, mintcomics1 said:

I was feeling all gung-ho to get going on another sales thread - now I just feel deflated.

Thanks Roy!

On a positive note, what this thread and Mike's charts seem to show is that there are a lot more lurkers but a lot less posters, so I'm sure your sales thread will get lots of eyes. 

As always, in the free market if you have the goods, they will come! 

[Funnybooks]

On 11/25/2023 at 8:15 AM, Namtak said:

Sure is quiter without @kav

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 11/25/2023 at 3:25 PM, VintageComics said:

Then stop justifying it. 

"She shouldn't have dressed that way." 

You don't have a leg to stand on here. Abuse is a lack of control by the person dishing it out. It is a total lack of maturity. Stop normalizing it. Full stop.

And addressing poor behavior in an objective manner, meaning everyone KNOWS where the line is, is far more equitable, easy, effective and FAIR than trying to subjectively figure out when someone has crossed a line too far. It's the "too far" part that is the problem because it's always different. 

Everyone knows what abuse looks like.

If you start making everything subjective, a decision eventually and necessarily will start contradicting itself and be seen as unfair to some people. 

Additionally, there is always a spin-off effect. Some (agreeable) people when they feel wronged will just leave or quiet down, but if you're a disagreeable personality (like You, Kav and I are) we are obviously going to start trying to push back, raising the heat rather than lowering it.

I can genuinely say my posting volume would have been reduced by 50% or more over the last few years, if I didn't have to constantly address poor behavior being thrown at me, and I think the same goes for many people who end up getting dinged. 

------------

BTW, I read everything you wrote in both posts and agree with most of it, as I usually do. 

I understand the complexity involved. I grew up in a family with 50 1st cousins, I was the oldest of 8 and have 6 kids myself (4 biological and 2 step kids). Being fair is hard, but sticking to objective, simple principles generally rule out the majority of complexity. 

If you use subjective reasoning you end up complicating everything by a factor of a zillion.

-------------

I'll finish by saying that it genuinely was not my intention to discuss this, I just "go where the ball is going" but it's a valid and worthwhile point worth discussing when discuss traffic on social media. 

 

I will say that I've seen a lot of benefits since Mike has started. His ability to discuss things with people has helped turn down the heat a lot around here. My post isn't a criticism of Mike per se, but rather a criticism of the guiding principles Mike operates under. 

I think abuse and bullying are far too common among some people. 

[CAHokie]

[skypinkblu]

On 11/25/2023 at 2:19 PM, Dr. Balls said:

Oh MAN, that would explain why I got away with so many bikini picture posts back then.

Errr, the mods did NOT take Fridays off,

[CAHokie]

On 11/25/2023 at 4:12 PM, skypinkblu said:

Errr, the mods did NOT take Fridays off,

They just participated in the fun. 

[skypinkblu]

On 11/25/2023 at 4:14 PM, CAHokie said:

They just participated in the fun. 

Maybe...

Some of those threads were so long that you had to be a hermit to have the time to read them;) that might have helped, too;)

I thought Kav would have been back by now. He was never mean... 

[mintcomics1]

On 11/25/2023 at 1:27 PM, VintageComics said:

On a positive note, what this thread and Mike's charts seem to show is that there are a lot more lurkers but a lot less posters, so I'm sure your sales thread will get lots of eyes. 

As always, in the free market if you have the goods, they will come! 

For sure. There are a lot of discerning collectors here.

I'm getting everything organized and will start posting shortly.

[GermanFan]

On 11/25/2023 at 7:31 PM, stock_rotation said:

Nonsense! Who among us did not delight in Kav & Oakman adding 4-5 pages of complete garbage insightful commentary to every single thread, no matter the subject!

Gresham's Law, baby! It's not just for economics anymore!

Gresham's Law.

The bad money drives the good money out?

[COI]

On 11/25/2023 at 3:25 PM, VintageComics said:

Then stop justifying it. 

"She shouldn't have dressed that way." 

You don't have a leg to stand on here. Abuse is a lack of control by the person dishing it out. It is a total lack of maturity. Stop normalizing it. Full stop.

And addressing poor behavior in an objective manner, meaning everyone KNOWS where the line is, is far more equitable, easy, effective and FAIR than trying to subjectively figure out when someone has crossed a line too far. It's the "too far" part that is the problem because it's always different. 

Everyone knows what abuse looks like.

If you start making everything subjective, a decision eventually and necessarily will start contradicting itself and be seen as unfair to some people. 

Additionally, there is always a spin-off effect. Some (agreeable) people when they feel wronged will just leave or quiet down, but if you're a disagreeable personality (like You, Kav and I are) we are obviously going to start trying to push back, raising the heat rather than lowering it.

I can genuinely say my posting volume would have been reduced by 50% or more over the last few years, if I didn't have to constantly address poor behavior being thrown at me, and I think the same goes for many people who end up getting dinged. 

------------

BTW, I read everything you wrote in both posts and agree with most of it, as I usually do. 

I understand the complexity involved. I grew up in a family with 50 1st cousins, I was the oldest of 8 and have 6 kids myself (4 biological and 2 step kids). Being fair is hard, but sticking to objective, simple principles generally rule out the majority of complexity. 

If you use subjective reasoning you end up complicating everything by a factor of a zillion.

-------------

I'll finish by saying that it genuinely was not my intention to discuss this, I just "go where the ball is going" but it's a valid and worthwhile point worth discussing when discuss traffic on social media. 

 

I will say that I've seen a lot of benefits since Mike has started. His ability to discuss things with people has helped turn down the heat a lot around here. My post isn't a criticism of Mike per se, but rather a criticism of the guiding principles Mike operates under. 

I think abuse and bullying are far too common among some people. 

You're using "subjective reasoning" just as I am, because we're talking about perceptions of social interactions here, not quantified data. We're speaking conceptually here about dynamics of socializing based on personal experiences and observation. Not to mention that your perspective on who Kav is and what he contributes is all subjective, just as my perceptions of him are. If you don't get that, then you misunderstand subjectivity vs objectivity. People like to throw out "subjective" when they think they see things as they are and the person they're talking to doesn't, but both of our positions here are subjective.

As far as victim blaming, I appreciate that you're telling me that I'm victim blaming even though I went out of my way twice to say that I wasn't. Thanks, Carnac. We have a different perspective, and you know me well enough to know I'm down to debate anything, so take my argument with good faith and try not to read between the lines, because you got it wrong in this instance.

My point was, socializing is an exchange between individuals and groups; there is feedback. When someone is consistently picked on, that's a type of social feedback. It's UNFAIR and often CRUEL (caps for emphasis, because you need it) but it's how socializing works, and you ignore that feedback at your own peril. The reason I mention this is because it's unpopular to say, and you demonstrated exactly why that is by calling it victim blaming straight out. That's not me "normalizing abuse" that's me saying abuse is normal UNFORTUNATELY, but can be mitigated somewhat by a little introspection. 

Everyone knows abuse is bad. No sheeit. But it exists. Stealing also exists and is also bad, but mentioning that you should maybe lock your doors isn't "normalizing stealing". I thought you liked nuanced conversation?

 

[Dr. Balls]

Friday Thread slo-mo’ing into Saturday like…

 

[VintageComics]

On 11/25/2023 at 4:01 PM, CAHokie said:

Do you remember that time when Greggy's Strawberry Shortcake quotes jammed the forums?

Or when that boardie...oh God, who was it again? Every time he posted his post would multiply infinity times and jammed threads up?

 

[bc]

On 11/25/2023 at 5:42 PM, Dr. Balls said:

Friday Thread slo-mo’ing into Saturday like…

 

Almost as good as the Hulu hoop girl 

-bc

[Dr. Balls]

On 11/25/2023 at 3:49 PM, bc said:

Almost as good as the Hulu hoop girl 

-bc

I don't remember her. But, my all time personal favorite:

 

[VintageComics]

On 11/25/2023 at 4:12 PM, skypinkblu said:

Errr, the mods did NOT take Fridays off,

It may have even been before your time as moderator, because there was definitely a time when board moderation was almost completely non-existent over the weekends.

That's where the "Friday threads" title came from.

On 11/25/2023 at 4:16 PM, skypinkblu said:

I thought Kav would have been back by now.

Kav said he wasn't coming back, although I'd like to see him back too.

When Mike started locking him out of specific threads just for respectfully disagreeing with people (who were allowed to disagree with Kav all they wanted BTW), Ithink that was the last straw.

Me as well. I would politely disagree and would get dinged for it while certain boardies had free reign to disagree with anyone they wanted to. 

There is NO QUESTION moderation favored certain posters over others. Y'all even had a vote about it and over 40% of people who voted agreed. So it's not just one or two people that disagreed. It was many. 

Edited November 25, 2023 by VintageComics

[Kramerica]

On 11/25/2023 at 2:42 PM, Dr. Balls said:

Friday Thread slo-mo’ing into Saturday like…

 

Very nice Doctor. Very nice. This lifts my spirits and fixes my doldrums. If I can get positive therapy like this every day I'd like to sign you up as my General Practitioner.

[Dr. Balls]

On 11/25/2023 at 4:06 PM, Kramerica said:

Very nice Doctor. Very nice. This lifts my spirits and fixes my doldrums. If I can get positive therapy like this every day I'd like to sign you up as my General Practitioner.

Thank you. Just doing my part to make Hot Girls and Comic Books not mutually exclusive.

[VintageComics]

On 11/25/2023 at 5:02 PM, COI said:

You're using "subjective reasoning" just as I am, because we're talking about perceptions of social interactions here, not quantified data. We're speaking conceptually here about dynamics of socializing based on personal experiences and observation. Not to mention that your perspective on who Kav is and what he contributes is all subjective, just as my perceptions of him are. If you don't get that, then you misunderstand subjectivity vs objectivity. People like to throw out "subjective" when they think they see things as they are and the person they're talking to doesn't, but both of our positions here are subjective.

As far as victim blaming, I appreciate that you're telling me that I'm victim blaming even though I went out of my way twice to say that I wasn't. Thanks, Carnac. We have a different perspective, and you know me well enough to know I'm down to debate anything, so take my argument with good faith and try not to read between the lines, because you got it wrong in this instance.

My point was, socializing is an exchange between individuals and groups; there is feedback. When someone is consistently picked on, that's a type of social feedback. It's UNFAIR and often CRUEL (caps for emphasis, because you need it) but it's how socializing works, and you ignore that feedback at your own peril. The reason I mention this is because it's unpopular to say, and you demonstrated exactly why that is by calling it victim blaming straight out. That's not me "normalizing abuse" that's me saying abuse is normal UNFORTUNATELY, but can be mitigated somewhat by a little introspection. 

Everyone knows abuse is bad. No sheeit. But it exists. Stealing also exists and is also bad, but mentioning that you should maybe lock your doors isn't "normalizing stealing". I thought you liked nuanced conversation?

 

Fair.

In social interactions it's tougher to be objective, but on a spectrum, it's much easier to weed out when someone has posted "too much abuse"  than it is when someone has posted "too much content" and that really was my central point. 

I always tell my daughters, you don't have to be sure of what you like, but you absolutely have to be sure of what you DON'T LIKE. 

It's far easier to weed out "bad behavior" than "too much good behavior".

The movie forums are a great example: If we were going to weed out "too much content" nobody posts more than Bosco. Not even me (and THAT's saying something). That's not a knock on Bosco at all, it's pointing out an extreme example. But because people find it entertaining...and PROFITABLE financially (because everyone here is now financially invested) it's allowed. 

But if someone abuses Bosco, they're gone pretty quickly.

-----------------------------------

If Kav was giving financial advice that benefitted even just a small percentage of the forums, he'd be beloved. 

Same with me. It's no secret I'm disliked, but I have so much knowledge I could share that would benefit everyone, but because it's now a business I choose not to. So because I stick to other discussions, I'm no longer welcome by the people who aren't benefitted by it. VERY SUBJECTIVE. If I'd been showering people with advice that profited them, they'd overlook everything they disliked about me.

-----------------------------------

The added benefit is that weeding out bad or abusive behavior is that it really does have a multiplied, net positive effect. It reduces the heat, it discourages additional abuse from bad actors AND it reduce the number of replies "good actors" will put out in combating the abuse.

Weeding out "too much posting" just leads to more bad behavior IMO. It produces ill feelings from the person being moderated AND it empowers those who have been doing the attacking in the 1st place, turning up the heat - a net negative. 

Anyway, you and I are not far off. That's my nuanced reply. 

Edited November 25, 2023 by VintageComics

[Kramerica]

On 11/24/2023 at 6:14 PM, VintageComics said:

You couldn't pay me enough to be among the animals that are out there during this time of year. 

Consumer zombies that feel they're enriching their lives by acting like...well, zombies. 

Sounds like someone needs to watch Romero's Dawn of the Dead  I would join you but did it recently for Halloween.

[Chip Cataldo]

On 11/25/2023 at 5:49 PM, bc said:

Almost as good as the Hulu hoop girl 

-bc

They stopped posting her because she's a (now-ex, but not back then) porn starlet.