is the subject I’ll be discussing. Briefly, I’m going to be changing my rules. Posts shall be (and have been) deleted when they grossly violate the rules, even if they’re from long-standing members.
Posts that disrupt the viewing of the site will be deleted or edited (I was dumb in thinking long-time posters wouldn’t engage in this form of disruption).
Posts that so grossly violate ‘living room language’ as to cause one’s jaw and pecker to drop shall be deleted.
People that bring arguments from places other than here are not welcome to do so.
Ladies and Gents, I welcome your views.
I intend to welcome people who may have made disgusting and unacceptable statements over on MABTW. Believe me, they shall get short shrift for that kind of behavior here.
What are your views? I’m going to redraft my ruleset for posting, but I’ll be guided by all of you. Speak freely, though none shall gainsay boobie-postings.
-wolfe
It’s never a bad thing to know the boundaries. And it’s your party, you can cry (or censor) if you want to!
(jaw and pecker to drop? you’re funny)
I will say that it’s a bit confusing when reference is made to discussions started elsewhere. In the living room format, it makes me feel as if I’m left out of the conversation. (I don’t visit MABTW any more because it was making me think very ill of men. I was truly not welcome anyway, so I saw no reason to stay.) However, since I’m only a sometimes visitor here, I’ve no idea why I should think I would have any say in the matter. Whatever rules you make are fine with me. It’s always a pleasure.
yours truly
what’s a boobie-posting?
~Z~
p.s. is this one? hope not.
@Teri yeah, I don’t think you should visit mabtw, though it’s improved a bit, it’s still a site I would never want a woman to go visit.
As for you being a “sometimes visitor”, every visitor/guest here is of value to me, and your view is no different. Thanks (I think) for the vote of confidence.
@Zog “What’s a boobie posting” Well this is one example. (Safe for work) As you can see, they support breast cancer research.
I’d make the usual (and justified) complaint about the level of funding for breast cancer research compared to funding for prostate cancer research, except that I really don’t want to see ‘prostate posting’.
-wolfe
@wolfe: perhaps it doesn’t have to be an either/or proposition as to cancer funding. I think that requesting no solicitation of any kind would have been perfectly appropriate.
to be fair, my mother has breast cancer, so it’s a tough topic.
~z~
@Zog I agree, it definitely doesn’t have to be either or, and I didn’t intend such an implication. Moreover, I don’t think we should reduce breast-cancer funding; I simply tend to think we should increase other forms of cancer research.
Sorry to hear about your mother.
-wolfe
…and I don’t mean to be a wet blanket. I’m not so fragile, remember, but it’s harder to see someone else have to suffer. Interestingly enough, I have to say that women are indeed wonderful organizers for fund-raising. I was privileged to participate in the Breast Cancer 3-day walk, which is 20 miles per day for three days, supported by pledges. That was an overwhelmingly female cadre of walkers. Any musings on why men haven’t rallied behind prostate cancer in the same way? And let’s remember that men get breast cancer, too.
~Z~
I honestly don’t know. I give, but I never gave until prostate cancer hit my Dad (then later hit an uncle). Both, incidentally are absolutely fine — total remission. In a bizarre way, I’d even say it helped my Dad very marginally — he got very serious about losing weight for surgery, and has kept fit, lean and trim. Breast cancer has (thankfully) entirely missed my family.
I think that men are much more… incompetent? — that’ll do though it’s not the word I’m searching for — at taking care of their health. Women tend to both be more neurotic, hypochondriac (both bad) and competent/careful (very good) about their health.
60 miles over 3 days… wow. Good for you.
-wolfe
I don’t believe that pure altruism exists except in very rare cases - even Mother Teresa had some ulterior motives, I hear. Most of us don’t get involved in causes until they affect us or those we hold dear. I did do a fair amount of fund-raising for breast cancer research because a close friend is in the medical field, and I had the privilege of meeting many of her patients who suffered the indignities that breast cancer brings.
“Physician, heal thyself.” Men have traditionally been the practitioners of medicine, and the worst consumers of health care. I look at my parents, who have been married well over 50 years, and realize that my Dad is alive because of my mother. He would always “tough it out” rather than seek medical care. My boys’ father would be hard pressed to tell you the name of their pediatrician(s) and I still remind him to visit the doctor himself, though we’ve been apart for more than three years.
I wonder how many Defenders would survive to defend if the Nurturers didn’t nag … uh, remind them to take care of themselves.
~Z~
“…the worst consumers of health care”
I’m not too bad at going to the quack. Getting me to follow his instructions is the toughy.
Nag away nurturers!
@Zed Dunno about Mother Teresa. Certainly Christopher Hitchens disliked her, but I don’t trust anything he says on religion.
@Zee (just giving you both US and UK pronunciations) Other than the first sentence (and even then you may be right), I agree 100% with the rest of your post.
@Gwallan I am terrible at going to the Dr., unless I force myself… or am *cough* ‘nagged’. Z’s dead right.
-wolfe