Found arseholes judging me online

[Ben]

Originally Posted by All_Zen_Indigo

Indeed, like suggesting the mods had not spoken to YCM prior to banning him.

Did such (meaningful, seeking an explanation type) discussions occur?

Originally Posted by All_Zen_Indigo

The act was in itself malicious. Also he did it time and time again, on different threads, even after having seen the negative reactions of the other posters.

The definition of malicious in this sense, is that he deliberately set out to cause hurt, based on the conversations (you seem to be implying you had), do you think that was the case?

Originally Posted by All_Zen_Indigo

They weren't designed to teach him about maturity, merely a way of venting understandable anger and hurt.

Next time someone grievously insults me in one way or another, I shall remember it is acceptable behaviour to make (illegal) threats against there person and/or post legally dubious altered images of them. Your right in what you say, it defs don't display maturity at all, just sheer foaming at the mouth hate.

[Pal]

Originally Posted by Ben

Next time someone grievously insults me in one way or another, I shall remember it is acceptable behaviour to make (illegal) threats against there person and/or post legally dubious altered images of them. Your right in what you say, it defs don't display maturity at all, just sheer foaming at the mouth hate.

Ben don't you think that's a normal, and quite understandable, reaction? Granted it's illegal but can we really expect everyone to be calm and collected when presented with something like this?

[diplodocus]

Originally Posted by Ben

Demonstrating to YCM his actions were wrong will not be done by making pictures accusing him of having a little pinkie,

In my own case I did the pictures because I was pissed off with him and because I thought that was a pretty apt way of treating him ironically as that is the very sort of stuff you see on ebaums forum. Immature and puerile? Absolutely but that was the intention.

Originally Posted by Ben

Next time someone grievously insults me in one way or another, I shall remember it is acceptable behaviour to make (illegal) threats against there person and/or post legally dubious altered images of them. Your right in what you say, it defs don't display maturity at all, just sheer foaming at the mouth hate.

Ah come off it Ben! You're way out on this one. Legally dubious altered images? So taking over members photos and posting them on another website for critique without their consent isn't legally dubious?? To me that's like for like.

* Just glad I didn't pull out my Commander Riker pics

[Admiral Fool]

Originally Posted by LexSless

the comments werent YCMs crime but they were objected to....... your gf said she wouldnt have been comfortable even if the comments had all been positive which to her credit shows consistency..... cos i think if the comments HAD all been positive i'm sure that actually in real terms YCMs crime would have been somehow diminished despite his actions being the same....... :hmmm:

How could the comments have been positive? 'Yes I would bang that she's fit' is still unlikely to have most of the women on here going 'well that's ok then' and the Ebaum posters saying 'yes, she is lovely I would take her home to meet my mum' is, well, doubtful (and a little creepy).

I don't see what the problem is anyway with people commenting generally on the sexist nature of those comments. Are they only allowed to do that if they specifically condemned the comments on the myspace thread? I think it also speaks good of Sauk, and the blokes here in particular, that most have said 'no this isn't right, he's crossed a line' as opposed to trying to justify it with the whole boys will be boys attitude.

Originally Posted by LexSless

unfortunately that cant be done.... 'some posters' in this thread scream "i'm a hypocrite!!!!!" but you cant name names which is kindof annoying but you just gotta understand accept why and shrug your shoulders

I think this would be preferable to making posters in general feel like they have to justify their comments because of these people. You wouldn't have to just shout 'hypocrite!' at them.

never asked this before....... why do people say that? is it a way of saying "what I'M about to say is relavent/pertinent but anything else anyone said just before me/says after me is not"?

It made me feel big, yes.

[custardcreams]

To be honest CC, you are presuming this or that (cos subjectively you thought she was 'preening'), just like YCM presumed that women would be OK with being judged in the exact same way, ie their looks, based on his definition of preening.

i don't think it's okay at all, that's why i said that a model shouldnt be fair game for judging in her time off. i brought up the fact of the preening (which is very definitely true unless my eyes are broken, i consider photoshop a form of preening and can tell when its been used) because i thought that this context further distanced the two events, not because i think one or both is okay.

as for the profile being private and therefore to be treated as her in her time off, i'm sure there was some short blurb on there about the mags she's appeared in... though i can't be certain.

i don't think that if the sauk women had been preened and posed it would be acceptable for ycm to use their images in that way either. i think judging women like that is shit across the board. even if you put yourself up on sauk on purpose to be judged, that doesnt give anyone else the right to use your image how they wish in another context. the fact that there's nothing to stop someone doing that is irrelevent, it's still shitty and shows a sense of entitlement to women's images.

If you think that thread turned bad, and posters were guilty of the same crime as YCM, why are they given the benefit of the doubt and not him.

i don't think they were guilty of the same crime because of context. ycm took those images in 'cold blood' for a laugh, posters on the thread here ripped a woman to shreds for misguided reasons other than personal titillation or the titillation of their mates.

i certainly won't give the benefit of the doubt to people who called her a 'slut' and so on though. maybe a different crime, but still just as shitty.

[LexSless]

Originally Posted by LiveAlienBroadcast

How could the comments have been positive? 'Yes I would bang that she's fit' is still unlikely to have most of the women on here going 'well that's ok then' and the Ebaum posters saying 'yes, she is lovely I would take her home to meet my mum' is, well, doubtful.

Ah come on, thats just semantics...... but some (a minority of course but some) girls/women DO enjoy getting comments like that. to them that WOULD be a 'positive' reaction. crude reassurance of their sexual attractiveness is still reassurance of their sexual attractiveness.

but thats by the by since none of the girls/women who put their photos up were looking to be 'assessed' in that way..

Originally Posted by LAB

I don't see what the problem is anyway with people commenting generally on the sexist nature of those comments.

Nobody has said they so have a problem with that though have they? i know i havent

Originally Posted by LAB

It's a bit of a leap to suggest that the people who do that should also have condemned the shit comments on the myspace thread.

you're at it again here!! i never said that people should also have come out and condemned the myspace chick comments... Ben may have, i dont know and cant be bothered to check.....

since you make that point though-- 'course that'd be dumb, people can post when they bloody want!! Whether or not they choose to express their feelings outwardly is neither here or there but it would be pretty inconsistent for someone to think that the SAUK lot who passed comment on myspace girl were any better than the ebaum lot--- people who posted to slag her off and then a couple of months later condemn another group doing practicaly the same thing seem to think thats the case..

Originally Posted by LAB

Or suggesting that because 'boys will be boys' people can't be annoyed with that attitude.

you seem to think that because I feel one way i must therefore think no one else is entitled to feel differently....

disliking, however or to whatever level, people doing that is perfectly understandable.

Originally Posted by LAB

Or are you just highlighting that we have people here who also make shit comments, who in some instances appeared shocked at other peoples shit comments? That's not really a huge surprise.

that'd be a summation of a portion of what i think about this whole issue sure. that the nature of those 'shit comments' is the same is kinda baffling in how people seem to be blissfully unaware that theyre being hyopcrites

the thread that made me feel compelled to actually post on SAUK was when i saw scores of people celebrating a fellow member basically commiting serious domestic violence on her partner... !! ... extraordinary stuff that was!

happened the other way round and to the same people HE was a dispicable, evil c**tmuscle!! there seemed to be very little acknowledgement that they were both guilty of the same thing

Even if it shouldnt be a suprise by now it is. maybe i shouldve learned by now but i still find myself instinctively feeling that bcos of social anxiety sufferer's own sensitivity and insecurity they'd be less likely to be total arseholes in that way and yet clearly the SA frat boasts big gaping arseholes too... probably in greater number 'n' all!

But this is surely a secondary concern that unfortunately looks like it is taking precendent over the real problem of YCM's actions?

Its not.... i think that the conversation moved on from the 'real problem'-- in different ways, everyone thinks YCM is a dick, and everyonehopes that the damage done to the girls/women whos photos he posted has been minimal,so there's nowhere else really to go with that core to the topic.

Thats probably why you thought the thread was done and dusted but there was certainly more stuff to it for me to want to talk about

[Admiral Fool]

Originally Posted by LexSless

Ah come on, thats just semantics...... but some (a minority of course but some) girls/women DO enjoy getting comments like that. to them that WOULD be a 'positive' reaction. crude reassurance of their sexual attractiveness is still reassurance of their sexual attractiveness.

but thats by the by since none of the girls/women who put their photos up were looking to be 'assessed' in that way..

Well, then we agree that what Ycm did wouldn't have been diminshed if the comments had been positive?

I wouldn't disagree with most of your assertion so I guess I did incorrectly take the overriding impression that you were arguing against people (or Ben was, he may have been more why I posted initially) being allowed to comment on the sexism aspect. I think the confusion arose because like I said, if you are not going to direct comments at the people you think are 'hypocrites' specifically, then the impression could be that you think everyone (or a bigger proportion than neccasary) who posted comments is a hypocrite, or the people you quote specifically to talk vicariously about others, are hypocrites for not condeming the hypocrites!

I think I know what you are getting at though.

[wd40mk17.4]

Normally it would just be a stupid act, being that this is an SA forum, it makes his act quite harmful aswell as stupid.
the other 22 pages of typical SAUK debate and argument is kinda pointless.
The guys banned, people are angry, and rightfully so.
And then we go into circular debate mode until everyones eyes hurt and people forget what they originally said.

[[MiffyKoala]]

..in the names of all the women here i say...check and mate

[[MiffyKoala]]

me n moose of doom removed where my pic used to be and put that dumbasses pic in its place...muhahah!!

[Arfed]

Originally Posted by [MiffyKoala]

me n moose of doom removed where my pic used to be and put that dumbasses pic in its place...muhahah!!

Heh, that's genius.

[LexSless]

Originally Posted by LiveAlienBroadcast

Well, then we agree that what Ycm did wouldn't have been diminshed if the comments had been positive?

Absolutely!! i cant remember what i said exactly but i probably didnt make clear what i was doing there-- I think his crime wouldve been the same, i was trying to represent that i think the majority of people wouldve been swayed by a 'positive' () reception

you seem to be quite on the ball so wouldnt have been suseptable to that but unfortunately i think most people are

Originally Posted by LAB

I think the confusion arose because like I said, if you are not going to direct comments at the people you think are 'hypocrites' specifically, then the impression could be that you think everyone (or a bigger proportion than neccasary) who posted comments is a hypocrite, or the people you quote specifically to talk vicariously about others, are hypocrites for not condeming the hypocrites!

impressive multiple useage of one word! No, i understand that but unless youre someone who's VERY careful about how he words stuff (i am not) then you have to stick by the rules which generally means being very vague!!

Originally Posted by moose

yes but if some people don't keep feeding the trolls they'll get bored

..and with out any (i dont think) DELIBERATE irony comes probably the most trolling comment in this thread so far!

""