Ethics

[cheryl]

inappropriate flame

Moreluck, I feel your pain. Talking to you is like trying to reason with a senile old lady. I have found that the ignore feature works well, you are now on it, I'm sure I won't miss anything. Now if I could only figure out how to keep your 'vanity' threads from showing up. Adios

Susie, this kind of personal attack is inappropriate and will not be tolerated on this board.

Discussion can be animated, which is fine, but we do not welcome personal attacks, on- or off-board. It is inappropriate to say anything on a discussion board about any individual or entity that you would not be prepared to say to them face-to-face.

It is fine to disagree with a different viewpoint, but please limit this to challenging the idea and not make your comments a personal challenge or make derogatory personal comments about individuals, their ideas or their situation. The latter is considered to be a flame and will not be tolerated.

 

[susiedriver]

cheryl,

In all fairness, this was in response to moreluck's statement "This is like trying to reason with a 12 yr. old.......very frustrating! I quit." and the 'vanity' comment was in reference to the post that stated "In general, I think the topics are "UPS-related," "politics" and "vanity." I'm sure there are better names for these general categories, but IMO, these areas comprise the bulk of the posts here on this board."
Ban me if you must, but ban all those who have called me names as well.

 

[Unregistered]

SusieDriver,
OK, I'm having login problems, but my ID is KybdBanger. Not much for anonymous replies. Cheryl is working on it.

Excerpt from Susie:
Anyone notice as we go over 2000 dead US servicemen and women and untold additional wounded ones (let alone civilians) that every month we are cautioned that we can expect an escalation until the next fill in the blank here and this talk has been continually recycled with another fill in the blank for almost two plus years?!?


What's your experience in the US military service, Susie?
Here's my guess if you're willing to answer honestly - none, zero, zilch, nada! Pick any of the above. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I personally have you pegged as one of those that is quick to exercise all of your rights that have been secured by others, but haven't been willing to learn or appreciate the meaning of personal sacrifice. Please say a prayer tonight for all of those that are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, both in terms of lives lost, but also in terms of difficult living conditions, abysmal demands on family, committment, and stress that are required of the millions of men and women willing to serve our country.

And yes, I am a vet and voluntarily serverd proudly in our country's armed forces to secure the rights which you are so easily able to exercise on this board.

 

[dannyboy]

Ban me if you must, but ban all those who have called me names as well.

Interesting. Reminds me of middle school days. Little trouble maker sitting back after being caught trying to share/shift the blame to every one else.

You know, it takes a lot to get the boss fired up enough to delete inappropriate posts, and then to call on you to straighten up, and all you can think of is well every body else is doing it

How about hey Cheryl, sorry if I offended anyone. Wont do it again. After all it is your board. Didnt mean to be a trouble maker.

But I would guess coming from Susie, well what do you expect.

d

 

[susiedriver]

KybdBanger,
<o =""></o>
First off, let me thank you for serving our country. I appreciate the sacrifices you and you family went through to insure the freedom we all enjoy in this great country. That is precisely why I speak up about the current state of affairs in this country. For the first time since the days after the Civil War, a White House official has been indicted. For the first time ever, we are involved in a war of aggression. For the first time in our honorable history, torture is the policy of our country. These, among other transgressions of our current leadership, endanger the freedom you and thousands of others have fought so valiantly to preserve
<o =""></o>
No, I did not serve in the military. I did spend two years serving in the Peace Corps overseas, not that it makes any difference to you.

 

[ok2bclever]

kybdBanger, first off I wish to correct your crediting of the quote.

Those were my words, not susie's.

To answer the question you posed to susie if you consider that a qualifier or pertinent, my military service time would be that none, zero, zilch, nada amount.

I believe that has led me to respect those that have more than otherwise, especially those that volunteered.

I am of an age that I was the last generation, last year of the manditory draft from the Vietnam era.

I was drafted number 109 and was ready to due my duty even though I was far more interested in attending college when they ended the manditory service.

So I went to college instead.

It is simple fact that the number of soldiers killed has passed 2000 and that the permanently crippled/injured is far, far higher.

These continuing quotes by the administration that they "expected an escalation of the violence until ...." infer that the violence will slack off after that date.

I was asking if anyone else had noticed that this same PR response to continuing deaths of our soldiers was being continually recycled using different dates/same results as the excuse.

While not in the military I have relatives and friends in the military, several over there currently.

I personally haven't had anyone close die over there yet although some in my community (small town) have .

I am unhappy with both the deception that got us over there and the neorepublican philosophies of democracy through military aggression that brought it about.

Is there some part of the quote you linked to susie that you take exception to?

Or do you think military service is/was required to have an opinion regarding the policies of our nation or the PR used in the news?

Or are you just unhappy with susie?

I take exception with the first two and am ok with the latter.

sorry susie.

 

[susiedriver]

kybdBanger, first off I wish to correct your crediting of the quote.

<<<snip>>>

Is there some part of the quote you linked to susie that you take exception to?

Or do you think military service is/was required to have an opinion regarding the policies of our nation or the PR used in the news?

Or are you just unhappy with susie?

I take exception with the first two and am ok with the latter.

sorry susie.

I didn't think I had said that, but agreed with it, in any case. No need to apologize to me, ok2b, if I make everyone happy, I'm doing something wrong, or hanging out with sheeple.</snip>

 

[ok2bclever]

What's to agree to?

It was just a statement of fact with a question whether anyone else had noticed the continually recycled excuse.

I cannot take exception with someone being unhappy with you as you have been quite uncharitable to several of late.

Not saying they didn't start it as you claim, but try to rise above whenever possible and leave it to disagreements of politics and religion as danny mentions in general.

I will say this is Cheryl's board so she can do as she sees fit, but I found it interesting (actually unfair, but I try for diplomacy whenever possible ) that Cheryl sited your post alone as unacceptable considering several of the things posted at you recently.

The one you sited was particularly more viscuous than the one Cheryl sited and she let that pass, but as I said it's her football and she can make the rules and take it home whenever she wants.

 

[dannyboy]

"neorepublican philosophies of democracy through military aggression that brought it about."

What.....and no democrats voted to invade? Wow, I wonder how that could have happened.

d

 

[susiedriver]

What's to agree to?

It was just a statement of fact with a question whether anyone else had noticed the continually recycled excuse.

I cannot take exception with someone being unhappy with you as you have been quite uncharitable to several of late.

Not saying they didn't start it as you claim, but try to rise above whenever possible and leave it to disagreements of politics and religion as danny mentions in general.

I will say this is Cheryl's board so she can do as she sees fit, but I found it interesting (actually unfair, but I try for diplomacy whenever possible ) that Cheryl sited your post alone as unacceptable considering several of the things posted at you recently.

The one you sited was particularly more viscuous than the one Cheryl sited and she let that pass, but as I said it's her football and she can make the rules and take it home whenever she wants.

I have communicated with cheryl privately, and let my intentions be known to her. In a nutshell, I do not wish to disrupt, but will not let lies pass as fact either. If someone hits me, I will hit back. I really don't think that I was out of line for calling someone 'old and out of it' after they called me 'juvenile and ignorant'. (parphrasing to avoid confrontation).

On the other hand, charity should be given to those less fortunate; closed mindedness is not a reason for charity. As far as I am concerned, everyone who has had the opportunity to make a career at UPS has been blessed, at least financially.

 

[ok2bclever]

"But they were guesses, not facts and the administration constantly presented them as facts.

Many democratic politicians supported the invasion on these "facts" presented to them.

I supported the invasion on these "facts".

We trusted this president and he lied to us."



Many of us supported the invasion under false pretenses.

While there was faulty intelligence on this issue there was also valid intelligence on this issue either disputing or at least putting in doubt much of the intelligence that was faulty.

The administration purposefully ignored what did not support the intended neorepublican democracy by invasion plan.

You didn't understand that part?

That isn't to say there are not democrat hawks by any means or that hawks are even necessarily bad.

It's just I don't know if there is a definative term for them like neorepublican.

On another note, try going to Google or any other major search engine and put in MISERABLE FAILURE.

You don't have to capitalize it or color it red.

I had nothing to do with this,
but it has been my contention for a long time.

 

[cheryl]

response regarding unfair flame policy enforcement

.....
I will say this is Cheryl's board so she can do as she sees fit, but I found it interesting (actually unfair, but I try for diplomacy whenever possible ) that Cheryl sited your post alone as unacceptable considering several of the things posted at you recently.

The one you sited was particularly more viscuous than the one Cheryl sited and she let that pass, but as I said it's her football and she can make the rules and take it home whenever she wants.

The post from susiedriver to moreluck received a record number of complaints. More than any other post in the 5 years this board has been in existence. That's why I chose that post to step in and publicly restate the flame policy. Hopefully that reminder is all we will need to get back on track.
<o =""></o>
Your suggestions, comments and complaints are always welcome.

 

[ok2bclever]

Well that explains it as I thought "Your a poor over the hill shriveled up bag that does not have a life" which wasn't commented on as far more viscious than "reason with a senile old lady" which was.

So it was a popularity issue between susie and moreluck on this forum rather than the contents of the flame.

Ok, that is certainly understandable who would lose here in that contest.

Well the insult issue needed addressing regardless.

Thank you for the clarification Cheryl.

 

[cheryl]

my fault

...
So it was a popularity issue between susie and moreluck on this forum rather than the contents of the flame.

Ok, that is certainly understandable who would lose here in that contest.

Well the insult issue needed addressing regardless.

Thank you for the clarification Cheryl.

This is starting to get a little silly ok2bclever... I’m pretty sure you understand that it isn’t a popularity issue. The flame policy applies equally to everyone. The quantity of complaints simply made me realize how much the mud slinging was offending our community.

I just really don't want to have to come in here like the town sheriff every time someone loses their cool. It stifles communication and can be taken as favoritism, just like you are implying now.
<o =""></o>
Since you want to continue to discuss this issue let’s analyze it further. I can be blamed for letting it go as far as it did. I accept the blame for not coming in with my magic wand and smiting whoever cast the first stone. I hoped that time would smooth tempers and cooler heads would prevail... but they didn’t. I often make mistakes, as many of you know from my technical goof ups. Let's write this one down as poor judgement when I was wearing the moderator hat.

Again I hope that we can get back on track from here on out. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated.

 

[ok2bclever]

The fact that a record amount of people messaged you over susie insulting moreluck (I lost count who slighted who first and it really doesn't matter as you say, but just needs to stop) is certainly a reflection of moreluck's popularity and/or susie's lack there of.

If you disagree with that then we will have to agree to disagree on the subject.

Perhaps you misunderstood me.

In my first post I certainly did say I thought your choice of susie as the public example to use was unfair considering the many personal attacks she sustains on any given day.

You explained your reasonings and they were totally understandable and reasonable and I said as much and my reference to popularity was as already mentioned in this post and certainly not in reference to you.

Sorry if you consider that silly.

Overall I like this board, I certainly like the new format far over the old one (except I cannot use the standard right click Copy/Paste with this new forum and my Firefox browser, it does work with IE as I checked that) and I am with you that I wouldn't want you to become the instant message word crushing overlord here.

That would be incredibly intensive on you and stultifying for most of the rest of us.

I think you do a good job and are quite responsive, not that you need my approval.

Keep up the good work.

 

[moreluck]

Stultifying ?? Can I use that word in the future, ok2be?

Don't everyone go running for your dictionary....it means "to render useless or ineffectual."

C'mon Cheryl, you were looking it up, weren't you??

I had to look it up. Thanks ok2be for keeping us on our toes and for the education. I like to learn a new word everyday if I can. It helps in those crossword puzzles I am always doing (in ink, I must add)

 

[ok2bclever]

Glad to be of service moreluck.

I have always hated to plead nescience to the king's english.

As previously mentioned I visit your joke thread every now and then for inspiration to take to work with me.

 

[susiedriver]

Please listen to this radio interview:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4987598

Morning Edition, November 3, 2005 Steve Inskeep talks with Larry Wilkerson, former chief of staff for former Secretary of State Colin Powell, about the influence of Vice President Dick Cheney's office over Iraq war policy. Wilkerson claims the vice president and others bypassed the rest of the government to control key decisions.

He will be on Jim Lehrer's Newshour tonight on PBS. He is a lifelong military man, and not part of the left wing at all. He was Powell's right hand man for 16 years, and a real American Hero.

 

[over9five]

Good article:

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/1105/02edmiller.html?COXnetJSessionIDbuild102=DpICsoeXn1GNFXprsEA1AZ9UiQg63kGGuelt0fndf1mfmO3I9OBY!64096873&UrAuth=aN%60NUOcNVUbTTUWUXUTUZTZU_UWUbU

Link doesn't seem to work..... I need computer lessons!

 

[toonertoo]

I like the joke thread, the quote thread and the food thread.
And if I had more time I might even use a recipe and cook once in awhile.
Til I have more time, if these are what have been referred to as vanity threads, thats just too bad. For the people who have the time, such as the retirees, etc, God Bless them they have earned it. And if these threads get no complaints, and they shouldnt, what exactly is the problem?
Cheryl should not have to be a sherrif, I am sure she has better things to do. I say lets get back to griping about our hours, our customers, our co workers, our government, or anything but the personal slams. I am sure everyone gets enough insults in their lives that no one needs to throw them here. Good God we are all adults. Lighten up people, it reflects badly on us as it is a public board.