matt said:

i was criticizing her idea. that people with cell phones have egos and are in demand 24/7.

and you recall incorrectly. what was reposted was all that i had said in the original comment.
[This message was edited Tue Sep 10 21:57:21 PDT 2002 by Aaron]

Aaron said:

Hey! I demand to be snipped too! Let's be fair! I wanna be cool! Don't leave me out! I'm decisive!

Cell phones are really useful for keeping in touch with people, and although "personalized" rings are fine as long as kept quiet when necessary, people who hate cell phone (yeah, Ian) users in general are....
[This message was edited Tue Sep 10 22:21:28 PDT 2002 by matt]

Aaron said:

I stand corrected... my memory is faulty sometimes. That said, you chose to criticize Nep2nes' idea with an insult, and the post was removed for that reason.

My request for you is simple: please post in accordance with our rules, or don't post at all. Thanks.

matt said:

So, are you going to be as vigilant with her as you are with me? Do you check my profile every day to see what I've posted just to make sure that I've not crossed any lines? Or does Nep2nes just report the messages to the moderators? Because if that's the case, then turnabout is fair play. What she posted was just as insulting as what I did. Why hasn't she been snipped?

Aaron said:

I do tend to scrutinize your posts because of your open unwillingness to comply with the rules. However, Nep2nes has also had some of her posts edited or removed, and if you believe that a particular post from her violates the rules, then report it to us and we'll take action, if appropriate.

Now, as for Nep2nes' comment about cell phone users, I don't object to it because it's not directed to a specific individual (i.e., it's not a personal attack), and I don't feel that it otherwise violates our rules.

Besides, I have a cell phone, and I admit that I have an ego.

matt said:

I do think the snipping of that comment was a little heavy handed Matt. It was pretty innocuous and hardly a flame imho.

matt said:

yes, but matt, you have to admit that a large number of her posts are broadely insulting to a large number of people. even when she's trying to say something serious or even kind, she always throws in some type of insult to a large number of people. so is it worse to be insulting one person or a whole group of people?

matt said:

I'll be the first to volunteer that this thread wasn't very good in the first place. It was a half-assed attempt at something... though I'm not sure what.

And matt, I DO agree with Aaron's last comment - that's why I posted what I did up there.

bkw said:

I understand your point. Taken alone, I probably would have let it slide. However, I interpreted the post in its context: a flame war that's been running for months and ought to be fully extinguished.

Perhaps we ought to take this over to prince.org Site Discussion, since we seem to have gotten away from the issue of cell phones...

matt said:

theC
Hey why don't you create a flame room here.Where orgers can go and duke it out and release their frustrations.It's not a bad idea when you think of it

theC said:

We actually considered this at one point, but decided against it. As I see it, there are three problems with having a designated "flame pit":

1) It's bound to get people upset and lead to things getting out of control.

2) Even a flame pit would have to have some rules, such as no threats of bodily harm. And I think it would be a nightmare to police.

3) "No flaming" has been a rule at prince.org since it was founded in 1995 (as the Paisley Park Mailing List). Having a flame-free environment is one of our basic values. Flaming is believed to be a major factor in Jon Brode's decision to end the Prince Mailing List, which ran from 1990 to 1995.

As I said, if people want to flame, there's always alt.music.prince, which is unmoderated.

matt said:

Then can you post a link from here so when i get mad i can call someone to the LINK and we can settle it??

matt said:

1) People can only get upset if they choose to participate. And if they choose to participate, that's on them. Not on the moderators.

2) Even at our flamiest, I don't recall anyone ever threatening actual harm on someone.

3) And just as the PML went on as the PPML and now Prince.org v 1.0 and 2.0, it would all go on again in SOME form if all the current moderators decided to close this thing down.

tommyalma said:

so matt, in an effort to keep someone from impersonating a moderater, you've gone and just done what he'd written as a joke anyway.

Good Gawd, I'm glad I gave up on Nep before all this came about - I would have gone if I couldn't her when I felt like it. But that was then...

Aaron, I understand!

tommyalma said:

Dunno why you mention me, I love mobile phones! I'm a complete techno-geek and gadget-fetishist. I've spent the last 5 years of my life developing for next gen mobile devices, Java enabled mobile phones, wireless technologies, and making mobile games etc.

Ian, as much as I like your new avatar, your old Prince-bearing-Fritos one is sorely missed. Will it ever be resurrected?

[Snip - cross post, off-topic question removed. Ian]

Natsume said:

Don't worry, my frito-based avatar is safe and sound. Just a temporary change while people get used to me as moderator etc

there was an article in today's paper regarding studies proving a link between cell phones and cancer

XxAxX said:

I dunno what to think about that. It's been said for a long time, hemmed and hawed over - it seems perfectly reasonable to me. But cancer seems to be caused by anything nowadays... and one would think that the people who had their phones glued to their heads would be more likely to get it than those who rarely use it.

The same goes for phones with the inner antennaes vs. phones with the extendable ones.

All in moderation, I'm telling ya...