Edit..... <deleted> it. Can't be bothered to get into a ruck with the pc brigade.

If I can, so can you, ahh I see, said the blind man, you meant me

Interesting turn around. We were all patting ourselves on the back about the fact that the topic was being dealt with reasonably maturely, and then it degenerated. Pity.

I still believe it was dealt with in the proper manner, but it does prove one thing, bad apples can produce some good cider

Just re-read my last post and realised it could be a tad ambiguous... I was furling my eyebrow at two posters only (from the previous page).

There are hundreds of forums out there where various subjects can be posted and discussed. If I really wanted to see what ever crap is on the front page of the Sun/Mirror/Star, I can go to those sites and read it. If I want to get involved in discussions on Euro politics, I'll look for sites that focus on those issues. If I want news or related information about my home country, I'll find sites that specialize in that.

If I want to look at Thailand related issues/topics, I come to ThaiVisa.

You must be talking of outside of Bedlam, because that is the General rule, it is primarily a Thai information site, but this is Bedlam, there are only two threads on the front page that can be linked to Thailand, so this may beg the question, why come here.

Bedlam allows a little more freedom to post stuff that isn't specifically Thai-related,

OK, a little at odds to your above statement, but to generate discussion it will inevitably lead to topics of interest 'further afield'.

but I don't think it was meant to be a place to post any and everything from whatever country you originated from.

Then it will fade, particularly if you enforce this part of the rules

Bedlam isn't a play ground,

I think we are lucky in that generally, Bedlam doesn't require the same level of moderation that the other forums do, but there still has to be some level of control or the little problems (like we've just seen in this thread) would get out of hand. In fact, this thread alone shows the need for moderation in Bedlam, and the inability of the members to "self-moderate".

I think it has been proven that on the whole, the members can self-moderate and I would counter demonstrate, that because two members were unable to construct a reasonable argument and stretched the plausible, we are suddenly left with a hullabaloo that everybody is not capable of constructing a counter resolve, this is implausible, nonsensical and bears no credence.

There will always be a need for moderation, but it has been established in recent times that little to no moderation is required, if you like, 'some level of control', give me the self moderation of my peers every time.

I' m not a very active member of bedlam, mainly because a lot of the humor being anglo-saxon escapes me, or doesn't really seem funny to me (my fault), and also because a lot of inside jokes and banter are beyond me (again my fault).

What I do want to say, is that 2 outsiders from the PC brigade have succeeded in stirring up animosity among some of the regulars, which was exactly what they were aiming for. If anything I would say that the moderation issue should be about keeping such people out of bedlam after being warned a couple of times.

Just my 2 cents

onzestan

If anything I would say that the moderation issue should be about keeping such people out of bedlam after being warned a couple of times.

Just my 2 cents

onzestan

It does happen once in awhile, where a members access to Bedlam is cut-off for whatever reason (just ask Bendix).

But to do that would require the mods to focus more attention on the forum which would (could) lead to a higher degree of moderation overall (much to the dismay of some).

What I do want to say, is that 2 outsiders from the PC brigade have succeeded in stirring up animosity among some of the regulars, which was exactly what they were aiming for. If anything I would say that the moderation issue should be about keeping such people out of bedlam after being warned a couple of times.

Just my 2 cents

onzestan

I understand your meaning, but I have to disagree. Anyone who has the ability to post here, also has the right to post here, and their views are generally welcome. It wouldn't do, to have a "clique" here that wasn't at all receptive to new ideas and fresh perspectives.

That said, the posters in question, came off as having fairly narrow and rigid views of the world, and ironically displayed a behavior not unlike that which they were criticizing so vehemently.

I understand your meaning, but I have to disagree. Anyone who has the ability to post here, also has the right to post here, and their views are generally welcome. It wouldn't do, to have a "clique" here that wasn't at all receptive to new ideas and fresh perspectives.

That said, the posters in question, came off as having fairly narrow and rigid views of the world, and ironically displayed a behavior not unlike that which they were criticizing so vehemently.

I also understand your meaning but have to add that in my view people that exhibit this kind of behaviour do not only display narrow minded viewpoints but do so in a very aggressive manner which is completely unwanted (by me at least), and are not going to stop until they feel they have won the argument as clearly shown in the topic about boater's poem. I did not find that poem racist, as a matter of fact it was more aimed at the inability of the politicians to recognize that some people are milking the system.

onzestan

not only display narrow minded viewpoints but do so in a very aggressive manner which is completely unwanted (by me at least), and are not going to stop until they feel they have won the argument

onzestan

You know, I can't argue with that at all, and it's probably the reason I didn't give a warmer welcome to the idea of a "serious issues" sub-forum.

It has been my observation that people form a "world view" about things. Everything they read, watch and talk about is in accordance with that already formed "world view". It's never been easier to stay attached to one's view as their are countless networks, newspapers, and authors spewing out polarizing opinions and people tend to seek out those that reinforce their already held points of view. People tend to wield, quotes, "facts" and statistics in these exchanges and nobody ever strives for "insight". Maybe for fun, if the subforum does get established, every week the posters should be made to switch sides and argue the other persons view for awhie.

I think we have all arrived at the same destination (or close by), albeit by slightly different paths. The common thread is that we are all agreed that those two posters in question are in error. Doesn't this speak volumes for our ability to self moderate?

I think we have all arrived at the same destination (or close by), albeit by slightly different paths. The common thread is that we are all agreed that those two posters in question are in error. Doesn't this speak volumes for our ability to self moderate?

I concur wholeheartedly

Doesn't this speak volumes for our ability to self moderate?

Not really, as it took a (mild) warning by another poster (who just happened to also be a mod), before those two stopped. I just went back over the posts, and didn't see much in the way of intervention by any other (non-mod) members.

Had Boo not stepped in, it is quite likely that verbal jousting would have continued and degenerated even further, to the point Boo (or another mod) would have had to act in an "official" manner.

If anything I would say that the moderation issue should be about keeping such people out of bedlam after being warned a couple of times.

Just my 2 cents

onzestan

It does happen once in awhile, where a members access to Bedlam is cut-off for whatever reason (just ask Bendix).

But to do that would require the mods to focus more attention on the forum which would (could) lead to a higher degree of moderation overall (much to the dismay of some).

I read Bedlam every day but make the conscious effort to avoid moderating the sub forum. In the majority of cases it is not needed and the members stay within the loosened boundaries of what is acceptable. The hot bum thread and Not PC jokes are obvious examples of threads that are allowed here but not in the main forums. In my experience threads that cross over the line are either ignored or become moderated by the other members. Most of us here know each other's forum persona and understand our individual quirks of humour. What may be funny to one may make no sense to another and visa versa.

Two final points:

1) Boater's post was a mistake and he learned a short sharp lesson from it. He apologised and it was accepted by most of the members. As far as I am concerned it is time to move on and let the poor guy alone. Calling for him to be banned/burned at the stake/tarred and feathered is excessive.

2) Robski what topics do you want to see set up? Let me know by PM or start them yourself and see how they run. The process is simple, if there is interest they will tend to stick to the front page. If it warrants continued support I will pin them to the top.

regards

CB

I just went back over the posts, and didn't see much in the way of intervention by any other (non-mod) members.

Did you re-read the same thread, I just re-read? If so, we have a particular different perspective of what actually went on, but each to their own, I'd say.

threads that cross over the line are either ignored or become moderated by the other members. Most of us here know each other's forum persona and understand our individual quirks of humour. What may be funny to one may make no sense to another and visa versa.

Yup, whole-heartedly agree.

Boater's post was a mistake and he learned a short sharp lesson from it. He apologised and it was accepted by most of the members. As far as I am concerned it is time to move on and let the poor guy alone. Calling for him to be banned/burned at the stake/tarred and feathered is excessive.

As I have already stated this, I again concur.

Move along now, there is nothing more to see

OK, guys,

What on Earth is going on?

I have been out of Bedlam for a while because I have sometimes to deal with something that other people (non-bedlamists) call a "live".... ...was busy, really!

I have not seen the poem in question but from the replies here I can roughly figure what it was all about.

There is a German satire magazine "Titanic" that I still subscribe to in Thailand. They had about 15 years ago an article that had the core statement as follows:

a joke is not racist, sexist or discriminating. The one who tells a joke might be. If the joke is told only for the purpose of discriminating someone or conveying a racist, sexist etc. opinion, then the joke-teller is to be blamed, not the joke. The same joke told by two different people with a different mindset conveys a completely different message.

On a personal note, I am German, living in Thailand. I deal every day with all sorts of nationalities and also my closer and not-so-close friends are very international. They take he piss out of me for being German on many occasions, being it the Faulty Towers "don't mention the war" routine or whatever...I developed something called "Humour" to cope with that.

For more on this topic kindly refer to my signature.