Even the mention of the word "sensitive" brings out defensiveness.

Talk about sensitive.

I see what you are getting at now mark, I got the wrong end of the stick earlier. Excuse me if I am being a bit dense, I had too many Leo's and nasty whiskey last night.

Again though, all the examples you have mentioned are in the news clipping forum. Many in there are so rabidly clambering over each other to be heard the loudest and to appear the cleverest, discussion becomes futile. It doesn't matter even if you have a very good, accurate and valid point. Everybody in the news section is so busy trying to say what they want to say, because they believe that their's is the only valid argument, that anybody else's opinion is wasted.

I don't think moving posts to a different section as you suggest would work. You'd just have the same old people going on and on in circles. I kind of like the news clipping section as it is because I know to just not go there. Let's keep them in there, kind of in self-imposed quarantine, rather than moving them about to other parts of the forum.

If I was a mod in that part of TV I'd likely just put all of them on long holidays and be done with it. But then that's why I'm unlikely to ever be a mod (not that I'd want to be)

I think most non-Americans would agree with you that it is not US bashing per se but over-reaction and hypersensitivity on the part of the Americans.

Case in point is this thread, where what you have rightly described as criticism is labelled US bashing by Marky.

So, to the OP and the general idea, the new forum should not be an anti-US forum populated by US bashers,,,,,,logically it should be called the Defend the US forum and be populated by over-sensitive defenders of the stars and stripes.

You got this idea in your head and you can't shake it. Please try and read what I have posted. I'll post it again for you. And I will post it every time that someone says Americans and I are over sensitive. Hopefully eventually it will sink in.

I don't mind the anti American posts. I don't want to eliminate them.

I want to move them so they don't derail discussion about a particular issue.

If the anti American posts are on topic. Great. Then I can respond to them and stay on topic. No harm no foul.

But that is not the case 90% of the time. 90% of the time the anti American posts are off topic and if I respond to them I will get thrown off TV like the baby with the bath water. You can't expect a mod to sift through all the posts to determine who started it and who is only responding.

The fact that the post is anti American does not bother me in the least. If it is wrong I should be able to correct that error. As it stands now I can't do that.

I see what you are getting at now mark, I got the wrong end of the stick earlier. Excuse me if I am being a bit dense, I had too many Leo's and nasty whiskey last night.

Again though, all the examples you have mentioned are in the news clipping forum. Many in there are so rabidly clambering over each other to be heard the loudest and to appear the cleverest, discussion becomes futile. It doesn't matter even if you have a very good, accurate and valid point. Everybody in the news section is so busy trying to say what they want to say, because they believe that their's is the only valid argument, that anybody else's opinion is wasted.

I don't think moving posts to a different section as you suggest would work. You'd just have the same old people going on and on in circles. I kind of like the news clipping section as it is because I know to just not go there. Let's keep them in there, kind of in self-imposed quarantine, rather than moving them about to other parts of the forum.

If I was a mod in that part of TV I'd likely just put all of them on long holidays and be done with it. But then that's why I'm unlikely to ever be a mod (not that I'd want to be)

I think most non-Americans would agree with you that it is not US bashing per se but over-reaction and hypersensitivity on the part of the Americans.

Case in point is this thread, where what you have rightly described as criticism is labelled US bashing by Marky.

So, to the OP and the general idea, the new forum should not be an anti-US forum populated by US bashers,,,,,,logically it should be called the Defend the US forum and be populated by over-sensitive defenders of the stars and stripes.

You got this idea in your head and you can't shake it. Please try and read what I have posted. I'll post it again for you. And I will post it every time that someone says Americans and I are over sensitive. Hopefully eventually it will sink in.

I don't mind the anti American posts. I don't want to eliminate them.

I want to move them so they don't derail discussion about a particular issue.

If the anti American posts are on topic. Great. Then I can respond to them and stay on topic. No harm no foul.

But that is not the case 90% of the time. 90% of the time the anti American posts are off topic and if I respond to them I will get thrown off TV like the baby with the bath water. You can't expect a mod to sift through all the posts to determine who started it and who is only responding.

The fact that the post is anti American does not bother me in the least. If it is wrong I should be able to correct that error. As it stands now I can't do that.

You are missing the point.

The point being made is that what you see as bashing is merely critisism, often valid critisism, and yet people such as yourself jump on it as "bashing" and get all defensive.

I see what you are getting at now mark, I got the wrong end of the stick earlier. Excuse me if I am being a bit dense, I had too many Leo's and nasty whiskey last night.

Again though, all the examples you have mentioned are in the news clipping forum. Many in there are so rabidly clambering over each other to be heard the loudest and to appear the cleverest, discussion becomes futile. It doesn't matter even if you have a very good, accurate and valid point. Everybody in the news section is so busy trying to say what they want to say, because they believe that their's is the only valid argument, that anybody else's opinion is wasted.

I don't think moving posts to a different section as you suggest would work. You'd just have the same old people going on and on in circles. I kind of like the news clipping section as it is because I know to just not go there. Let's keep them in there, kind of in self-imposed quarantine, rather than moving them about to other parts of the forum.

If I was a mod in that part of TV I'd likely just put all of them on long holidays and be done with it. But then that's why I'm unlikely to ever be a mod (not that I'd want to be)

I think most non-Americans would agree with you that it is not US bashing per se but over-reaction and hypersensitivity on the part of the Americans.

Case in point is this thread, where what you have rightly described as criticism is labelled US bashing by Marky.

So, to the OP and the general idea, the new forum should not be an anti-US forum populated by US bashers,,,,,,logically it should be called the Defend the US forum and be populated by over-sensitive defenders of the stars and stripes.

You got this idea in your head and you can't shake it. Please try and read what I have posted. I'll post it again for you. And I will post it every time that someone says Americans and I are over sensitive. Hopefully eventually it will sink in.

I don't mind the anti American posts. I don't want to eliminate them.

I want to move them so they don't derail discussion about a particular issue.

If the anti American posts are on topic. Great. Then I can respond to them and stay on topic. No harm no foul.

But that is not the case 90% of the time. 90% of the time the anti American posts are off topic and if I respond to them I will get thrown off TV like the baby with the bath water. You can't expect a mod to sift through all the posts to determine who started it and who is only responding.

The fact that the post is anti American does not bother me in the least. If it is wrong I should be able to correct that error. As it stands now I can't do that.

You are missing the point.

The point being made is that what you see as bashing is merely critisism, often valid critisism, and yet people such as yourself jump on it as "bashing" and get all defensive.

If the anti American posts are on topic. Great. Then I can respond to them and stay on topic. No harm no foul.

But that is not the case 90% of the time. 90% of the time the anti American posts are off topic and if I respond to them I will get thrown off TV like the baby with the bath water. You can't expect a mod to sift through all the posts to determine who started it and who is only responding.

What you are missing is I don't make the decision if a post is bashing (flame) someone in authority makes that decision.

I just realized I should tell you, I think it is fun to respond to the anti American posts. Especially the ones that are considered flames. Most of the time the flamers have only a slight knowledge of America, history in general and their own countries. It is kind of like a verbal video game. Very amusing and it keeps ones mind active.

My problem is I can't respond. The criticism does not bother me in the least. I feel the critic may get some education about Americans from my reply. He may also find not all Americans fit his stereotypic ideal.

Does the Swedish guy who hates America know that there are more Swedes in Chicago than Göteborg/Gothenburg?

And that there are parts of Chicago that you can speak Swedish on the street and get a local Swedish newspaper? Probably not. I'll tell him.

I also understand the authorities can't let those posts stand because they may offend people. I also understand the authorities close threads because it simply becomes too much work to police them.

That's why I am suggesting simply move them.

Yeah great idea

The zero culpability section of the forum

Perhaps there could be an anti

American section

Israeli Section

German Section

Japanese section

Indian Section

Islamic section

Korean Section

African Section

Oi, oi, oi !!!! What's wrong with OZ and NZ?

Can't we have an Oz-bashing forum?

(Oh, I forgot - that's called Bedlam)

Yeah great idea

The zero culpability section of the forum

Perhaps there could be an anti

American section

Israeli Section

German Section

Japanese section

Indian Section

Islamic section

Korean Section

African Section

Oi, oi, oi !!!! What's wrong with OZ and NZ?

Can't we have an Oz-bashing forum?

(Oh, I forgot - that's called Bedlam)

Do mods routinely remove anti OK and anti NZ posts? I must be missing something because I have not seen any removed in the general or news forum. I posted one anti Aussie post once just to see what would happen. It was about the battle of Singapore and a book I had read. I knew when I posted it that the author was probably wrong. But I posted it just to see what would happen. As I remember it got quite a response. I guess I could post something that Kiwi troops did bad in Afghanistan but outside of killing Afghans I don't know of anything. Two internal defence inquiries have cleared diggers of illegally killing seven local men in Afghanistan in April. In separate statements issued on Friday, the (Aussie) Department of Defence said its soldiers had acted appropriately. Both incidents occurred in Oruzgan province where Australian troops are working with their Dutch colleagues to rid the region of the Taliban, remnants of al-Qaeda and other criminal forces. In the first incident on April 2, three Afghan men were killed while soldiers were clearing a house and surrounding buildings. I guess the Aussies and Dutch are killing Afghans too but not too many. Don't tell Lao Pao. He already thinks I am obsessing about the Netherlands.

Mark.

The one name mentioned tells me you are talking about a news clippings thread again. Posters in there are experts at absolutely everything known to man, they are the all knowledgeable beings who are never ignorant and never ever wrong. Anything said in there will be refuted by people who want to show the rest that they are vastly superior in intelligence. But then if you want to discuss facts then incorrect 'facts' are going to be pounced on pretty quickly anyway. Especially in a forum where al the members are trying to get one up on each other.

But to go back to what HB said, there are whole threads in bedlam, and I think in the pub (or jokes) section, that are dedicated entirely to bashing Aussies. The threads have been going for some time and are really quite long as well as quite amusing

I see the difference between banter.....which most of the posters here are correctly writing off as good humoured responses, and the posts which a member feels he is not 'allowed' to respond to.

The point here, there are occasions where an incorrect generalisation, or comment can be used in an attempt to undermine or appear to question the credibility of a thread participant. A full and detailed response to that comment to provide relevant and detailed information to refute the comment and thus show the lack of knowledge of the poster would derail the thread and possibly take the discussion so far off course the track of the thread is lost.

So do you respond, or does the poster escape with an inaccurate comment/observation? or as is being suggested, there is a forum where the comment could be parked and responded to in an appropriate manner.

Personally I would respond and take the thread off course if I felt strongly enough........but I seldom get to that level.....

The fact that the post is anti American does not bother me in the least. If it is wrong I should be able to correct that error. As it stands now I can't do that. [/b]

Mark

Are you suggesting that you are being discriminated against? People can make anti American posts, particularly off topic jibes and they are left on station, yet if you respond to an off topic flame you will be sanctioned?

The fact that the post is anti American does not bother me in the least. If it is wrong I should be able to correct that error. As it stands now I can't do that. [/b]

Mark

Are you suggesting that you are being discriminated against? People can make anti American posts, particularly off topic jibes and they are left on station, yet if you respond to an off topic flame you will be sanctioned?

I realize I am a high profile poster but I am not saying I am discriminated against. Noticed frequently would be a better term. For 6 months after my virginity thread every thing I said on Thai Visa was connected somehow to the word virginity. I, of course could not respond. There were other equally infamous threads. But I am not saying I personally was discriminated against.

What I am saying, is if a poster makes an anti American comment that is unacceptable and another poster corrects him. Both posts have to be deleted because the answer refers to the unacceptable anti American post.

The only way I can see to respond to an off topic anti American post is to have a forum devoted to anti American posts so it would be on topic.

To reiterate, I am not referring to on topic criticisms of anything American. The DEA sting of VB I think is a topic that any post about heavy handed American justice is worthy of debate.

The American new round of printing money I think is a topic that by its nature starts a debate if the American government has lost its brains again. Even though the theory behind it comes out of the London school of Economics. If the Portuguese and Irish and Greek and Spanish governments default on sovereign debt the world will not end as we know it. If the dollar fails, the world will end as we know it. I can understand why everyone has an opinion.

I am only talking about off topic slamming of the US. A lot of people like to do it. OK great, make a new forum and have on topic slamming and defense of the US. I really don't see much real anti any other country posts on a regular basis.

When I used to go to bars in Pattaya I would leave if a UK and surrounding areas discussion turned to Catholics and Protestants. After long experience I realized they often turn violent. But I have not seen much of that here.

The only way I can see to respond to an off topic anti American post is to have a forum devoted to anti American posts so it would be on topic.

You're already there.

The only way I can see to respond to an off topic anti American post is to have a forum devoted to anti American posts so it would be on topic.

You're already there.

:lol:

Tuu Tong

But also bottom line is America along with others are world leaders....

USA along with a very few others are super powers

USA has the world reserve currency.....

USA has been known to try & be a preacher/moral compass...

USA has been known to dictate or try to act as a world policeman/cop

Because of their high profile & these things they will be called out on many things...They will have fingers pointed at them......You will call it bashing

It goes with the job/claims & is a double edged sword.

None like folks who do not practice what they preach.

At times they will be seen as such.

Thicken your skin or change your passport like you said you did with your USD currency....BTW were you bashing the dollar by doing that?...Of course not

The only way I can see to respond to an off topic anti American post is to have a forum devoted to anti American posts so it would be on topic.

You're already there.

:lol:

Tuu Tong

But also bottom line is America along with others are world leaders....

USA along with a very few others are super powers

USA has the world reserve currency.....

USA has been known to try & be a preacher/moral compass...

USA has been known to dictate or try to act as a world policeman/cop

Because of their high profile & these things they will be called out on many things...They will have fingers pointed at them......You will call it bashing

It goes with the job/claims & is a double edged sword.

None like folks who do not practice what they preach.

At times they will be seen as such.

Thicken your skin or change your passport like you said you did with your USD currency....BTW were you bashing the dollar by doing that?...Of course not

I know it is difficult for you to read and understand what I write because you would like so much not to like me. But please give it a try. I have said on countless occasions in this thread I have no problems with on topic posts and the examples you point out above could be on topic and a basis for discussion.

I am talking about off topic posts designated off topic by the mods and removed from discussion. I would like to discuss the off topic posts in a forum designed to make off topic posts on topic. I like reading the criticism and having the ability to respond to it. I don't have a thin skin, I am asking for more exposure for anti American topics. What about this don't you get? I know it grates you to read an American writing he wants to read more anti American posts not less. So you will probably ignore this post. I understand.

The only way I can see to respond to an off topic anti American post is to have a forum devoted to anti American posts so it would be on topic.

You're already there.

Not so. You can't take posts removed from the General or News forums and re post them here.

I know it is difficult for you to read and understand what I write because you would like so much not to like me.

Mark45y, you are wasting your breath. Once you have been designated as a supporter of the U.S., no one on the "other side" is going to deal with your posts honestly. That is just how it is in OTB.

I don't have a thin skin

I think one doth protesth too much.

By the by, despite your protestations, it is clear that the vast majority herein, even if viewed as off-topic, do differentiate between the US ship of state which, despite elected Kings, continues on it worrisome course as opposed to disliking American citizens per se

Regards

I know it is difficult for you to read and understand what I write because you would like so much not to like me.

Mark45y, you are wasting your breath. Once you have been designated as a supporter of the U.S., no one on the "other side" is going to deal with your posts honestly. That is just how it is in OTB.

The A_Traveller post above is a good example. I make a post that asks for more not less anti American post discussion and he writes implying that I have a thin skin. I simply don't understand it. I ask over and over again. Give me more anti American posts and the ability to debate those issues and everyone keeps implying I am asking for no anti American posts. Where am I going wrong? It I post in big letters I am being impolite, so I can't do that. Do you have any suggestions? I want more anti American discussion. I have said this over and over. I don't want to give up and throw in the towel. How can I say it clearer?

^ Not implying, stating. Nowhere that I can see do you ask for more not less, as you put it, at least in this thread, maybe you are doing so elsewhere. However, curiously perhaps I'm responding to this thread.

Ho Hum.

Regards

Mark45y, you are wasting your breath. Once you have been designated as a supporter of the U.S., no one on the "other side" is going to deal with your posts honestly. That is just how it is in OTB.

True. Once people have formed a false assumption on a member of ANY forum, then it tends to cloud their vison when dealing with an appropriate topic. Mark is trying to push water up hill here. I don't care if I hate someone's guts; I'll still accept a correct post or reply by them. I want to debate the subject, not the person making it. And, as I've said MANY times, there is always two ways to say the same thing. One is with respect and the other is derogatory.

Mark45y, you are wasting your breath. Once you have been designated as a supporter of the U.S., no one on the "other side" is going to deal with your posts honestly. That is just how it is in OTB.

Mark is trying to push water up hill here.

I have a hard time pushing water in any direction. Especially around here.

^^ Ian, I'm intrigued as why you use the term 'false assumption'. In many cases here in the TV ecosystem, I see people who pontificate upon subjects of which they clearly have minimal knowledge apart from that gleaned from supportyourprejudices[dot]com. If, for example it is a subject which I have knowledge, possibly based on research of primary source materials, do I spend time and effort to present this, knowing full well that such a post will be attacked because it doesn't match their prejudicial expectations, and will lead in inevitably to flaming, or do I resist adding petrol to the embers?

Oddly I wonder sometimes if the web is just reinforcing divisions, as opposed to creating bridges.

Regards

Edit add post pointer//

Oddly I wonder sometimes if the web is just reinforcing divisions, as opposed to creating bridges.

It can do both but I see what you mean.

Whether people are swayed to change their minds or not, at least they (we) are exposed to different, often extreme, points of view. You don't get that reading only the New York Times or watching Fox News of MSNBC (for those who haven't heard of it, MSNBC is an American cable news channel that leans the opposite direction of Fox News and gets maybe 10% of the ratings)

Some ideas are presented better, more civilly than others and stand a better chance of being accepted by the "other side". The divisions are reinforced when the tone used is something inflammatory like "The Texas Village Idiot" or "Israeli genocide against the Palestinians". It makes me think that the other person will never consider anything than what they already believe. On the other side, would a supporter of Obama's policies be more willing to listen to someone who started out with, "President Obama is...." or "That n*****- Prez is..."? I know I sure wouldn't read any further if it started with the latter one even though I'm not be an Obama supporter. So not only can the tone hurt the chances of a new idea being accepted by the other side, it can also make it unaccepted by people on your own side of the political debate.

Are Americans generally too sensitive? Maybe the whinging & whining gets old after the1000th time? Or maybe Americans - like 2-3 other nationalities that come to mind - don't shy away from confrontation. Many nationalities will avoid confrontation, stare at the ground and be silent and call it a virtue. Others don't.

If you're the big boy in the playground it goes with the territory. If you'd been reading TV 150 years ago it would have been full of Brit bashing.

Oddly I wonder sometimes if the web is just reinforcing divisions, as opposed to creating bridges.

It can do both but I see what you mean.

Whether people are swayed to change their minds or not, at least they (we) are exposed to different, often extreme, points of view. You don't get that reading only the New York Times or watching Fox News of MSNBC (for those who haven't heard of it, MSNBC is an American cable news channel that leans the opposite direction of Fox News and gets maybe 10% of the ratings)

Some ideas are presented better, more civilly than others and stand a better chance of being accepted by the "other side". The divisions are reinforced when the tone used is something inflammatory like "The Texas Village Idiot" or "Israeli genocide against the Palestinians". It makes me think that the other person will never consider anything than what they already believe. On the other side, would a supporter of Obama's policies be more willing to listen to someone who started out with, "President Obama is...." or "That n*****- Prez is..."? I know I sure wouldn't read any further if it started with the latter one even though I'm not be an Obama supporter. So not only can the tone hurt the chances of a new idea being accepted by the other side, it can also make it unaccepted by people on your own side of the political debate.

That's because 90% of Fox viewers are redneck and/or trailer trash couch potatoes that sit and watch TV all day.

Why is calling Bush a Texan idiot inflamatory? If it is because the truth hurts, then the injured readers need to toughen up.

I know it is difficult for you to read and understand what I write because you would like so much not to like me.

I know it grates you to read an American writing he wants to read more anti American posts not less. So you will probably ignore this post. I understand.

No it is not you that I dislike & I have said it 2 or 3 times already it is your pompous diatribes that you try to pass off later as a writing style.

They always start or end with something along the lines of...I know your stupid but try.... Just like this very post of yours....same as pretty much any of the hundreds of your posts in the news section.

As for your non-issue I could care less if your American & WANT more anti American....I am sure you can find plenty without looking too hard.

Your claims that you cannot because things are modded or removed before you get a chance to launch yet another I am smarter than the average retired expat falls on deaf ears.....Because that is all your really crying about...You didn't get another crack at it.

Why?

I do not think you will find a forum anywhere on the internet that allows things to go so far off topic as you will here. So your claim is a non starter

When a mod removes a post here it is when it is an attack on a person not a country & usually a person complains...So whats really the problem?....Oh right you didn't get the last word in?

If you want a off topic specific forum for your off topic specific topics go start one...... It is a mostly free internet you know

^ Not implying, stating. Nowhere that I can see do you ask for more not less, as you put it, at least in this thread, maybe you are doing so elsewhere. However, curiously perhaps I'm responding to this thread.

Ho Hum.

Regards

This is from a post above in this thread. "I like reading the criticism and having the ability to respond to it. I don't have a thin skin, I am asking for more exposure for anti American topics. What about this don't you get? I know it grates you to read an American writing he wants to read more anti American posts not less. So you will probably ignore this post. I understand."

What don't you understand? Would I be wrong to expect an apology?

Oddly I wonder sometimes if the web is just reinforcing divisions, as opposed to creating bridges.

It can do both but I see what you mean.

Whether people are swayed to change their minds or not, at least they (we) are exposed to different, often extreme, points of view. You don't get that reading only the New York Times or watching Fox News of MSNBC (for those who haven't heard of it, MSNBC is an American cable news channel that leans the opposite direction of Fox News and gets maybe 10% of the ratings)

Some ideas are presented better, more civilly than others and stand a better chance of being accepted by the "other side". The divisions are reinforced when the tone used is something inflammatory like "The Texas Village Idiot" or "Israeli genocide against the Palestinians". It makes me think that the other person will never consider anything than what they already believe. On the other side, would a supporter of Obama's policies be more willing to listen to someone who started out with, "President Obama is...." or "That n*****- Prez is..."? I know I sure wouldn't read any further if it started with the latter one even though I'm not be an Obama supporter. So not only can the tone hurt the chances of a new idea being accepted by the other side, it can also make it unaccepted by people on your own side of the political debate.

That's because 90% of Fox viewers are redneck and/or trailer trash couch potatoes that sit and watch TV all day.

Why is calling Bush a Texan idiot inflamatory? If it is because the truth hurts, then the injured readers need to toughen up.

FOX viewer profile:

Gender

58.2% are Male

41.8% are Female

Age

22.8% are 18-34

68.6% are 25-54

Income

71.8% have a household income of $50K+

46% have a household income of $75K+

25.8% have a household income of $50,000-74,999

20.2% have a household income of $75,000-99,999

17.6% have a household income of $100,000-149,999

8.2% have a household income of $150K+

Education & Occupation

42% have graduated college or higher

38.4% are professional/managerial

Marital Status

60.6% are married

Online Usage

46.2% access the web every day

89.9% have a broadband connection

39.9% access the web from work

96% access the web from home

Are you trying to say that you wish this thread to morph into such a discussion, as opposed to your submission that you wanted a new forum for this? This thread is not such a locale since by definition it does not have such a topic.

Concision and precision would be most welcome.

Regards

That's because 90% of Fox viewers are redneck and/or trailer trash couch potatoes that sit and watch TV all day.

Do you really think that "redneck trailor trash" watch the news? Sports, game shows or soap operas are the main offenders.