aie aie aie, sounds bl00dy painful the idea of losing members :-O
Woah, woah, woah - posts like those of Christa (about homeopathy and self-sufficiency) are examples of what we shouldn’t be seeing. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying they shouldn’t be allowed. What I’m saying is that, as adults, we should have the decency and common sense not to post such hurtful comments. Opinions are not facts - therefore no one has the right to say that anyone is “batty” or “well over the madness horizon”. Are you a doctor? Have you met these people in person and given them an official consultation? I seriously doubt it. As one of the younger members here, I am disgusted by some of the comments that get bandied about. This is not the school playground. Let’s leave the childish name-calling to the kids. Even if you don’t agree, you need to understand that people are entitled to their own opinions without having to fear any backlash.
I like to quote Thumper, from Bambi “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say nothin’ at all”. Perhaps not the most educated of scholars, but a good motto to live by nonetheless.
As for the name, this has been rehashed plenty of times but at the end of the day, it’s c&j’s site and they can call it whatever they like 
But actually - there aren't that many attacks! You should see some of the other boards I look at occasionally...
Exactly. And the day we become like the rest...I will eat my socks. Or sell the kids. Or something. Ain't going to happen even if we have to lose lots of 'members' en route.
Aaargh, mammary became mamry, excuse me. Only had a beer, time to get onto more water at my size of life I suppose!
Gosh an unfiltered three letter word that is actually a kind of small woodland bird or, rhetorically, a mamry gland. Shame on you madam! Like the exchange Bryan and Mark, if everybody 'sank' (again rhetorically meant in a sense that even Aristotel would have approved) to that level the SFN would win lots of awards... Then Bryan blamed Hunger (deliberate capital) which is much like Augustine denouncing Pelagius as heretic on the question of original sin. Do we thus become a philosophical or theological thread as a consequence or am I also writing slang for male genitalia? :) :) ;) :D
@Bryan. Not at all. I enjoyed your response.
@ Jeanette - Bryan did not swear at you. He used the word bollox to describe your argument. Maybe my dinner parties are uncouth but that kind of language appears all the time. I agree that I perhaps should have asked him not to use the word again but you had been needling him, I (and others) thought for some time.
I made a light hearted reference to Neil needing my crutches to referee - and incidentally, I quite often "plead" with people to stay as you put it, to help diffuse various situations. Please don't misquote me as you make me look like a tit and I don't appreciate it. Thanks.
Yes it does Jeanette, and if someone abuses that then I'll deal with it.
@Bryan. The question "where would be without rhetoric" was itself rhetorical and was intended as a joke, and therefore may have illustrated your point.
Right all you deranged vegetable growers, demented potters and any other group who I could probably offend I I tried.....
Please go and read my blog post on the subject and then lighten up. We're all basically in agreement here that we don't want SFN turning into The Other Place....
Am now off to knit Crista a snowboard. In this seasons colours of course. Barking? Moi? Of course.
I'm not sure about anthropologist jokes, but where would we be without rhetoric?
Jeanette, as this isn't the first time you've brought this up I will take the time to respond in the hope that we can put this to bed. SFN has an automatic profanity filter, it's not me or Catharine that go through every post with our black marker. If you spell the word correctly it will get filtered. If you don't it may not (there are some misspellings of common profane words in there too). I hope that clears it up for you?
Thanks
James
Wooo, must away to cook dinner BUT!
Bryan that last line is pure genius! It is a very interesting thought indeed. If so it is true then do you think that is a broader societal issue? It does offer a very profound answer if you are right.
:) Anybody got any 'how many anthropologists' jokes? We probably need them to liven up an often over serious discipline. ;)
OK, celeste just seen the one from you below mine. Right, my point kind of. You are a psychologist, or were you joking, because looking through some of the threads I suspect there is a lot to glean for your paper. I am not but human nature naturally affects what I see as a social scientist. As for age, well I am getting on some and thus far I see a mix there so perhaps it is the water - as they so often say when there is no other answer.
Hey folk, my point really is not some kind of censorship per se, nor is it about the undoubtedly value of SFN which we all seem to agree on. What I was trying to say was that some people have become fairly unpleasant recently and one or two of them have done it to several people. That being said, it is easy for others to say that if we do not like a post then leave it. In a few cases the person who soured it came in well in and then through no fault of the people already discussing (not necessarily arguing) an issue threw in something or some things that were either quite offensive or unfitting. Whether those were telling us that a war would intervene or that we are all (in effect) losers anyway is not as important as those interventions would be lost to them and the people 'conversing' would be stopped. Some have been outright nasty, on Facebook too, and James has dealt with them. Others have pushed it as well. If we do not like such interventions is one thing, but we should then quit the post for those people is another. If people did that then the entire SFN would be sacrificed to the killjoys, lose support including advertisers et voila, SFN R.I.P. That is not what any of us want at all, or... If it is then why? Get cross with each other by all means but being just plain offensive and then not taking hints that are put politely smacks of people out to stir up trouble and if people are saying live with it then you clearly do not want this site. I do, so I wrote down my thoughts and it is very interesting how diverse the remarks back are, there was no aggression or anger in them at all, just a totally laid out comment. On Facebook I see some people are calling those comments aggressive, that stuns me. I have been in chat groups and sites over several years and have seen too many sabotaged (yes, deliberately and maliciously) and killed off. I do not think that would be at all fair on the people who have made an online community on SFN or to Catharine and James who put it up to begin with. That is all my point was and if in doubt then please read through again slowly and think just a little again.
Hayley's meant to be packing so I'll have hers.
On Mark! Must save my work and go to collect my daughters. Let's see if we are a big, big party by the time I get home...
OK, being researcher I'll go out looking for the bar where the beer is best chilled for Hayley since we are dead broke and won't be offering Chablis instead of beer either. Any other takers?
Five.