What Is Harassment?

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by Leesifer

Oh, Sweetie, Sweetie, Sweetie, I do look briefly at your links but they are mainly aimed at Adora having a pop at either you or Alex Bragi.

Right, well......she's been here for awhile. I don't know anybody that approves of her behavior firstly, except beyelzu.

I can't really tell you what you are about except for all the things you've told us - you are super-intelligent,

I am not super intelligent, I am just intelligent as opposed to stupid and insane, you know, because we all know how insane I must be not to fall for some of the crap many of you try to pull and not to toe the party line all the time. You're all quite right, I'm sure it is insanity. Life is so much nicer oblivious and when playing nice-nice.

have a near photographic memory,

I have a good memory.

stick up for newbies before they even join,

Stick up for underdogs regularily, even if it's not obvious.

think most women are total bitches

Right, well when some of you choose not to act like total bitches hunting in a pack, defending your friends just because they are your friends, saying patronizing shit like "sweetie, sweetie, sweetie" I might change my mind.

and have breast fed about 500 children.

I have three children.

I have also seen you enjoying yourself on other threads as well lately, so there.

Enjoying myself? Where was this? Did I miss it? Shit!

[Veritas]

Would everybody please just SHUT THE FUCK UP ! ! !

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by scarletpeaches

Would everybody please just SHUT THE FUCK UP ! ! !

There's an ignore feature for this little problem, use it.

[Leesifer]

Stop shouting for Cliff's sake.

Can I direct you here:
http://www.freethought-forum.com/for...?t=4855&page=2

[Miss Shelby]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

b) not sure why you bothered noting it in the first place. Not sure where you fit in.

Because I was bored and had nothing better to do with my time at the moment. For someone who supposedly doesn't want to fight with me you're coming across as awful snide.

Anways, thanks for the recap of the ancient threads that I had participated in and had forgotten all about. I'll stash it right back in my memory where I store all of my other useless information. That would be my memory's equivalent of File 13.

Michelle

[Leesifer]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

There's an ignore feature for this little problem, use it.

Heh, if only there was a pot/kettle smiley.

[Veritas]

I choose not to ignore this thread on the grounds that someone may harass me behind my back.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by Leesifer

Heh, if only there was a pot/kettle smiley.

Sweetie understands the idea of irony very well which is why she employs it as an underhanded highlight of an inherent contradiction in the actions and behavior of most people.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by scarletpeaches

I choose not to ignore this thread on the grounds that someone may harass me behind my back.

The first real point you have made, thank you. It is a point. Not only would you miss all the talk behind your back, you would miss who was supporting them in it, no? You would miss slander, etc.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by Miss Shelby

Because I was bored and had nothing better to do with my time at the moment.

Ok. I figured you were just another one getting in line to try and get me for something. I figured you might behave as others do when their friends are up against confrontation and since I'm neither fond nor friends with your friends lunachick or TomJoe, I thought you might turn that into motivation for a cause against me. Just a thought, I never said I was always right. I like to be wrong about things like this, for the record.

For someone who supposedly doesn't want to fight with me you're coming across as awful snide.

Interpretation.

Anways, thanks for the recap of the ancient threads that I had participated in and had forgotten all about. I'll stash it right back in my memory where I store all of my other useless information. That would be my memory's equivalent of File 13.

Yes, I'll forget that you were arguing a similar thing as I, that you observed a similar problem as I, and that you were treated similar to I until the end when you came to somewhat agree with them.

[Leesifer]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

Sweetie understands the idea of irony very well which is why she employs it as an underhanded highlight of an inherent contradiction in the actions and behavior of most people.

DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

And in the end, this is about what the admins have to say and that have pretty much remained silent which some of you argue is the best thing. I'm really not sure why. It's up to them what they consider relevant, what they will consider, what they won't. How am I supposed to know what will convince them, they aren't a court of law, they weren't appointed because they were the best judges, they own the place, it's their house, their rules, their friends. There's no jury, nothing. It's them and only them and them are not participating, at least on my issue.

Sweetie, I posted way back on page one reiterating what I had already told you on the Goodbye thread, and then clarified it by saying:

Originally Posted by vm

In other words if you're interested in discussing our policy, then you will have to be more specific about what it is you want from us. If you are just interested in a general discussion of what harassment is, then Forum Administration is not the appropriate place for this thread.

I don't know how to make it any more clear. If you are looking for some kind of official answers from us we're going to have to know what your questions are.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by Leesifer

DENNIS: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system.
ARTHUR: Shut up!
DENNIS: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!
HELP! HELP! I'm being repressed!

Is that supposed to make some sort of sense? It's incomplete as an example or as something satirical, methinks.

[xyza]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

She harasses those people she takes a dislike to, those who disagree with her about things, etc. It doesn't change that she has harassed in the past, and that she may in the future. Doesn't mean that she also doesn't pick her victims. I started setting about showing this in the other thread. Did you read my posts, did you follow the links?

Shit, I really didn't want to directly stand up for Adora but what you say above is a total load of fucking bollocks (and yes I swear it's normal for me, I know I should have my mouth washed out with soap).

I have disagreed and argued with Adora until I'm bored with her, in several threads now. I can't be bothered to play her game so I stop.

Most important thing is I do not feel harassed by her because we have disagreed on different topics, even when she has become patronising and insulting. As far as I'm concerned when that starts happening the game is over, because I'm not here to break things down to a full scale one-on-one slanging match.

Again I will reiterate, I do not feel harassed by Adora even though we disagree on topics.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by xyza

I have disagreed and argued with Adora until I'm bored with her, in several threads now. I can't be bothered to play her game so I stop.

Right, and I stopped for a long time. What got me going again was her treatment of others and their response and the idea that we are not all as strong and that utlimately it's uncalled for. It's bullying on a playground, do we all stand around and watch the bullying or do we say something?

Sometimes, some of us are more vulnerable also.

It's like for instance, there's a man and he's got heart problems and he gets mugged which triggers a heart attack. But for the deliberate act of being mugged, he wouldn't have had the heart attack.

The mugger says, "well, I've mugged several people, it's not my fault this guy had a heart problem."

The mugger is still at fault, even for possibly murder if the guy dies as I understand it because "but for" the mugger's deliberate and illegal actions, the guy would not have died.

So we have people out there, and they're not as strong and Adora needs not behave that way, it's wrong. She can argue that if it affects them it's their problem, their weakness. I disagree that that matters when it comes to purposeful wrong behavior such as verbal abuse. Also, there's a question of how much we are at fault for letting her get away with it.

Now, that's a hypothetical, but what if it does happen? What if participation in this Forum and her verbal abuse causes someone here to commit suicide?

Most important thing is I do not feel harassed by her because we have disagreed on different topics, even when she has become patronising and insulting. As far as I'm concerned when that starts happening the game is over, because I'm not here to break things down to a full scale one-on-one slanging match.

Again I will reiterate, I do not feel harassed by Adora even though we disagree on topics.

Right, but you also haven't witnessed a full year or more and its' effects of this specific wrong behavior.

[Leesifer]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

Is that supposed to make some sort of sense? It's incomplete as an example or as something satirical, methinks.

No sense meant at all Sweetie. Just a bit of humour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humour

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

]In other words if you're interested in discussing our policy, then you will have to be more specific about what it is you want from us. If you are just interested in a general discussion of what harassment is, then Forum Administration is not the appropriate place for this thread.

Oh, well I guess I just skimmed that one because I thought it was saying the same thing as the other.

As it stands, I think a discussion of what harassment is in order to draft policy is not only entirely relevant, it is entirely necessary and I need your input on the subject. I am however, not going to play some sort of baseball with these threads. Since my discussion is mostly for the admins and because of the admins, since it's relevant to ulitmate forum policy and administration, I think it belongs here. It has a point and a purpose and that purpose is bound up in policy.

I don't know how to make it any more clear. If you are looking for some kind of official answers from us we're going to have to know what your questions are.

You don't know what my questions are?

[xyza]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

It's like for instance, there's a man and he's got heart problems and he gets mugged which triggers a heart attack. But for the deliberate act of being mugged, he wouldn't have had the heart attack.

The mugger says, "well, I've mugged several people, it's not my fault this guy had a heart problem."

The mugger is still at fault, even for possibly murder if the guy dies as I understand it because "but for" the mugger's deliberate and illegal actions, the guy would not have died.

Again bullshit, if he had heart problems and had a heart attack, then it was going to happen anyway, he was just a time bomb waiting to go off.

And don't try and argue that with me, I work in A&E and I know about heart conditions.

[Sweetie]

Sorry, just a continuation.

So, someone here commits suicide. They were prone to it in the first place, and they might have done it at some point in time, but deliberate verbal harassing abuse triggers it in this case, is there fault?

You can argue, well there was something wrong with them in the first place and that would be true, but there was something wrong with the behavior that triggered it as well.

Maybe someone made an off-handed comment that triggered it as well but it wasn't deliberate and it wasn't abusive, same problem, fault? No.

[viscousmemories]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

As it stands, I think a discussion of what harassment is in order to draft policy is not only entirely relevant, it is entirely necessary and I need your input on the subject.

This begs the question of whether any policy on harassment needs to be drafted.

You don't know what my questions are?

No, I don't. Of course I'm aware of the fact that you feel Adora deliberately harasses you and others and I believe you would like to see her banned, but if you have any questions for me and livius I don't know what they are.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by xyza

Again bullshit, if he had heart problems and had a heart attack, then it was going to happen anyway, he was just a time bomb waiting to go off.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but legally, but for the actions of a mugger, he would have continued on. Maybe he would have died naturally five minutes later where there would have been no fault, but he didn't, he died because of a deliberate wrong action.

It's my understanding that the mugger would be at fault.

And don't try and argue that with me, I work in A&E and I know about heart conditions.

It's just a hypothetical, reassign the logic to something else then, sheesh. It still applies.

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

This begs the question of whether any policy on harassment needs to be drafted.

Dude! That's my point. You told me to take it here and suggest a policy. My point is and was, I need to convince you that we need a policy in the first place and in order to do that, I need to have an adequate working definition between us of the thing in question, harassment specifically.

No, I don't. Of course I'm aware of the fact that you feel Adora deliberately harasses you and others and I believe you would like to see her banned, but if you have any questions for me and livius I don't know what they are.

Since I clarified it in the other thread, I'm sure you'd like to go back just to be fair and find out what it is I'm really about.

[xyza]

Originally Posted by Sweetie

Perhaps, perhaps not, but legally, but for the actions of a mugger, he would have continued on. Maybe he would have died naturally five minutes later where there would have been no fault, but he didn't, he died because of a deliberate wrong action.

It's my understanding that the mugger would be at fault.

It's just a hypothetical, reassign the logic to something else then, sheesh. It still applies.

So you would blame his children if they jumped out on him as he walked through the door on halloween ???

And I think it is a crap analogy for YOU to use seeing as they most likely brought their heart condition on themselves.

[Veritas]

Except for those who have angina - a friend of mine who is the correct weight, swims regularly, does voluntary work, eats healthily, needed a double bypass. She was home within five days, is now driving again, swimming too - all because she looked after herself beforehand and was the victim of nothing more than bad luck.

If someone mugged her and she died, I would blame the mugger. However, the onus is on her to look after her physical health and to avoid things that adversely affect her blood pressure (as a way of bringing this back to the OP).

[Sweetie]

Originally Posted by xyza

So you would blame his children if they jumped out on him as he walked through the door on halloween ???

Right, bingo, the difference is, one was a not intended wrong and accidental act, the other was a deliberate wrong and illegal act which he should not have been doing in the first place...or soemething.

And I think it is a crap analogy for YOU to use seeing as they most likely brought their heart condition on themselves.

That doesn't change anything.

I've seen the idea several places, tv mostly, though the logic still applies.

So, someone replaced the flu vaccine with nothing, with water so a whole bunch of people went for flu vaccines thinking they were getting the vaccine when they weren't. The guy took the vaccine he stole and sold it for profit.

However, in the meantime, let's say ten people died as the result of the flu.

The guy was responsible for those deaths, ten counts of murder. They died of the flu which is natural, but for the guy's intervention and wrong action, they would have lived, he was guilty of ten deaths and all he did was steal a preventative medicine which people don't need and it's only hit and miss whether you get it or whether it works or whether it's even needed at all. It wasn't likely those people would have gotten the flu to begin with, it wasn't his fault they got the flu, the flu is natural, but he's at fault for their deaths.

Ah, Law and Order I think it was.