A single voice to speak for Puppy

[Bert]

It seems to me we now have a single voice speaking here: shariebeth. No one else in the puppy community seems to be really interested to add yet another layer of complication to our already intense communications.

DaveS summarizes it perfectly:

Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????

We can add new sub forums with new rules, new admins and moderators, but in the end will not get any further than we are now.

The only problem is thirsty egos. No amount of organizing can solve that.

I quite like the anarchy and freedom John Murga allows in this forum. It would be a pity to start building restrictions, because of a few rotten apples.

My impression is good questions and ideas presented in a relaxed and friendly, sharing way, have always been read by the devs and have often inspired them.

[cthisbear]

Go Bert.

4 the above post.

shariebreath is still on her power trip.

Nothing wrong with control freaks??????????????

Chris.

[cthisbear]

Addendum:

Miss Whinie Pants reminds me of the times where a patient is dying,

and all the Relis come out of the closet to be there, and divide the spoils.

Maybe she can point to a recent post where she has actually helped people
out with problems....not posts of her being the problem.

And the clock ticketh.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Chris.

[tlchost]

Miss Whinie Pants reminds me of the times where a patient is dying,

Name calling and other mud-slingging certainly adds to the overall problem-solving, doesn't it?

Maybe she can point to a recent post where she has actually helped people

And your quoted message helped?

Thom

[Bruce B]

Thom,

Anyone who cares about truth. And as I'm sure you know, many do not, can read the record and see where any name calling started and who did it and who was their intended recipient.

Moreover, anyone who cares about truth and can read will see that I did absolutely nothing to be called referenced as a 'ranting ego'. Not even close. This means her snideness is totally uncalled for.

As you probably know, I'm not afraid of an argument. But based on the record and what actually happened, in truth and reality, do you think anyone can argue Sherie displayed even basic respect toward me, who also happens to be the person who was interested and looking at the logistics of this.

Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????

Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????

Thank you for proving my point.

If I cannot communicate in a polite manner with Sharie Beth without this crap, there no point in communicating with her at all in an effort to provide what she wants.

Bruce

~

[Bruce B]

WhoDo,

Neither Flash and I together can make a functioning sub-forum without bugs. We recently made a compiling forum and never could get the bugs out of it.

Bruce

~

[shariebeth]

@Bruce B: Can you show me where I said you have a ranting ego? Or where I said anybody has a ranting ego?

What name calling did I engage in? What snide remarks? I have not intended to show disrespect but if attempting to clarify to you any misconceptions is disrespect, then I guess so.

As to cthisbear, again all I can say is your insults and hatred duly noted. No further comment to you.

@Bert: I don't want to be "the voice". I don't have the abilities and knowledge to be that voice. I do think WhoDo's idea is a great one and being a user of an older Puppy, 431, I especially see where things are lacking and what needs work. You may disagree with that, but I, and others, feel that some organization, cleanup, and improvement are in order. I don't understand: in one post you support WhoDo and his ideas then turn around and bash the person stepping up that's trying to make them happen.
Puppy's not perfect, it's current chaos is not perfect, but I do think Puppy is worth trying to straighten out. Not change, but straighten out.

[Bruce B]

@Bruce B: Can you show me where I said you have a ranting ego? :shock: Or where I said anybody has a ranting ego?

What is on record is on record. I'll leave it to the reader to decide context if anyone is even interested.

And of course there is a backup record on my hard disk.

DaveS posted and in two minutes you quoted him and thanked him verbatim, "Thank you for proving my point"

This means you had an understanding of what he meant and you were making a point.

You, more than anyone, is in a perfect position to explain what you think DaveS meant and what your point was and how it all fits into the context of the discussion at that time.

~

[shariebeth]

@Bruce B: Can you show me where I said you have a ranting ego? Or where I said anybody has a ranting ego?

What is on record is on record. I'll leave it to the reader to decide context if anyone is even interested.

And of course there is a backup record on my hard disk.

DaveS posted and in two minutes you quoted him and thanked him verbatim, "Thank you for proving my point"

This means you had an understanding of what he meant and you were making a point.

You, more than anyone, is in a perfect position to explain what you think DaveS meant and what your point was and how it all fits into the context of the discussion at that time.

~

My point precisely was that we need our own moderated forum section, rather than just a thread, to be able to keep the information and discussions on track without stray insulting comments to derail the whole thing and ultimately getting the thread locked with nothing accomplished except more noise and mud slinging. Full stop. No more, no less. No extrapolation needed. It doesn't matter what or who DaveS meant. It in no way contributed anything to this discussion other than namecalling and mudslinging.

Question for you: You don't think DaveS's comment was insulting?
Question 2 for you: You don't think cthisbear's comment was insulting?

[Bruce B]

Here is what DaveS wrote after my post.

Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????

You understood what he meant. I say at best the meaning is ambiguous.

Will you take the ambiguity out of this and explain with clarity the following

Who or what are the ranting egos?

What does the 'two places' mean in this sentence?

What does the 'one [place]' mean?

Then rephrase it into a sentence without any ambiguity, if you will.

~

[Aitch]

Bruce

Maybe it's just me?....but you seem to have some bad karma with SharieBeth for some reason...?

The idea is to have a public place to post and be seen, but at the same time able to control the mess, arrange threads and posts, and keep it organized and griefer-free in one set spot that is easy to find for both users and devs. I even provided a template of sorts.

My highlight of a stated intention

Thom,

Anyone who cares about truth. And as I'm sure you know, many do not, can read the record and see where any name calling started and who did it and who was their intended recipient.

Moreover, anyone who cares about truth and can read will see that I did absolutely nothing to be called referenced as a 'ranting ego'. Not even close. This means her snideness is totally uncalled for.

As you probably know, I'm not afraid of an argument. But based on the record and what actually happened, in truth and reality, do you think anyone can argue Sherie displayed even basic respect toward me, who also happens to be the person who was interested and looking at the logistics of this.

DaveS wrote:
Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????


shariebeth wrote:
DaveS wrote:
Huh... we gonna have ranting egos in two places now instead of one????

Thank you for proving my point.


If I cannot communicate in a polite manner with Sharie Beth without this crap, there no point in communicating with her at all in an effort to provide what she wants.

Bruce

My highlights again

Now, could it be that you've misinterpreted Shariebeth's "Thank you for proving my point." as referring to you, taking it personally, when she may have been, by my reading, referring to the intended greifer free forum section - locally 'spoiled by DaveS's comment? [which you heatedly attribute to her...?]

Now this is a perfect example of where a mod needs to state whether their comment is personal, as a mod, or just an interested poster....as this reflects badly on the moderation standards in the forum, which is ONE of the reasons for a 'user defined section'...if I understand things correctly

It could just be that human communication occasionally gets its wires crossed, but the reaction is HEAT.....not always justified, and not, IMHO good for Puppy forum PR

Anyone else see this?

Shariebeth, can you confirm.....coolly...thanks?

edit: seems I'm too late...additionally, [agreed,] why cthisbear's comment didn't get chewed on?

Aitch

[shariebeth]

1. I interpreted DaveS's comment to mean that anyone involved in this project has ranting egos. As to the second location, I have no idea who he meant.

2. As I stated also in my post, it doesn't matter who he meant. The post itself had nothing useful. It was just an insult to whoever he was referring to.

[Aitch]

WhoDo,

Neither Flash and I together can make a functioning sub-forum without bugs. We recently made a compiling forum and never could get the bugs out of it.

Bruce

~

Please explain these bugs, and compare to PG's section on Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff)....which doesn't appear to have any bugs

Is this a phpBB problem or permissions, or what.....?

Maybe we need more assistance from John M than I thought...?

Aitch

[tlchost]

Thom,

Anyone who cares about truth. And as I'm sure you know, many do not, can read the record and see where any name calling started and who did it and who was their intended recipient.

My post was in reference to the post made by cthisbear.


Thom

[Bruce B]

Thom,

Anyone who cares about truth. And as I'm sure you know, many do not, can read the record and see where any name calling started and who did it and who was their intended recipient.

My post was in reference to the post made by cthisbear.

I know it was Thom.

My post was not meant to exonerate cthisbear, rather to reference where things started.

~

[tlchost]

Maybe we need more assistance from John M than I thought...?

Aitch

It would seem to me that if John Murga wanted to have what Shariebeth is suggesting come to fruition....we would see it. Not seeing it might be an indication that it is not something that will happen.

I suspect one could find an answer outside of this forum by posing questions on the phpBB support form for the software in use here, or even reading the documentation file.

Thom

[Bruce B]

Aitch,

Last I checked the Compiling forum is not visible to guests and lacks editing controls for the users.

I suppose, as you suggested, that it permission issues. The permissions are set identically to the other forums based on the same template. Only the permissions won't take.

And yeah, we worked on it.

Bruce

~

[Aitch]

Thom

As someone who has regularly posted suggestions for phpBB scripts/updates [mainly re: spam eradication, admittedly]....I have not even had confirmed which version of phpBB is used for the forum, but I suspect we still have v2....?

So, reading phpBB forum/support documentation is of little use without knowing ....things change.....sometimes more slowly than is required

I also suspect John M doesn't have this thread as his number one attention grabber.....yet


btw, its not just Sheriebeth trying to make this happen....she just seems to be taking most of the heat though - it was WhoDo's OP
Good suggestions from gcmartin, WhoDo, and myself haven't been similarly 'hit on'...and only Flash and Bruce, as mods have posted....not exactly encouraging assistance so far....ttuuxxx and Béèm still to post [and any other admin/mod, including mod-in-chief, JM]

Aitch

[tlchost]

So, reading phpBB forum/support documentation is of little use without knowing ....things change.....sometimes more slowly than is required

Good point....although one might think that that if folks wanted to do something, and it did not work, they might ask for help....and might we assume that they might mention the software version in use?

phpBB is updated many times simply to plug security holes, many times with an announcement that the authors don't think there is a problem One method of protecting the foum is security by obscurity....the operator sets the forum NOT to show the version. It's easier than applying the updates, but may not be as effective.

Thom

[Bert]

@Bert: I don't want to be "the voice". I don't have the abilities and knowledge to be that voice. I do think WhoDo's idea is a great one and being a user of an older Puppy, 431, I especially see where things are lacking and what needs work. You may disagree with that, but I, and others, feel that some organization, cleanup, and improvement are in order. I don't understand: in one post you support WhoDo and his ideas then turn around and bash the person stepping up that's trying to make them happen.
Puppy's not perfect, it's current chaos is not perfect, but I do think Puppy is worth trying to straighten out. Not change, but straighten out.

Shariebeth, I wasn't bashing you. I was talking about how some egos succeed to almost destroy what would be an enjoyable and perfect forum without their presence. This happens time and again. I have no opinion about you, yet

These shouters are what tires the developers. Their monologues and their constantly beating the same drum can chill the atmosphere to freezing.
Without these egos there would be no need for more organizational structure.

When I call you "a single voice", that is just my observation of the very visible situation this topic is in: there is no enthousiasm from the wider Puppy community to start this idea up.

My appreciation for WhoDo hasn't diminished. But in my first post in this thread I also wrote:

I don't see the answer right now, but appreciate his effort.

We're a whole month further now and I have personally come to the conclusion that this PLUG idea, while intelligent in itself, will not improve the communications.

Adding hierarchy and rules to a community of free individuals in the end always fails to work.

This world is full of structures and systems already, to the extent these are suffocating us as individuals and as a species.
Let's keep Puppy a free flowing community, based on mutal interest, friendship and respect.