Community/Respect/Standards of behavior

[Ally]

That's like saying if a cancer cell invades your body, cut it out once but should it return, leave the rest alone. As long as lies are being told, they need to be challenged.

The idea that charm and civility counts more than honesty is one I do not support. Most conmen and shysters are the most charming and civil people you will ever meet, it's the key tool of their trade.

If you don't want to fight, that's your choice, but exhorting other to allow lies and dishonesty to flourish under the false premise of "civility" is a tacit statement that the truth isn't worth fighting for.

[ghoulstonstreet]

Be Cooler

That's like saying if a cancer cell invades your body, cut it out once but should it return, leave the rest alone. As long as lies are being told, they need to be challenged.

The idea that charm and civility counts more than honesty is one I do not support. Most conmen and shysters are the most charming and civil people you will ever meet, it's the key tool of their trade.

If you don't want to fight, that's your choice, but exhorting other to allow lies and dishonesty to flourish under the false premise of "civility" is a tacit statement that the truth isn't worth fighting for.

I, for one, have enormous respect, Ally, for the wealth of information you have amassed on the Ripper topic. However, I disagree with your claim that not everyone deserves civility. Every-lone-wolf-out-there idea deserves respect by the listener. And after that, of course, you don't have to put any credence in it. Frankly, I find your comments on the Rippercasts to be a bit abrasive and would prefer a cooler voice.

[protohistorian]

You are correct in that regard Ally. I had not seen the issue as a defense of the facts. In which case I am glad you have decided to be the gatekeeper. Dave

[DVV]

Hi all,

just one thing: arrogance and lies, even when no bad words are used, should be considered uncivil.

Amitiés,
David

[Ally]

You are correct in that regard Ally. I had not seen the issue as a defense of the facts. In which case I am glad you have decided to be the gatekeeper. Dave

One minor point of disagreement, I am not THE gatekeeper. Everyone must be their own gatekeeper and choose which battles they believe are worth fighting for.

This is why, I can disagree with your premise, quite strongly but still remain civil with you, neither cursing nor insulting to you, because you come by your opinion honestly and it arises from a place that has pure intent. I disagree with you, civilly, because you have not shown yourself to be dishonest or deserving of disrespect.

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

Civility costs nothing, and it is a far better thing to use it than to withold it, imho.

best wishes

Phil

[Ally]

I, for one, have enormous respect, Ally, for the wealth of information you have amassed on the Ripper topic.

Factual correction: I have amassed no wealth of information on the Ripper topic. That is the work of Stephen Ryder, John Bennett, Robert Clack, Stewart Evans, and many more too numerous to name who have done the research and gotten their hands dusty to provide us with new knowledge. I am piss poor ignorant on the subject compared to most of them.

[johns]

People talk on cell phones in public while totally ingnoring the people around them.

Hunter... what exactly is wrong with talking on a phone in public? I've never understood the problem some folk have with this.

As for protohistorian's original points, I would totally agree. However a message board is a reflection of society, and sadly society is becoming less civilised I've noticed. I'm a taxi driver who encounters the best and the very worst in people on a daily basis so my view may be jaundiced.

Regards... and get your feet off the upholstery!!

Injection of humour there... it may have failed.

[DVV]

what exactly is wrong with talking on a phone in public? I've never understood the problem some folk have with this.

Blowing his nose in public is worse, I reckon.

Amitiés,
David

[Tom_Wescott]

While I agree in spirit with what proto has written, it's interesting to note that the only person who has attacked or insulted me in the last week is protohistorian himself. Perhaps it is his guilt over this unsolicited attack that inspired this thread. One can hope, as I can't even recall the last time he and I were found posting on the same thread.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sox]

Attacking a theory or idea is one thing, but it is the large number of personal attacks and insults, between people who obviously do not like each other, that ruin many threads on this website.

On all the forums I use (and this is still the only Ripper related one) personal attacks are strictly not allowed. I find it very strange, that I can participate in more civil discussions on most gaming forums, than I can on a website supposedly full of well educated people.

[Natalie Severn]

The idea that everyone deserves civility is a fallacious one. The premise that all are entitled to respect is a false one.

There are people on this board who lie with malicious disregard for others and for the truth and treating them with anything other than the contempt that they have earned would validate their behavior.

We currently have two people on this board who go around slandering people without providing a single shred of evidence for their claims and they've been getting away with it for years. They are utterly unconcerned with whose reputation they damage in their attention seeking shenanigans and it has been proven, time and time again, that they are incapable of either providing evidence for their slanders or just shutting up. Appeals to be civil to them are frankly cowardly and a tacit acknowledgment that their actions are acceptable.

Ally,
Can I be clear about this .Are you then accusing me of "complicity" in this slanderous behaviour ? Are you also suggesting that I too have a "malicious disregard" for others, because I stated a few days ago that Ap was a friend of mine?
Best wishes
Norma

[Robert]

I NEVER talk on a phone in public.

I don't have a mobile.

[Chadwick]

A collection of very interesting people

Attacking a theory or idea is one thing, but it is the large number of personal attacks and insults, between people who obviously do not like each other, that ruin many threads on this website.

On all the forums I use (and this is still the only Ripper related one) personal attacks are strictly not allowed. I find it very strange, that I can participate in more civil discussions on most gaming forums, than I can on a website supposedly full of well educated people.

I am by no means a Ripperologist. I stumbled onto this site after watching "Jack the Ripper in America" a few months ago, and read each of you talking and discussing, admiring your knowledge.

"Cadet" is far above my grade.

I know it is imperative for this site to have civility in order for it to be a welcoming place. There are such divergent personalities that shine out here, though, making it interesting and spicy to read and learn from.

I agree that we can discuss, not all agreeing on every point. I mean, what would be the point if everyone agreed? How boring. Name calling should be forbidden, just as lying should be. Being "crusty" shouldn't. Cracking jokes or trying to be humorous (even if it falls flat) shouldn't be banned.

As a newbie coming in, reading your posts is catching sight of interesting personalities displayed in the commentary.

I hope I haven't, in my short time here, had occasion to offend anyone. I've fought for my unorthodox ideas at times. I greatly respect everyone here and really enjoy the posts. Each visit is eye-opening.

My thanks to all of you!

Best
~Chadwick

[Cap'n Jack]

I thought the last two posts most pertinent to the discussion here, in that although I have a strong desire to attack the accepted norm and present fashion, I never do so in a personalised manner, but rather attack the material and facts associated with the accepted norm and present fashion.
Then others come along and attempt to personalise my well launched attack to dilute and diffuse my original purpose of exposing true fact and situation by labelling it as a 'personal attack', and then slinging mud at me because I have - in their words and view - made a personal attack on the orginator of the premise or theory I have attacked.
They call me a 'liar' because I asked a question, about a fact.
I don't personally know anyone on these boards, and that's a good thing for discussion, but I do know that the people who make a speciality of attacking me as a liar, cheat and whatever else do so because they are personally acquainted with the person they are attempting to defend.
They appear unable to forge the distinction between a personal attack, and then a general attack on the concepts and fundamental beliefs of someone they consider to be a personal friend.
This is the problem we discuss here:
That folks put personal friendship above and beyond the normally accepted standards of historical research and endeavour.
I don't.