next »

[thundering_m]

I don't think I have ever disagreed with Jackit.

Stop the train(wreck)!

[contemporary_]

...
Why do you think I disagree with Jackit? (rhetorical Q) I don't think I have ever disagreed with Jackit. 
...

Stop the train(wreck)!

I should frame this...

Pfft!

[st_alfonso]

Oh dear, St. A.

87 posts and how many involve namecalling; how many have engaged in the core and constructive interests of the community? Exclusion is not the goal, at least for me, but discovery and nuance are. Academics are accustomed to noting patterns and drawing inference, and a well-established community with a public record can be forgiven for assuming that its culture is no surprise to even the mildly analytical.  This thread's dynamic indicates that we don't take our chosen profession lightly yet we prefer not to take ourselves too seriously. Those who take offense easily are rather the reverse.

That said, you'll notice some of the more enduring threads are defined by more narrow criteria of compatibility. Some are entertaining to watch but difficult to navigate. The helpful frequency counts show which ones attract interest compared to participants.  Lurk awhile, friend. Notice the patterns of chronic posters and individual boards. A thick skin is not so necessary as a civil, if not comic, curiosity.

Oh wow, Thundering is a distinguished senior member with 1,737 posts. As a junior member I must worry that you will soon be denying me tenure on the forum.

T_B is a popular forumite, liked and respected my the Fora community, and has been around for a very long time, so be very careful with your tone.  I don't know exactly what you feel that you are accomplishing in your role as the self-appointed protector of the clueless posters (you've done it elsewhere, as well).  However, I have noticed that you rarely take the time to respond to these posters yourself, so what is your point?  Is it away for you to feel morally superior to other forumites, or are you simply an enabler of this type of behavior?  You must give out A's like candy:  "that's right, Suzy, you DID put all the variables in the result, so it doesn't matter that you calculated the variance instead of the mean, here's half credit for that answer". 

Be careful with my tone? What are you going to do? Throw a fit? Is insulting a mischaracterization of my grading procedures the best you got? My, my mouseman you've fallen to a low point in justifying your behavior. The blood, sweat and tears of your ever so difficult academic life is clouding your judgement.

No need to justify my behavior, so I didn't.  You, however seem to have a need to pick fights.  What's the matter, you're on break, so you can't pick fights with the other faculty in your department?  Speaking of throwing a fit... You're right, you would not stand for such behavior from your students, but I'm sure that you walk the corridors of your department taking other faculty to task:  "how dare you lower little Tommy's grade for missing an assignment!  Now look, you made him cry!  You're such a bully!".
I also noticed that you didn't advise the OP to do a PhD in Statistics.  It has an additional bonus that it's almost guaranteed employment. 

You've developed a whole set of scenarios around what you imagine my academic standards to be. This is plain weird mouseman. And, yes, I would recommend she study statistics if she was inclined to do so. Students graduating with strong quantitative skills are doing quite well in the current job market. Not as well as a couple of years ago, but definitely better than folks in MLA fields. Since we know who does what based on posting history, how is your job search?

[bread_pirate_naan]

I could see how one who considers herself a member of a group "acting as agents of social control" would feel the thread stupid. Did it get drafty when you realized the curtain had been pulled revealing who you are?

Good luck grand agent of social control.

Ah, I get it.  You have not understood the variety of ways in which social controls are being exerted by community members.

Mine was brief, my first post to this thread.  Mousman's first post was as well, but detailed and specific.  Thundering's last post and Larry's also participate in forms of agency intended to control the social field.  Thee are others and this is totally okay here. 

This post(below):  It is also an attempt at social control based in taunting, denigration, misrepresentation and humiliation. There are others like it.  It is less likely to get a pass on the level of participant-observer social control, but it won't get you banned by the moderators.  The moderators are the grand agents of social control on the CHE fora.

You are 100% free to express yourself to the degree that it prevents the thread returning to its intended purpose.  But only if we respond to your posts.  That fault lies entirely with us.

I think most, if not all of us wish you peace.

What a crock. Go back and look at the OP. It was an innocent question. You don't recognize your behavior as office politics because you are unable to identify activities that are associated with office politics in a different context. Of course you and others are playing office politics in this forum. Office politics revolve around a system of "we know how to behave, you must learn to behave like us or we will ostracize you for your own good." This system allows you, and others like you, to police newcomers and drive them off when upon arrival they fail to immediately recognize your importance in a caste system that exists in your mind. This results in the commonly occurring cycle where an individual unaware of "the club's" ways asks an honest question. This is followed by "dammit why can't these little A-holes ask questions we want to answer in perfect English?" A whiny little snot then jumps on the poster because life is "soooo hard for us academics, oh we suffer so much, the pain, the pain. If only you knew how hard our lives are." Then, other little snots pontificate upon how important they are in this world. Wash rinse repeat. 

[st_alfonso]

I could see how one who considers herself a member of a group "acting as agents of social control" would feel the thread stupid. Did it get drafty when you realized the curtain had been pulled revealing who you are?

Good luck grand agent of social control.

Ah, I get it.  You have not understood the variety of ways in which social controls are being exerted by community members.

What a clever plan Brain. "What should we do tonight?", "The same thing we do every night, Pinky—try to take over the world!"

Mine was brief, my first post to this thread.  Mousman's first post was as well, but detailed and specific.  Thundering's last post and Larry's also participate in forms of agency intended to control the social field.  Thee are others and this is totally okay here. 

With the exclusion of your description of Larry's response, the above is revisionist history.

This post(below):  It is also an attempt at social control based in taunting, denigration, misrepresentation and humiliation. There are others like it.  It is less likely to get a pass on the level of participant-observer social control, but it won't get you banned by the moderators.  The moderators are the grand agents of social control on the CHE fora.

Nonsense. You and pals drove someone off through denigration and humiliation. Now you're upset that someone called you on your behavior. Keep turning the wheel BNP; eventually, you'll hit a rationalization that sounds good to someone.

You are 100% free to express yourself to the degree that it prevents the thread returning to its intended purpose.  But only if we respond to your posts.  That fault lies entirely with us.

I think most, if not all of us wish you peace.

So the intended purpose of the thread was to run off the OP? Seems like a strange purpose.

As for my post below it calls you on the behavior you are currently defending. If I engaged in such behavior I'd consider being accurately called on it "taunting, denigration, misrepresentation and humiliation" as well, because as you know BNP the best defense is a good offense.

What a crock. Go back and look at the OP. It was an innocent question. You don't recognize your behavior as office politics because you are unable to identify activities that are associated with office politics in a different context. Of course you and others are playing office politics in this forum. Office politics revolve around a system of "we know how to behave, you must learn to behave like us or we will ostracize you for your own good." This system allows you, and others like you, to police newcomers and drive them off when upon arrival they fail to immediately recognize your importance in a caste system that exists in your mind. This results in the commonly occurring cycle where an individual unaware of "the club's" ways asks an honest question. This is followed by "dammit why can't these little A-holes ask questions we want to answer in perfect English?" A whiny little snot then jumps on the poster because life is "soooo hard for us academics, oh we suffer so much, the pain, the pain. If only you knew how hard our lives are." Then, other little snots pontificate upon how important they are in this world. Wash rinse repeat. 

[/quote]