What is Negative? Rule 2.

[whitt]

I think the new rule proposed is pretty good.

Also the possibilty of making a permanent Rules post at the top of each New Post search.

[Dean@Massiveaction]

That is so you Peter, "Groove Armada".

[Commercial Dan]

The humble poormastery thinks the "negativity" rule is complete and utter drivel, but this might be because poormastery has the dubious honour of being the most censored poster on the site!

Imagine this thread was about the Nazi Concentration Camps. What could we allowably say, using this positive thinking mantra? I suppose you could say on the “positive” side that the camps were a model of efficiency? Yet the humble poormastery would think that a comment like this would miss something important – such as the fact that these camps were the amongst the most unspeakably reprehensible acts recorded in human history.

In other words, why shouldn’t poormastery be “negative” or critical when negativity is justified by the facts? I suppose I could give the my name (or my number on my arm per the example), but why should poormastery have to?

Irrespectively, poormastery does much appreciate the job the monitors do under trying circumstances (poormastery's posts!), and I unreservedly thank you for a job well done.

Keep up the good work!

Regards,
*bad boy poormastery*

Well said PM

[poormastery]

The humble poormastery remains positive and optimistic

Hi CD,

Yes, the legendary "positive thinking“ versus “negative thinking” debate is absolutely fascinating.

I have had many PM’s from posters saying they love my posts, but there is really no hope and no point. A certain organisation has been around forever – they will always be with us. There will always be a pool of poor people to rip-off. This made me question - is this defeatism positive thinking? The humble poormastery simply smiles, with teeth of steel!

We also have a large set of Christians who argue that the morally justified position is to sit on the fence. Of course, many of this group was not sitting on the fence just a few short months ago – they were openly and actively touting for business for this company. Whilst silence is an improvement on their position three months ago, which was to actively promote this company, nonetheless the humble poormastery is underwhelmed by their judgement and their actions.

Yet poormastery is stubborn – I have never been a quitter. You can adapt to silly “negative thinking” rules – sarcasm is one way of doing this.

For the record, the humble poormastery is arguably the most positive thinking and optimistic person on this site. It seems that I am the only one that has the stomach for the fight, and believes that it will be won. The humble poormastery has them rattled!

Personally, poormastery enjoys your posts. You provide balance. You just need to adapt your posts slightly to remove anything that could be construed as personal abuse.

Thus spake poormastery!

Regards,
*positive poormastery*

[Monid]

Okay to summarise the poll and the discussion:

It seems the majority of the community feels that the moderators interpretation is about right. While some think we don't moderate enough for this reason and a few think we moderate too much, the majority are happy with the status quo so we will stick with that for the time being.

There have however been some useful discussions here and elsewhere on how we may encourage, support and if need be enforce civility here on PT.

In particular there are a couple of suggestions on the table including modifying Rule 1.B as suggested above, and Whitt's suggestion of adding a card system (Something which is already in part built into the software for PT but presently is under used). The moderators are discussing both these measures.

Cheers
David Hunter (Monid)
PT Mod