• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Have you noticed the changes on the forum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
These are my thoughts:

I can't miss Connie and Chuck, since I wasn't here before they left, or at any rate, I was too much of a newbie to be in awe. But if you want to find them- I can tell you where. Of course, you will have to adjust yourself to a site that has one post an hour, maybe, instead of tens or a hundred. Not meaning that as an insult- just that our site, CS.com, is lively and active and vital, not stagnant. That there is some other, higher-level, mystical place is a myth. No other site is better than this. We still have Kathy Love- what's better than that??? She isn't too jaded to offer help when needed. Not to mention a whole slew of other extremely knowledgeable breeders. Who breeds more cooler new morphs than Rich? I guarantee that if you want to have an in-depth genetics discussion, you can find people here to have it with. Dean- you don't _have to_ read the poop threads. The torch has been passed and there are plenty of newer members spreading their wings and offering the same rote advice in a fresh voice. It's part of the learning process: see one, do one, teach one. I _love_ that there is a feeling of closeness, of family, here that allows people to talk about their personal lives. I find that _just_ as interesting as the snake stuff sometimes. Yeah, people don't have to swear, don't have to attack people- (and now we have moderators that can and do address that- we don't _all_ have to take the role of mini-mods!) but I think that's limited to a few newer people who are still learning the atmosphere. We even have _this_ same old thread a couple times a year. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Nanci
 
diamondlil said:
If anyone reads a post they're offended by, they do have the option to report it to the moderators, who can then decide whether to act upon that report. That's why we've got the moderators, whom we elected.
Overall control of this site, it's code of conduct and content lies with Rich though, I wonder what his thoughts are on this?
This isn't a dating site, and the distinction between good-natured ribbing and crudity is obvious to any members with half a brain. Personally, I'd hate to think I'd offended anyone here, but if I felt more than mildly annoyed by anything I'd report it.
Click to expand...
Good points, Janine. The mods don't read every word typed on this board, so we rely on the members here to alert us to offending material or site rule infractions through PM or the "report post" function.
 
Without 'chit chat', we'd never know about each others' triumphs, like Nanci's R12 award, the problems, the changes. If people just want snake info, they could stick to those parts of the forum. Without the extras, some of this site's strengths would go, IMO.
 
Roy Munson said:
Many discussion boards prohibit certain discussion topics, such as sex, politics, and religion. Many of these boards still maintain a general off-topic subforum.
Click to expand...
:-offtopic

The clergyman who sexually abused me in my youth believes that George W. Bush is a moron. Discuss.

:sidestep:

(Self-referential humor is my favorite, even ahead of irony.)

regards,
jazz
 
Nanci said:
These are my thoughts:

I can't miss Connie and Chuck, since I wasn't here before they left, or at any rate, I was too much of a newbie to be in awe. But if you want to find them- I can tell you where. Of course, you will have to adjust yourself to a site that has one post an hour, maybe, instead of tens or a hundred. Not meaning that as an insult- just that our site, CS.com, is lively and active and vital, not stagnant. That there is some other, higher-level, mystical place is a myth.
Click to expand...
Hey, I can tell you where they live. ;)

However, you're mistaken in your claim. Post rate does not imply anything; content is king, not frequency. The claim that Rich has the market cornered on the coolest and newest is fallacious as well; this IS, after all, a community of hobbyists and breeders.

But I can agree with the "see one, do one, teach one" - but only to the extent of the veracity of what they've seen and have learned. Otherwise, it can easily become a "telephone game" of knowledge.

The "other" site has its advantages on some things, and this site has its advantages in other things. Neither is "better", just different.

regards,
jazz
 
Nova_C said:
The slippery slope argument is a pretty common logical fallacy, and I'd just like to say that I'm always wary when people write a general complaint saying "It's not too bad now, but we've gotta DO something before it does get that bad!" That kind of reaction usually ends up with unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

Yeah but in this case, the thing is that the problem already exists but just is not rampant. That doesn't mean it has to be tolerated even at low frequency. And I'm no Nostradamus, but human nature has shown time and time again that you give folks an inch and they take a mile.

Nova_C said:
As far as younger kids go, I really don't understand why people use that as a reason to censor themselves. About the only kids I can see parroting what is said without regard to source are toddler age - most teenagers are very specific. Encouragement to use profanity is a peer sourced thing, not a random forum thing.
Click to expand...

It's not just about parroting specific words. It's about behavior and general conduct as well. It's about frequency. How do you think behaviors are learned? It's not necessarily a one time event that leads to it. It can be the accumulation of seeing things repeatedly. If someone reads one post with bad language they probably won't think much of it. But if there are several threads currently floating around the forum that contain bad language it can start to support a mentality of "Hey, this seems to be a common theme. Maybe this is how people are really supposed to interact." Obviously, I've boiled it down to a simple example. I doubt that most people have that sort of epiphany, but rather it's just something that builds up over time after seeing things repeatedly.

And about peers. Kids don't just learn from "peers" of a similar age. Yes, people of a similar age are a major influence. But younger people do pay lots of attention to adults and they way we behave.

Nova_C said:
That said, I always find it interesting when people create a thread like the photo thread and sexual comments start coming out. It seems mildly disrespectful unless someone invites that sort of thing.
Click to expand...

And the thing is that it's not just the words written. Some of the photos do provoke those sorts of comments more than others. And those sorts of photos probably don't have any more place than the words they invite.:shrugs:


Nova_C said:
Yes, but the assertion made was that by allowing even covered profanity (By using odd characters) encouraged teenagers to use profanity, which I totally disagree with. Basically, I'd like someone to prove to me that forums have a significant effect on a person's overall behavior. If the case was made that profanity should not be allowed because we want to present a friendly and open environment to new people, okay, I can agree with that. But no, according to the OP, profanity should not be allowed because, oh, won't SOMEONE think of the children?

An idea I find to be very insulting to the intelligence of younger people.
Click to expand...

It's funny because, when writing the OP, I had both thoughts in mind: providing a welcoming, positive environment and setting an example for younger members. I decided to emphasize the latter.
If you felt that my OP implied that what was happening on this forum encouraged younger people to act the same way, I think you misinterpreted or maybe I didn't get my point across effeciently. My implication was that the way we behave and speak to one another influences others. Influence and encouragement are not the same thing.
Proof goes both ways. Prove to me that it doesn't effect how younger folks behave. If you expect proof from me or you expect to prove your viewpoint, you're going to be sorely disappointed.


jazzgeek said:
Well played. Kind of a "correlation does not imply causation". <golf clap>
Click to expand...

I'd be the last to say that correlation is causation. I am a biology major, ya know and we do know somethings about correlations. However, that doesn't mean that correlation has no usefulness.

I guess your argument is that there is no perfect proof that reading and hearing others curse influences someone else to do so? The fact that there doesn't appear to be obvious proof doesn't mean that it isn't the case. Another logical fallacy.

Can you name that tune, jazz?
 
zwyatt said:
Yeah but in this case, the thing is that the problem already exists but just is not rampant. That doesn't mean it has to be tolerated even at low frequency. And I'm no Nostradamus, but human nature has shown time and time again that you give folks an inch and they take a mile.

It's not just about parroting specific words. It's about behavior and general conduct as well. It's about frequency. How do you think behaviors are learned? It's not necessarily a one time event that leads to it. It can be the accumulation of seeing things repeatedly. If someone reads one post with bad language they probably won't think much of it. But if there are several threads currently floating around the forum that contain bad language it can start to support a mentality of "Hey, this seems to be a common theme. Maybe this is how people are really supposed to interact." Obviously, I've boiled it down to a simple example. I doubt that most people have that sort of epiphany, but rather it's just something that builds up over time after seeing things repeatedly.

And about peers. Kids don't just learn from "peers" of a similar age. Yes, people of a similar age are a major influence. But younger people do pay lots of attention to adults and they way we behave.
Click to expand...

About the only thing I could see here is that it'll encourage others who already exhibit that behavior elsewhere to believe that it is acceptable here. Good enough reason not to allow it, but by no means are we altering the behavior of others.

zwyatt said:
Proof goes both ways. Prove to me that it doesn't effect how younger folks behave. If you expect proof from me or you expect to prove your viewpoint, you're going to be sorely disappointed.
Click to expand...

You're the one making a positive claim. You're the one with the burden of proof.
 
jazzgeek said:
However, you're mistaken in your claim. Post rate does not imply anything; content is king, not frequency. regards,
jazz
Click to expand...

Hurry over there, then- there is a lively conversation on cockatiels, sun conures, mice, Halloween costumes, people who sit on the most rattlesnakes and a reptile show. Now that's content!

Nanci
 
Nova_C said:
About the only thing I could see here is that it'll encourage others who already exhibit that behavior elsewhere to believe that it is acceptable here. Good enough reason not to allow it, but by no means are we altering the behavior of others.
Click to expand...

No we aren't altering the behavior. Where did I claim that we are forcing change on other people? The altering occurs on the end of the individual expressing the behavior. What we do only influences how they alter their own behavior. Maybe if I repeat this point enough...

But by your own suggestive argument, if nothing we do causes other people's behavior to change, why discourage it all?



Nova_C said:
You're the one making a positive claim. You're the one with the burden of proof.
Click to expand...

My claims are innocent until proven guilty. I made a claim and, by refuting my claim, you made an equal but opposite claim. You're charged with proving yours just as much as I am mine. But there's no point in discussing proof any further because the fact is that neither of us can prove anything.
 
zwyatt said:
I'd be the last to say that correlation is causation. I am a biology major, ya know and we do know somethings about correlations. However, that doesn't mean that correlation has no usefulness.

I guess your argument is that there is no perfect proof that reading and hearing others curse influences someone else to do so? The fact that there doesn't appear to be obvious proof doesn't mean that it isn't the case. Another logical fallacy.

Can you name that tune, jazz?
Click to expand...
I can name that tune in three syllogisms. ;)

While I can agree that correlation has its purpose, I can't agree with the premise that this forum is involved with the correlation that you seem to assert.

Also, I wouldn't be as presumptuous as to "guess" what your argument is, or what stance I'm taking on the issue. But since you did....

OF COURSE, hearing others curse is an influence for someone else to do so. It's your basic (if not dysfunctional) family dynamic and garden-variety peer pressure at work.

But I can't even begin to believe that READING cuss words influences me to write them, even in a (presumably) anonymous forum such as this.

Reading "Catcher In The Rye" won't cause me to start typing in an angst-ridden and profane style. Reading "Portnoy's Complaint" won't influence me to, well, you know.....

As Nova has stated, you've made the assertion. :cheers:

regards,
jazz
 
zwyatt said:
But by your own suggestive argument, if nothing we do causes other people's behavior to change, why discourage it all?
Click to expand...

Like I said, it's about what the site wants to be. My impressions of cs.com is that it wants to be friendly and open to new people. Because of the stigma on profanity, a lot of people may find the frequent use of it less than friendly. That is a consideration that should be taken into account.

I never said nothing we do causes people's behavior to change. I said reading a forum with profanity on it won't increase a young person's likelihood of using that profanity.

zwyatt said:
My claims are innocent until proven guilty. I made a claim and, by refuting my claim, you made an equal but opposite claim. You're charged with proving yours just as much as I am mine. But there's no point in discussing proof any further because the fact is that neither of us can prove anything.
Click to expand...

You're right, neither one of us can prove either way. I just find it interesting that you think by saying I don't believe your claim I have to prove it false. You said you're a biology major - if someone in your class makes a claim and presents absolutely no evidence of that claim, is it up to you to prove them false? If a theory with zero evidence is taken as valid, doesn't that fly in the face of the very idea of critical thinking?
 
While I can't compete with all the rhetorical banter here I have a couple comments: I found that some comments on the "forget your snakes" thread offensive, but I was not brave enough to say it. So here goes it is not OK to refer to a woman as a "chick" and it is not OK to refer to her "rack" as an object for you to oogle. I find some of the language on here offensive, not because I don't use it myself, but it is not necessary on a public forum.
I enjoy the of the chit-chat, as I think this is one big differance between us and another forum about corns. I also have to say I see members who say they have no life, I do and I don't. I have my snakes, rats, mice a couple other hobbies and this forum. This is sad but it is what it is. I wonder how many other people spend as much time on here as I do, there are some, I wonder why they do. Maybe there shoud be a sub-forum for people who want to talk about the weather whatever... I would hate to see our "chit chat" limited to just reptiles. susang
 
susang said:
it is not OK to refer to a woman as a "chick"
Click to expand...

I don't take any issue with any part of your post except that - why is it not okay? Do you also disapprove of calling men 'guys'? 'Chick' is a slang term for young woman.
 
jazzgeek said:
But I can't even begin to believe that READING cuss words influences me to write them, even in a (presumably) anonymous forum such as this.
Click to expand...

The point isn't that reading cuss words here will simply result in someone else using them in their posts on this forum. It's the usage of the words in everyday, average communication between other people. Assuming that it only applies directly to reading and writing is reading into it a bit too much.

I think my only mistake in starting this thread may have been to emphasize the influence on younger members. Not everyone is going to agree that what younger people see and hear influences their behavior. Maybe it's my background (educational, that is) that affords me the assurance that I feel in that claim. On the other hand, if I had gone with the "keeping this a positive place" angle, there would have been folks that disagreed there, as well.
 
Last edited:
Nanci said:
Hurry over there, then- there is a lively conversation on cockatiels, sun conures, mice, Halloween costumes, people who sit on the most rattlesnakes and a reptile show. Now that's content!

Nanci
Click to expand...

All the "hurry" is accomplished with a click on an adjacent tab. However, I'm sure Rich appreciates your desire for me to do just that.

And while your snark regarding content is well intentioned, all the conure and Halloween talk over there is no different than the tort pen, beardie, and scuba talk over here; but when you want to REALLY get into the specifics of corns, the density of content over there, IMHO, can't be beaten. Conversely, the laid-back attitude of what takes place here is more enjoyable. As I previously stated, I enjoy both sites for what I perceive their individual advantages to be. I post to both sites, and will continue to do so.

regards,
jazz
 
Nova_C said:
I don't take any issue with any part of your post except that - why is it not okay? Do you also disapprove of calling men 'guys'? 'Chick' is a slang term for young woman.
Click to expand...

Just asked my 16 yo grand-daughter if was OK again to call a girl a 'chick' and she in junior high, but she is one person in OR. I don't see a problem with 'guys or gals' but really don't like it when say "this is the girls basketball team" they are women or young women no girls anymore then it is the boys team. :shrugs:
 
susang said:
So here goes it is not OK to refer to a woman as a "chick" and it is not OK to refer to her "rack" as an object for you to oogle.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, the "nice rack" comment was in reference to a photo of an orangutan and was very obviously a joke. If it wasn't, then that person has more serious issues than we can address here and we should offer him our support and sympathy.

Secondly, many women under the age of 30 refer to themselves as "chicks" and therefore do not find the term offensive. I often refer to myself as a "chick" and I've been known to call my husband a "dude". I do not feel that I am disrespecting myself or my peers by referring to our age group in colloquial terms.

Third (and I know this part wasn't in your post), if a woman finds the discussion of her nipples offensive, then she needs to refrain from mentioning that she has them PIERCED. The same applies to a man who mentions his PA. It's difficult to have that conversation without the word "penis" coming up.

Lastly (for now, anyway), a 22-year-old chick that posts photos of herself half dressed with a come hither smile and mountains of exposed cleavage does so with the specific intention of being "ogled" (or "oogled"...both feel really nice). Really. Ask one.
 
Last edited:
Nova_C said:
I said reading a forum with profanity on it won't increase a young person's likelihood of using that profanity.
Click to expand...

Proof please. Oh wait...I forgot. This somehow isn't a claim.



Nova_C said:
You said you're a biology major - if someone in your class makes a claim and presents absolutely no evidence of that claim, is it up to you to prove them false? If a theory with zero evidence is taken as valid, doesn't that fly in the face of the very idea of critical thinking?
Click to expand...

Not if their claim is a simple hypothesis or observation. When did I try to publish a paper or write a book on "Human behavior and the influencing affects of other people"? My claim is based on empirical observations. You and I certainly won't have had the same experiences in life, so I can't expect you to be dealing with the same set of observations from which to draw conclusions. Even if we had the same set of experiences, the interpretation could be subjective and the basis for our disagreement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top