Can't get new avatar to show up!

[Larry Kart]

don't want to complain again that the getz thread was deleted, it's not like i didn't understand some of that... but if larry kart says he heard something from a source he considers reliable i don't consider that "rumor mongering or hearsay"...

Nice to be thought of as a gold standard of probity/reliability, but one doesn't always live up to one's credentials.

[neveronfriday]

Nice to be thought of as a gold standard of probity/reliability, but one doesn't always live up to one's credentials.

Thanks!

I haven't seen "probity" used online since, uhm, 1992?

I like the sound of that word.

[JSngry]

Did somebody say "probeity"?

[Larry Kart]

Did somebody say "probeity"?

I love you, a bushel and a peck.

[Free For All]

A bird in the hind is worth two in the..........oh, never mind.

[Aggie87]

Heaven, Im in heaven

And my heart beats so that I can hardly speak

And I seem to find the happiness I seek

When were out together dancing cheek to cheek

[Use3D]

This thread is tanking quick! Not like it had a lot to go on...

[Free For All]

Don't tase me, bro!

[Jim Alfredson]

Like life, the course of the and board ebbs and flows. My main concern is that everyone act civil to each other. I'm not terribly concerned with enforcing a strict set of rules. I'm definitely not concerned with making sure nobody is ever offended. I just want people to act with decency towards each other. We should all know what that means on a fundamental level.

Regarding the Getz thread (some things never die), I probably would've let it go on, as uncomfortable as it was, had not his own daughter came by and said "Hey, this is really hurtful". I think that trumps any free speech righteousness. As soon as she popped in it became obvious that we're not just talking about some guy that used to play the saxophone, we're talking about someone's father. I know I wouldn't want people spreading rumors about my dad, who is dead and can't defend himself. Would you? That's not too hard to understand.

A blanket set of hard rules, enforced with an iron fist is nice in theory but doesn't work in practice, imo. I like flexibility. (Waiting for sexy album cover depicting flexibility). I guess you can call me a hypocrite, but I just don't think absolutes are the way to go in this situation.

[papsrus]

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Always has.

This board is pretty special, from what I've seen out there elsewhere.

[king ubu]

Sorry for having stirred up the pot again... I kindly asked Berigan to consider changing his avatar. Publicly at first (in the political forum of course), then by PM (including an apology for not having done so first).

He was kind enough to change it, so that's done with for me.

As for the discussion here, I've taken a stance once or twice, so I guess it comes as no big surprise that I'm in the camp of Hans, never and Chuck here. I guess - even though Chuck agrees on this - it basically boils down to a cultural difference between mentalities. Freedom of speech in the US grants acts (yup, burning a cross in the yard of a black family was protected by the Supreme Court because of the first amendment) that in most parts of Europe and by most Europeans are regarded as atrocities and would be expected to be persecuted.

Anyway, we've had this discussion before and I guess we'll have it again...

[papsrus]

Freedom of speech in the US grants acts (yup, burning a cross in the yard of a black family was protected by the Supreme Court because of the first amendment) that in most parts of Europe and by most Europeans are regarded as atrocities and would be expected to be persecuted.

Not to completely derail things, but is this correct? I'd be shocked. First of all, it would be trespassing and likely vandalism. I guess you could burn a cross on your own lawn, or on public property in front of a house, with a permit. But on someone else's property? Doesn't sound quite right to moi.

and my 2 cents on Berigan -- he's a genuine guy and a fine fella. I think it's a mistake to place too much emphasis on a person's political views one way or the other. It's their actions that count, and he made a gentlemanly gesture on the whole avatar thing.

I do remember that avatar showing the guy pounding himself into a pulp on the keyboard. I didn't really find it offensive. Kinda funny really. But animated avatars are always a little distracting to begin with. I think I actually just moved the browser so the left side was off the screen in order to avoid the distraction.

Best avatar has to be that guy who flips a gun into the air and catches it in his pants, then begins firing away at the bad guys by pumping his hips.

[king ubu]

It's a bit more complex... of course. I read about this in Judith Butler's interesting book "Excitable Speech". Here's a link:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1048518258780

[papsrus]

It's a bit more complex... of course. I read about this in Judith Butler's interesting book "Excitable Speech". Here's a link:

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1048518258780

Thanks

[Jim Alfredson]

Sorry for having stirred up the pot again... I kindly asked Berigan to consider changing his avatar. Publicly at first (in the political forum of course), then by PM (including an apology for not having done so first).

He was kind enough to change it, so that's done with for me.

See and that's the thing; rather than make a new rule and spend time enforcing or worrying about it, just asking the person nicely in a PM to change the avatar usually works just fine.