Concerns about moderating policies

[Freewillow]

I just wonder how long you moderators will take all the sh*t that Bennno trows at you. I am also interested in the link he is non-stop referring to. To yell continuously does not make your point right, buddy...................

 

[drrich2]

This must have come up before, so what, just for example, might I answer him that doesn't use the word "Moron" and might motivate him make a conservative plan?

I'll respond generally speaking, without referencing the linked thread so as to avoid any risk of being seen as personally attacking that person, and I'm a member but no mod. (being persuasive isn't restricted to mod.s).

If your post comes off as belittling (even if merited), even within the Terms of Service, you may come off as a threat to a person's ego/sense of self, which tends to switch people from thinking in terms of open-minded reason to a self-protective, ego-driven mindset. Defending their dignity from you, warding off a sense of shame before other witnesses, can become more important than learning from you. Defenses are triggered, mind closes, position becomes more rigid...

So, if you wish to motivate/persuade him, anything with a hint of 'moron' may work against your goal.

In other threads I've seen a few underlying themes driving participation in 'debates.' Examples:

1.) To persuade, or at least present the logical case for a position so as to know others have been granted the maximum opportunity to consider it, and at least know you did your part (even if the horse led to water still won't drink). We had a member, Lynn, who died on a dive some time back who was the queen of this technique, but BoulderJohn does well with it - even when he's obviously irritated, he maintains a controlled, reasoned delivery. 'I believe you may wish to consider doing it this other way and this is my thinking...'

2.) To debate in favor of a cause, even if convinced you will not change the other person's mind, as a matter of principle, perhaps hoping to persuade 'on the fence' 3rd party observers. In this case, your ego is more likely to come across as involved. 'This way is the right way, yours is wrong and here's my list of why.'

3.) Similar to 2.), but add heckling your opponent, perhaps smugly belittling the person's views (or what you construct them to be). I believe this style is prone to come off as egotistical and can be off-putting to 3rd party observers. 'Okay, once again, this time in words with few syllables so you can get it...'

Richard.

 

[Bubblesong]

I'll respond generally speaking, without referencing the linked thread so as to avoid any risk of being seen as personally

Richard.

Your advice is sound for helpful replies, but there is also the issue of WHO the fellow might be likely to listen to, and who has more technical explanations as well.

Reflecting, I was kind of hoping somebody else with more experience than me would join the thread and tell him about all the things that could be hidden, (rust?, worn plastic thingy?), in an unserviced regulator that would be fine, until exactly the worst time, and then the unserviced regulator would fail at exactly the worst possible moment.

Also, it seems cost is a real factor in safety analysis. This guy might agree to service in a thread but still skip it in real life due to cost. I heard about a diver that tried to be frugal and not pay rental on helium tanks, be frugal and not waste helium, so he transferred helium to his Nitrox tanks, FORGOT, did not O2 analyze,(cost of analyzer sensor?), and died. For a few bucks of helium.
Since this thread is about not being harsh, I have teenagers(and worry about other people's kids), I just don't trust myself to answer in the manner you describe.
ahhh, there is always the instructional tragedy. Do you know any specific cases about unserviced regs?

 

[Bubblesong]

@drrich2
While I have been wringing my hands fretting, other people just convinced him not to buy since price is too high.
Well, I will be ready with that answer next time!

 

[mmmbelows]

A gun is designed to kill. That's its purpose. It's what it's made for.

huh? All these years I thought they were just designed to fire a projectile. Wonder what the users of rubber, wax, bean-bag, shock rounds, pepper rounds and all of the rest of the non-lethal projectiles manufactured for firearms would have to say about it?

 

[Bubblesong]

huh? All these years I thought they were just designed to fire a projectile. Wonder what the users of rubber, wax, bean-bag, shock rounds, pepper rounds and all of the rest of the non-lethal projectiles manufactured for firearms would have to say about it?

I have shot skeet with paper wadding, now that you mention it.

 

[Bennno]

Now that I've found the thread, perhaps you can point us to the rumors within that thread. The burden of proof is on you. I can understand your reticence if there aren't any rumors in there, but you certainly don't make a convincing argument when you refuse to exemplify your criticisms. We'll wait patiently while observing the first rule of Scuba: We won't hold our breath!

I'm afraid if you can't find the rumors in that thread, can't help you. Although you probably do understand, you just enjoy spinning what people ACUALLY said and create more pointless discussions this way.

It's the same, but you see the difference. Got it.

Look up what 'semantic' means.

 

[Bennno]

It's OK to not like me. It's also OK for me to point that out to others that your accusations are fueled by that dislike.

You like to spin and twist peoples words constantly! That's what I don't like. It's not staight up lying, it's being dishonest. You did it again in this post.

 

[Storker]

It's OK to not like me. It's also OK for me to point that out to others that your accusations are fueled by that dislike.

You like to spin and twist peoples words constantly! That's what I don't like. It's not staight up lying, it's being dishonest. You did it again in this post.

So, what you're saying is that you do like @NetDoc ?

 

[Bennno]

So, what you're saying is that you do like @NetDoc ?

Well, I like him better than I like you. I constrast to you, he doesn't PM me personal insults like you do.