PLEASE READ: Discussing threads from other forums

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Beyond the Sidewalks : One Thread

It was suggested awhile back that we not begin discussions of threads from other forums here (Terry suggested it). I didn't see it as a problem. Now I do, and the problem is this: The threads are often controversial ones, and end up getting deleted. Thus, they disappear before they can be read, and then the discussion here is impaired, if not outright impossible.

Rather than ban such discussions here, I am going to ask the person who starts the new thread here to make a copy of the thread in question, so that it can be reposted here in case the original disappears. Save it to your documents file -- you can always delete it later. Save any posted comments too, especially if you are going to discuss them. People interested in participating in the thread here, feel free to make your own copies, since it is possible you will see additional responses.

Anyone who thinks we should ban this type of "cross-over" or wants to make comments about my idea of how to deal with the situation, please feel free to post your comments to this thread. Thanks!

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2002

Answers

makes good sense. Or just paste the parts your discussing on in your post here if its not too long.

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2002

Excellent idea, Joy, about "saving" the thread to be discussed here from another forum before it disappears. It is hard for everyone to comment and discuss their opinions of said thread once it has been deleted, it leaves many of us here just shaking our heads because we have no clue at exactly what is being talked about in the first place.

It is my opinion that no ban on "crossover" material discussion, or any type of ban on material being discussed, be imposed, other than Jim-Bob's original posting guidelines to be followed in our discussions. We are adults who should be able to voice our opinions, concerns ( imagined, real or otherwise), worries, and day to day pain in the posterior happenings without such things getting out of perspective. We are also good at sharing humor, and alot of what we all discuss as humor first appears elsewhere, and a cross-over ban would prevent that.

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2002


Every time I go "over there"; I get really, really glad that Jim established this forum for us; and that Joy is keeping it going. What a bunch of callous people. I know I sigh over the good old days at CS, but we WEREN'T like that in the old days.

-- Anonymous, March 02, 2002

I think I picked a good 24 hours to be off-line!

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2002

Drifting, sort of:

Anyone seen any CS or FSR or CF threads about that woman who killed her children in Texas? From what I have heard (I haven't paid much attention, as it's just too awful), this woman sounds like a homeschooler, hard-core fundamentalist Christian, who (besides being nuts) let her husband bully her into a very unhappy life. Since that sounds like several of the women who post to some of the Country-type boards, I was wondering if anyone had offered up opinion: i.e., defense (like "yeah, better to kill your kids than let Satan get 'em) or shock and horror, etc.

If no discussion has been happening, I'm curious why not.

Anyone? And, no I'm not dissin' homeschooling, etc. There just seems to be a kind of combo "profile" that I'm thinking of.

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2002



Sheepish, is it really you?!

I've seen only two brief comments; both were on CS, on the homesteaders stick together thread. I don't read hardly any posts over there, so there may be more. I saw nothing at FSR or CF. I wouldn't expect to. Would you really expect someone like Little Bit, or daffodilly or LBD to post something that might lead someone to believe that their way of living ISN'T perfect? I would expect them to pass it off as some type of punishment for past sins or something, if they said anything at all.

And yep, "nuts" pretty well sums it up! Better than post-partum depression, IMHO. It's happened before in the past (one generation and back), just got hushed up better. Most of the maternal infantacides in the past did not involve all of the children; usually only the infant. 'Course, in those days, most of the other kids were probably outside, too. How many cases of SIDS, actually weren't?? Or still aren't? People do some of the damnnedest things. Some of the stories I've heard make me fear for humanity. Others just make me a firm beliver in Darwinism.

So, on a brighter note - who do you think is the troll over at CF that's posting under Melissa's name?! (No, it's not me!)

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2002


Polly, C'est vrais, c'est moi....

No, I really didn't expect those folk to post....the apparent silence, however, speaks rather loudly.

A Melissa troll? Good grief! Just not a John one!

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2002


A "John Troll"? Was that at CF or FSR? Is that what Doreen was talking about? Someone impersonating John Leake? Or a different John?

-- Anonymous, March 03, 2002

Yikes! I was just fooling around. I thought of all the folks to be/have a troll, John would be the most unusual! I hope there isn't one!

-- Anonymous, March 04, 2002

Oh, I have to laugh hard at the "Melissa Troll"!!! Had that done to me more than once, not fun, but, in retrospect, pretty darn funny now!

On the crazy woman who drowned her children "lest Satan get them", yep, she is nuts for sure, and I agree that you sure wouldn't see LBF or the other's even get near THAT discussion in a coon's age!!! Frankly, if I were the judge hearing the case, I would also charge the husband with, at minimum, child endangerment, for allowing the woman to attend/take care of those children, he KNEW she was nuts, and they continued to have more children and allowing her to be the main caretaker of them, even though all the doctor's who saw her recommended she not do this. I would not be kind to the husband, I would charge him with manslaughter since he definately had a part in the crime as well.

I love thread drift ;-)!!!

-- Anonymous, March 04, 2002



Moderation questions? read the FAQ