Goodbye to Hard Times Tokens 0

[Hard Times]

From Wikipedia:

"Hard-times tokens are large cent-sized copper tokens, struck from about 1833 through 1843, serving as unofficial currency. These privately made pieces, comprising merchant, political and satirical pieces, were used during a time of political and financial crisis in the United States."

 

It is unavoidable to separate political satire with the idea of a Hard Times token. Currently one minter makes Hard Times tokens, Clark and Gruber Company. In a previous thread, I suggested an idea for a current HTT publicly, with all sincere intent of presenting in the spirit of political satire. Yet, some of you decided to make it political, even when I invited anyone to take any other political figure of these Hard Times and suggest motifs and sayings for an HTT. Because you made it political (and you know who you are), the thread was poofed. It is too bad, and apparently there is alot of pent up anger going around, because if everyone would have just taken the thread as it was intended, we could have had some fun with it. I was looking forward to others ideas for HTTs for the other political figures - there is certainly alot of materials out there these days and I presented just one and what that person has said. Folks that is how political satire works. Some you apparently can't distinguish political from political satire. I never once stated my views on the current politics and none of you know how I voted, nor did I state my view on that politician or anyone, it was not a political post in any way. I just picked the most obvious figure, what that person had said, and used it for an idea for POLITICAL SATIRE.

 

Hard Times tokens are one of my passions. Of course I am going to think about new political satire HTT's just after an election and of course I am going to present to what I believed to be open minded colleagues. I was apparently wrong.

 

What gets me about the poof is all of the hypocrisy by doing so. For example the Carr threads have been totally political and posters have been very nasty towards each other, but NGC thinks these are okay to stand. Emotions and accusations on each side have been high, but NGC lets them stand. Same with Langbord threads, yet poofs mine with no political intent, and then sends me a warning for politcal threads. One word NGC - Yikes.

 

As long as there are some that hijack every thread and twist it here, and seem to have nothing better to do with their time, and you know who you are, then, a rational discussion of any lively subject is not going to happen. Hence, I am gone, you can PM me ATS if you want.

 

I hope someone keeps my long running HTT and Conder token threads going because I believe they are important records for historically significant series and having a collective of images is something worth doing, even if NGC won't make the effort to keep them at the top as they do some other, less viewed threads.

 

OUT, HT

 

 

[comicdonna]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

[physics-fan3.14]

They deleted the whole Hard Times thread, or just a few posts from it? I didn't frequent that thread, so I missed what happened.

 

HT - I hope you aren't saying you are leaving this forum. You are one of my favorite posters. This place is dying a slow death, and won't survive long if many people of your caliber leave.

 

However, I definitely understand if you do decide to leave. Where are you planning on hanging your digital hat?

[nk1nk]

So what you're saying is you need a safe place. Bye Felicia!

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

From Wikipedia:

"Hard-times tokens are large cent-sized copper tokens, struck from about 1833 through 1843, serving as unofficial currency. These privately made pieces, comprising merchant, political and satirical pieces, were used during a time of political and financial crisis in the United States."

 

It is unavoidable to separate political satire with the idea of a Hard Times token. Currently one minter makes Hard Times tokens, Clark and Gruber Company. In a previous thread, I suggested an idea for a current HTT publicly, with all sincere intent of presenting in the spirit of political satire. Yet, some of you decided to make it political, even when I invited anyone to take any other political figure of these Hard Times and suggest motifs and sayings for an HTT. Because you made it political (and you know who you are), the thread was poofed. It is too bad, and apparently there is alot of pent up anger going around, because if everyone would have just taken the thread as it was intended, we could have had some fun with it. I was looking forward to others ideas for HTTs for the other political figures - there is certainly alot of materials out there these days and I presented just one and what that person has said. Folks that is how political satire works. Some you apparently can't distinguish political from political satire. I never once stated my views on the current politics and none of you know how I voted, nor did I state my view on that politician or anyone, it was not a political post in any way. I just picked the most obvious figure, what that person had said, and used it for an idea for POLITICAL SATIRE.

 

Hard Times tokens are one of my passions. Of course I am going to think about new political satire HTT's just after an election and of course I am going to present to what I believed to be open minded colleagues. I was apparently wrong.

 

What gets me about the poof is all of the hypocrisy by doing so. For example the Carr threads have been totally political and posters have been very nasty towards each other, but NGC thinks these are okay to stand. Emotions and accusations on each side have been high, but NGC lets them stand. Same with Langbord threads, yet poofs mine with no political intent, and then sends me a warning for politcal threads. One word NGC - Yikes.

 

As long as there are some that hijack every thread and twist it here, and seem to have nothing better to do with their time, and you know who you are, then, a rational discussion of any lively subject is not going to happen. Hence, I am gone, you can PM me ATS if you want.

 

I hope someone keeps my long running HTT and Conder token threads going because I believe they are important records for historically significant series and having a collective of images is something worth doing, even if NGC won't make the effort to keep them at the top as they do some other, less viewed threads.

 

OUT, HT

 

 

An explanation of the reason for removal of the thread by the moderators can be found by going to the "Moderation Action Discussion" and scrolling down to the thread "What Qualifies As A Political Post...?".

 

Good intentions are not the issue.

 

A review of "Strike Records and Name Changes", especially the more recent actions, is enough to exercise caution by members.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

So what you're saying is you need a safe place. Bye Felicia!

 

That was not very helpful and was uncalled for and discourteous, in my opinion.

[numisport]

Hard Times I would never dream of out posting you but I did respond to the poofed thread and maybe I'm partially to blame. I can see how some would think politics were involved but since the thread is gone I have forgotten what I said. My statement probably was politically oriented. I apologize.

[coinsbygary]

I am of the opinion HT that you should not leave. I have always enjoyed your thoughtful posts while at the same time I have avoided all the threads that you mentioned in your post. I also get the same sour taste from these that you do. However, what I have enjoyed here is honest open dialog and an exchange of ideas. This I know though, that ATS they are tougher on threads they don't approve off that are perfectly fine over here. Thus what it boils down to is too strict ATS and not strict enough here. I do appreciate the not strict enough over here, and ignore the posts here or anywhere for that reason that I consider out of bounds or hateful. What ever you decide, I wish you all the best in your collecting pursuits.

Gary

[USAuPzlBxBob]

I've never really followed the Hard Times tokens, but I did bother to pull up a post or two from Hard Times, and his posts are second to none. They're very well done, and I was even able to pick up that the tokens are commonly referred to as ache-tee-tee's just by his attention to detail of placing an "an" before HTT.

 

Politics and satire, to understand the difference, you need a thick skin and a strong sense of humor, and because they're layered on each other like avalanche-packed-snow, the slightest misunderstanding can lead to complete mayhem.

 

Whenever I've typed anything that I've felt touches on politics a little too much, I've known it as I've typed it, and most always I've pulled my reply entirely: you know when you're pushing things a little too far. (For example, this reply may be pushing things too far, but I'm posting it to make HT reconsider, and come back rather than leave.)

 

Btw, HTT tokens, after viewing a few in the various threads, are really, really beautiful, and I can see why someone would want to make them a concerted lifetime-collection undertaking.

[RWB]

HT - Turning your back on a problem does not resolve it or lead to improvement.

 

Your thread is likely stored on a server and in several copies. I've forgotten where but some of the IT people who post here can probably help you recover it.

[PaulS.]

I took a second look at the post, and I'm sorry but it seems to be political to me. I did not originally pull it, but I feel whoever did was correct in doing so. The tone and topic of the post were not in keeping with the friendly atmosphere that we try to foster on the boards.

 

 

Sorry, and we hope you'll stick around!

 

 

 

-Paul

[coinman_23885]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

+1

[jom]

Bummer.

 

jom

[MJ]

HT take the weekend off and please reconsider. We don't have enough members here and you certainly are a quality one to boot. Hate to see you leave

 

mark

[physics-fan3.14]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

[ldhair]

It's getting tough to have a good time here.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

[Afterword]

"The tone and topic of the post were not in keeping with the friendly atmosphere that we try to foster on the boards."

 

 

 

What is friendly about insinuating or outright calling DCarr a fraudster or counterfeiter? What is appropriate about members taking it upon themselves to determine what is or is not illegal and then attempting to enforce the law themselves via repeated intimidation and harassment?

 

Discussing politics is not appropriate, but repeated intimidation and harassment is?

 

[ldhair]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

Were you posting in the HT thread that went poof?

[nk1nk]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

 

You just proved Jason's point perfectly. Chalk this thread up in the miserable and unfortunate column.

[ldhair]

Who, what members took the HT thread to the point of going poof?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

"The tone and topic of the post were not in keeping with the friendly atmosphere that we try to foster on the boards."

 

 

 

What is friendly about insinuating or outright calling DCarr a fraudster or counterfeiter? What is appropriate about members taking it upon themselves to determine what is or is not illegal and then attempting to enforce the law themselves via repeated intimidation and harassment?

 

Discussing politics is not appropriate, but repeated intimidation and harassment is?

 

I have not responded to your posts in some time, and I wouldn't on this occasion, except I thought you may be asking the question of me. It may also be that you are simply posting after my post, and that is why your post references mine.

 

I did not post the words you have quoted.

 

But, just in the off chance you were responding to my post for some reason, I have never called Mr. Carr a fraudster or a counterfeiter and have not been discourteous toward Mr. Carr in my posts or attempted to belittle him. He has resorted on occasion to posting in that manner, but I assume it is due to frustration. I freely admit I have been repetitive in my commentary and opinion of his use of the word LEGAL, and only because Mr. Carr has a tendency to obfuscate and misdirect the conversation concerning same. As an example, his opinions of the subject of using the word LEGAL on his websites without a statement that the endeavors have not been adjudicated is "that is all you are going to get".

 

My opinion of the endeavors of Mr. Carr is and has been very clear. His pieces have not been adjudicated as legal, and it is my opinion that any language that describes the pieces as legal in any manner on his websites can be misleading, and he has never opined why he won't pursue adjudication, which may very well be a very good approach for his business.

 

I did not declare the pieces legal or not legal or determine same. That is the function of the government to do so. It is not out of bounds to publicly declare such an opinion, nor is it a political discussion. Reading the thread of what is or is not political clarifies how the host views the subject.

 

I do agree that there has been discourteous posts and name calling toward Mr. Carr, which are in my opinion not necessary to make a point.

 

I of course can not answer for other members or their choice of words. Nor is it my place to determine an intent of intimidation or harassment via the posts of other members, but I know it when I see it, and to that degree I concur it has happened in my opinion.

 

My opinions are my own, and as such are not important at all. It is just chat board opinions.

[nk1nk]

Also mcknowitall, I'd like to point out you violated your own rant about ignoring posters. We had an agreement we would ignore each other here

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=2&Number=9555479&Searchpage=1&Main=414458&Words=&topic=0&Search=true#Post9555479

 

But yet you went contrary to that declaration and commented on my first post in this thread. Go away already!!

 

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

Were you posting in the HT thread that went poof?

 

Since you respond in the thread, I am sure you are aware I did so. I am also sure you are aware that I publicly stated I was notifying the Moderators that in my opinion the thread was political and would lead to no good. I always state openly when I use the notify function and always state why I did so.

[BillJones]

Perhaps if you had called for a token to slam Trump AND a token a slam Hillary, none of us would have taken note of it. We all know that both of them were flawed in the recent campaign, and both of them could easily be subject to satire.

 

The trouble is, you went after only one side after at particularly contentious race during which considerable mud was slug from both sides. Perhaps if you had waited six months or so it would have gone down better.

 

At any rate if you leaving because of this, it's too bad. There are bigger issues around here, if you have been reading the messages, that will have a greater effect upon the enjoyment many of us have had on this site.

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Also mcknowitall, I'd like to point out you violated your own rant about ignoring posters. We had an agreement we would ignore each other here

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=2&Number=9555479&Searchpage=1&Main=414458&Words=&topic=0&Search=true#Post9555479

 

But yet you went contrary to that declaration and commented on my first post in this thread. Go away already!!

 

 

I understand your confusion. I will, whenever I notice it, comment on childish discourtesy and name calling of another member. I did so in your case specifically because it was unnecessary and demeaning and belittling for only one reason....because you could. It is certainly your right to be childish and immature, and it is certainly my right to voice an opinion of such behavior. You may continue to post in that vein all you want, as you did in the post I am responding to. We all break self imposed rules from time to time, and hopefully when I do so, I will do so with a clear conscience and not cross my own line. I try not to, but I am human and fail miserably on occasion.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

 

You just proved Jason's point perfectly. Chalk this thread up in the miserable and unfortunate column.

 

I also understand your perspective, and your right to have an opinion. As such, it is logical that that my suggestion concerning the ignore function would be to your benefit, also, based on your post.

[Afterword]

"The tone and topic of the post were not in keeping with the friendly atmosphere that we try to foster on the boards."

 

 

 

What is friendly about insinuating or outright calling DCarr a fraudster or counterfeiter? What is appropriate about members taking it upon themselves to determine what is or is not illegal and then attempting to enforce the law themselves via repeated intimidation and harassment?

 

Discussing politics is not appropriate, but repeated intimidation and harassment is?

 

I have not responded to your posts in some time, and I wouldn't on this occasion, except I thought you may be asking the question of me. It may also be that you are simply posting after my post, and that is why your post references mine.

 

I did not post the words you have quoted.

 

But, just in the off chance you were responding to my post for some reason, I have never called Mr. Carr a fraudster or a counterfeiter and have not been discourteous toward Mr. Carr in my posts or attempted to belittle him. He has resorted on occasion to posting in that manner, but I assume it is due to frustration. I freely admit I have been repetitive in my commentary and opinion of his use of the word LEGAL, and only because Mr. Carr has a tendency to obfuscate and misdirect the conversation concerning same. As an example, his opinions of the subject of using the word LEGAL on his websites without a statement that the endeavors have not been adjudicated is "that is all you are going to get".

 

My opinion of the endeavors of Mr. Carr is and has been very clear. His pieces have not been adjudicated as legal, and it is my opinion that any language that describes the pieces as legal in any manner on his websites can be misleading, and he has never opined why he won't pursue adjudication, which may very well be a very good approach for his business.

 

I did not declare the pieces legal or not legal or determine same. That is the function of the government to do so. It is not out of bounds to publicly declare such an opinion, nor is it a political discussion. Reading the thread of what is or is not political clarifies how the host views the subject.

 

I do agree that there has been discourteous posts and name calling toward Mr. Carr, which are in my opinion not necessary to make a point.

 

I of course can not answer for other members or their choice of words. Nor is it my place to determine an intent of intimidation or harassment via the posts of other members, but I know it when I see it, and to that degree I concur it has happened in my opinion.

 

My opinions are my own, and as such are not important at all. It is just chat board opinions.

 

 

 

No, my post was not directed at you specifically - but your replies are always interesting.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

"The tone and topic of the post were not in keeping with the friendly atmosphere that we try to foster on the boards."

 

 

 

What is friendly about insinuating or outright calling DCarr a fraudster or counterfeiter? What is appropriate about members taking it upon themselves to determine what is or is not illegal and then attempting to enforce the law themselves via repeated intimidation and harassment?

 

Discussing politics is not appropriate, but repeated intimidation and harassment is?

 

I have not responded to your posts in some time, and I wouldn't on this occasion, except I thought you may be asking the question of me. It may also be that you are simply posting after my post, and that is why your post references mine.

 

I did not post the words you have quoted.

 

But, just in the off chance you were responding to my post for some reason, I have never called Mr. Carr a fraudster or a counterfeiter and have not been discourteous toward Mr. Carr in my posts or attempted to belittle him. He has resorted on occasion to posting in that manner, but I assume it is due to frustration. I freely admit I have been repetitive in my commentary and opinion of his use of the word LEGAL, and only because Mr. Carr has a tendency to obfuscate and misdirect the conversation concerning same. As an example, his opinions of the subject of using the word LEGAL on his websites without a statement that the endeavors have not been adjudicated is "that is all you are going to get".

 

My opinion of the endeavors of Mr. Carr is and has been very clear. His pieces have not been adjudicated as legal, and it is my opinion that any language that describes the pieces as legal in any manner on his websites can be misleading, and he has never opined why he won't pursue adjudication, which may very well be a very good approach for his business.

 

I did not declare the pieces legal or not legal or determine same. That is the function of the government to do so. It is not out of bounds to publicly declare such an opinion, nor is it a political discussion. Reading the thread of what is or is not political clarifies how the host views the subject.

 

I do agree that there has been discourteous posts and name calling toward Mr. Carr, which are in my opinion not necessary to make a point.

 

I of course can not answer for other members or their choice of words. Nor is it my place to determine an intent of intimidation or harassment via the posts of other members, but I know it when I see it, and to that degree I concur it has happened in my opinion.

 

My opinions are my own, and as such are not important at all. It is just chat board opinions.

 

 

 

No, my post was not directed at you specifically - but your replies are always interesting.

 

If only that was true, but I recognize my shortcomings and do not have any issue when they are described by other members. All are allowed opinions, whether we agree with same or not.

[ldhair]

Sad to see you go, HT I will miss your posts. I think leaving based on the actions of one administrator (right or wrong) is a little extreme but, that is your choice.

 

It is not just the administrator. The environment of these boards is growing increasingly toxic, and a couple of posters in particular are driving this place into the ground (for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience). The recent decisions by NGC won't help, of course, but the NGC forums have been doing their best Hindenburg impression for a while now.

 

I can understand your perspective.

 

I was always curious that there is an ignore function that can be used by members that are not pleased by the posts of others, yet when a member publicly states they have initiated the function for a certain member, darn if the person that initiated the function can still opine about the posts of the member they have initiated the ignore function for.

 

As an example, and not that it is important at all, but just an observation, I recall that many many months ago, you publicly stated you had initiated the function as a preference toward my posts. I did a little checking, and I had not remembered that you publicly stated this action 4 times, and 2 times in the last 2 months. You state in the post I am responding to, and I am only quoting for the purpose of illustration of my thoughts:

 

"....(for example, any time "MrMcKnowitall" shows up in a thread, you can guarantee it is going to be a miserable and unfortunate experience)..."

 

It appears that you are not really ignoring me, because if you were, then you would not know that which you stated, if you were in fact ignoring my posts. There is the issue, because as we all know, it is not really ignoring, because the ignore function does not "hide" the post when a member is off line, and when the member is on line, the member can reverse the ignore function and read in real time. Your posts over the last few months prove this, as indeed the post I am responding to does, when you refer to me or my posts. I think it would be very helpful to members like you, if when the ignore function is used, it can not be cancelled once initiated. This would prevent the human nature response of peeking, and lack of self restraint to truly ignore the member that caused you to initiate an ignore function. It is sort of a lack of self dignity and self discipline to peek, similar to cheating yourself. We all do it, though, and then profess loudly and repeatedly and publicly about the member we original had on ignore. This in turn usually causes the cheating member (as it applies to peeking even though the ignore function is on) to not be able to control themselves and to continue to foment a strange hatred and disgust and anger, and it soon starts effecting the same type of attitude toward many other aspects and people and situations. That is no way to live. There are many other important aspects of life a person can enjoy, rather than be obsessed with another member, or the host or the business choices of the host, or a person that disagrees with you, to the point that you feel the only tool at your disposal that helps to relieve your obsession is to attempt to belittle and be discourteous.

 

So, I agree with you that the host could help improve the boards a little for the members lacking in self restraint and self dignity and courtesy, by making the ignore function permanent in all situations and eliminate peeking, once the member initiates the action. I would not want to be the cause of any member being irate because they can not control their self harming human tendencies.

Were you posting in the HT thread that went poof?

 

Since you respond in the thread, I am sure you are aware I did so. I am also sure you are aware that I publicly stated I was notifying the Moderators that in my opinion the thread was political and would lead to no good. I always state openly when I use the notify function and always state why I did so.

I missed the thread but would love to read it. When your name was brought up in this thread, I figured you were part of or most of the reason the other thread went poof. From your own words it sounds like you created the problem and turned around and reported the thread. That's just not cool.

It's like you are on a mission to kill this site. I'll stop there because I don't understand all that was said.