Stacking Blocks

One of my cat walked on my keyboard while attempting to register to Stacking Blocks, andit triggered a registration with some unintelligible username that Ican't remember what it was. I need this entry to be erased so I can restart again. (starts with \o/)This said, I like the idea of Starting Blocks, but it seems to be an attempt to pursue the dialogue on Artblog. Are you going to moderate this in such a way that only your friends are allowed to bitch others? Because this is really how Artblog felt (I've only visited a week and never went back). I truly don't mind the bitching, but I mind the censorship.Cheers,Cedric

That was you? A cat registered for my forum? That's something new.I cleared that user. You should be able to register with a human name now. Or you could just stick with "Cedric".I am not intending to moderate Stacking Blocks in any way (aside from deleting spam, if it shows up).Artblog was never moderated the way you describe, though. Franklin pretty much let anything go. But the tone of the discussion was such that it was hard for someone not already involved to gain entry. I don't hold that against it at all -- it's what I liked about it, actually -- but I doubt anything I run will end up like that.At the moment, I'm mostly talking to myself, actually.

I am no liar. Artblog was the first and only internet forum ever where I had multiple messages censored within the only week I ever participated. It's not because of the arguments about art. The censored messages were those replying to insults, and it didn't take me a long time to figure out that only a few regulars were allowed or even encouraged to insults any outsider disagreement. This has been discussed elsewhere, and others stopped visiting Artblog for the exact same reasons (or because of the constant whining there). I'm the first glad to take off my paws of this kind of environment, is all am saying. ;-) Cedric

I'm not calling you a liar so much as, let's say, biased. To you your posts may have seemed as reasonable as anyone else's, but to others, they may have appeared, at best, a waste of time to read through. I mean, Cedric, I love to see your name on comments and encourage your future participation in all my blogging endeavors, but you're not always the most coherent commenter. There are times when I have to give up halfway through your posts because I can't figure out what you're trying to say.Franklin's just less indulgent than most bloggers. Me, I'll put up with anything.

Err..Can you talked some more about how you looked at your nostril sitting on your sofa the other day?Cedric

Cedric, I am calling you a liar. I deleted YOUR insults to other commenters at Artblog.net, as well as your junking up the thread with your conspicuous, obnoxious typing style. You wrote at one point, and I quote, "Ban me, it will be fun." And while I have no mechanism for banning users, I have one for handling individual acts of stupidity - the delete key. You were no victim. When you started trolling, I dealt with you the way I deal with all my trolls. Don't think you were singled out in any respect.

Oh, the Ogres at Artblog and the thousands trolls they attract...To Chris:You know there is less than 7 art bloggers who, when they write, never loose anyone's else time. Now why is it that I only pop up here about twice every month? Wouldn't it be that it's because I also find that some of the posts that you write are wasting my time? Do I go on and cry "stop writting Chris until you have something extremely pertinent to say!". I can't believe how you people are so full of yourself. Gosh, you don't even have the careers to excuse those attitudes. Or the social contacts. You just hang together like stupid little fiends. See how far that will get you.Cedric C

That's big talk from a self-entitled, lying twit who likes to see himself type, and thinks that spastic application of the return key is some kind of original personal statement. Go punch yourself in the head.

I deeply appreciate both of your helping to test the strength of my commitment to unfettered dialog."Go punch yourself in the head"? I mean, come on. At least be amusing when you make suggestions like that. "You don't even have the careers to excuse those attitudes"? What does that even mean? Was Jeff Koons hailed as a genius when he graduated high school? Did Damien Hirst sell his placenta for millions just after he was born? Everyone needs to start somewhere.I don't mind a feud, but at least we could be entertaining about it. I'm sure there's an appropriate Oscar Wilde quote for this occasion.

Pff, Franklin, and you keep sipping that suicidal punchof art criticism of which you know so well the recipe.

You didn't find that amusing in a slapstick sort of way? I'll try harder.This is pretty much what he did at Artblog.net, FTR. People challenged the veracity of what he was saying, which he took as an insult, so he responded with insults, and it's amusing to whack people like that but it gets old when they never clue in. Especially after all the blogging I've done. Been there, bought the t-shirt, hit C-space C-w.Maybe the apt Wilde quote here is, "If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you."

That's not what I did on Artblog. What I did is come in defense of someone who I thought was unfairly mistreated by others. I thought that I should enter the fight because I have the skin for that sort of thing, but it ended upthat my comments were simply dismissed. Fact is and remain that people have been bitching and throwing insults on Artblog wayyyyy before I came. And I'm not known to throw gratuitous insults on most places I visit.I know when I am being confronted with disrespect. And I'm beginning to get a pattern of the sort of people who indulge into that.My Wilde quote is:"Bad artists always admire each other's work. They call it being large-minded and free from prejudice."I hope you learn something out of that one.Cedric C

Franklin: One time you wrote to me of someone, "I wonder if he ever feels like the cat has made a doody in his brain." Thinking of it still makes me laugh, sometimes at very inappropriate moments.That's where I set the bar for you, now. You need to be at least that funny.I like that Wilde quote, though. That's a good one. Very appropriate for my blog. I need to make people laugh more.Cedric: I haven't known you to be insulting without provocation, so your reputation is safe here. I think it should be clear -- to both of you -- that you simply misunderstood each other and the others on Artblog. If there's anything I've learned in my 20 years on the Internet, it's that people often and easily misunderstand each other, even intelligent and well-meaning people.It's funny that you'd pull that Wilde quote, Ced: I did go looking for a good one, and I found that and liked it so much I added it to my blog up top. Go ahead, check.But you need a lesson in logic. Bad artists admire each other's work. The Artblog regulars admire each other's work. That doesn't mean the Artblog regulars are bad artists. You're affirming the consequent and that's an error in formal logic.

Also, as an aside to Franklin: This is why I object to deleting people's comments. (I especially object when they delete mine, or delete whole posts on which I've commented.) The trouble with deletion is it leaves no record. We can't now go back to the posts and review the tapes to see who might've misunderstood who. There's no way for me, for example, to verify that your take on the situation was accurate, or to decide that maybe you were overreacting.Of course, you can freely not give a shit about that. In the scheme of the universe, certainly this is a tiny matter. But it bugs the obsessive-compulsive in me.

Cedric - the skin you have; the brain you do not.Chris, I have no doubt that we misunderstood each other, although I posit that only one of us was writing clearly. It probably also doesn't matter in the grand scheme to be accused of censorship by someone whom I asked to stop commenting, continued anyway, and did so aggressively and maliciously when I started deleting his comments. But I object to it anyway."See the full set" under the quote doesn't work so well, btw.

I have observed there is no writing so clear it cannot be misunderstood by someone. It's an article of my personal faith in humanity that that someone isn't necessarily an idiot."See the full set" looked fine from the index page. Not so much from internal pages. Oops. Thanks for catching that.

So glad, by the way, that we're using my lovely new forum for this.

It's always the people I find wrong who are trying to dabblewith my intellectual faculties.Cedric

Once more, but this time in English?