John has been warned repeatedly about hobby-horseism but recently posted a comment on the Spanish television set entry that was guaranteed to spin it off into a discussion about Latin and bishops and traditionalism. He is now given his last chance to avoid disinvitation to participate in the blog. If he doesn’t keep discussions of Latin, the bishops, and traditionalism to entries dealing with those subjects, he’s gone.
I’m also announcing the creation of two new entries in DA RULZ:
21. Commenters in the combox are to use either their real name or a
(non-offensive, non-spiteful) handle that distinguishes them from
others when posting comments. They are not to post comments while
leaving the "Name" field blank. It’s rude to expect people to interact
with you and give them no way to refer to you.22. When someone is
under a warning not to ride his hobby horse, others on the blog are not
to post comments tempting him to get back on the hobby horse (e.g., "I
wonder what So-and-so will do to twist this thread onto his favorite
topic"). That’s rude because it tempts another person to break a rule
when he already may have trouble restraining himself on a particular
topic.
Last time I gave John a warning, he asked that others not taunt him in this way, and I agree with that sentiment. I’ve seen people under a hobby-horse warning get goaded into breaking the restriction, and it’s not fair to them.
Fair enough. Let’s move on.
Yup.
I’m going to speculate that many of the people who comment anonymously don’t bother to read DA RULZ. I hope I’m wrong.
They are not to post comments while leaving the “Name” field blank.
Can the form not be changed to make “Name” field required? Other forms work that way for that reason.
For a blog that does not have some kind of commenter registration requirement, I think this one generally is very congenial.
Excellent additions to da rulz…and speaking of good rules, it brings to mind some opinions I wanted to put out there regarding Latin, the Bishops, and traditionalism………
Must…resist…
…some opinions I wanted to put out there regarding Latin, the Bishops, and traditionalism…
Uh…mmm… So how about that Bishop Trautman?
Aaaaarrrrhhhh! Sorry, I’ll go away now. :-p
For a blog that does not have some kind of commenter registration requirement, I think this one generally is very congenial.
Thanks. I’ve really wanted to avoid implementing a registration requirement, but I’ve tried to maintain a congenial atmosphere. That’s the reason behind Da Rulz. Having clearly posted rules for discussion helps maintain a good environment.
(JP2 said something similar in his intro to the Code of Canon Law.)
I also try to let people have a chance when they’ve violated the rules so they get a sense I’m willing to work with them and let them have their say. I won’t ban someone just because I disagree with their viewpoint. I think that helps generate a reciprocal willingness to follow Da Rulz since they know I’ll let them have their say as long as it’s done in the right way (e.g., on-topic and politely and at reasonable length).
I am a touch disappointed, though, that in all the years I’ve had Da Rulz, nobody seems to have noted the cartoon connection they have.
Oh, well. 🙂
What cartoon connection?
Jimmy,
completely off topic here: just noticed you often use “CHT” as shorthand for what’s usualy called a hat tip.I’ve never seen that, what’s the origin of that?
Also, it kind of makes me laugh because it’s a common shipboard designation for systems involving #2 (i.e. the “stinky hose” that removes sewage from Collection Holding Tanks)
“…in all the years I’ve had Da Rulz, nobody seems to have noted the cartoon connection they have…”
Does it have anything to do with floaty crowny things?
Wanda– Timmy, according to the rules…
Cosmo– Who cares? C’mon, champ, wish up that super-bomb!
lol
Tom:
Look at Jimmy’s picture — CHT stands for cowboy hat tip.
Tim
I guess Jimmy thinks authors of the Bible are rude — many books where they didn’t “sign it.”
“I guess Jimmy thinks authors of the Bible are rude — many books where they didn’t “sign it.”
No, he just thinks that his blog is not inspired Scripture.
Scripture isn’t remotely like a comment box either. So that comparison is flawed
Scripture isn’t remotely like a comment box either
Thank goodness – I’d hate to see the combox of God’s blog. How many trolls would there be, claiming that His blog was a fake because He doesn’t really exist.
Then there would be those who aren’t sure if the blog’s author really exists.
Then there’d be a bunch of people claiming that some other blog is really God’s blog, and anyone who believes differently is going to 404.
Then you have those that do believe it is really God’s blog having different interpretations of God’s version of “Da Rulz”, as well as those saying that Rule 1 is critical but Rule 20 is optional, while Rule 5 is meant figuratively, not literally (even while taking a literalist view of the other rulz).
… all because God just wanted to make captions on a funny picture from His Universe.
ha ha, great post Jamie
I have noticed there is more than one Suzanne who posts. I will now be forever known as Suzanne from Okla. here. That only unfortunate thing is now you will know which one isn’t the brightest (me!).
Scripture isn’t remotely like a comment box either. So that comparison is flawed
But the Talmud is. 🙂
But I just got a new hobby horse for Christmas 🙁
Jimmy
I will try my best, and I thank you for your patience with me
If I get out of line please let me know as I am passionate about the faith as we all are here and I dont think anyone here has malice
You are true to your word
God bless you
Then there’d be a bunch of people claiming that some other blog is really God’s blog, and anyone who believes differently is going to 404.
Some say 403 or 500, so there’s debate there too 🙂
God bless you John,
Ah, so how ’bout them Redskins?
Then there’d be a bunch of people claiming that some other blog is really God’s blog, and anyone who believes differently is going to 404.
Some say 403 or 500, so there’s debate there too 🙂
Ah, but how do we know there even really is a blog? Perhaps the blog we think is God’s blog is just a figment of our imaginations… 😉
And yes – in all seriousness – may God bless you, John.
Now let’s talk about Justin Verlander’s recent no-hitter…
Ah, but how do we know there even really is a blog? Perhaps the blog we think is God’s blog is just a figment of our imaginations… 😉
yes, I forgot to include the nihilists, who even while denying the blog even really exists, will continue to post because it doesn’t matter.
Then you’ve got the whole group of people who think that the blog is only written by 1 person versus the group who believes it is actually a group effort of 3 people who act and think alike.
Finally, let’s not forget those that believe the blog started on its own, through the course of random events.
The Apocalypse is come. no rudeness in a combox?! unheard of ! absurd!