Study on gay marriage views retracted after allegations of fake data

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 02:34 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: However that has not been the case because even if this is a "brain abnormality" as you put it earlier, it is still only deviant behavior and not an illness or a disorder and so will not be seen as such.

Unless the definition changes

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 02:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unless the definition changes

Considering how many brain abnormalities or mutations cause behavior that is against the social norms, I should hope not. We'd be back to the 19th century list of reasons to be admitted into an asylum.

Nothing like the good ol' days, eh? Better get those lobotomizing rods ready.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 02:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: We'd be back to the 19th century list of reasons to be admitted into an asylum.

Nothing like the good ol' days, eh? Better get those lobotomizing rods ready.

I expected better.

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I expected better.

Than what? If deviant behavior were to be reclassified as mental illness we would be regressing in the field of psychology/psychiatry a good 100 years.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 03:03 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Than what? If deviant behavior were to be reclassified as mental illness we would be regressing in the field of psychology/psychiatry a good 100 years.

Than a snarky comment (I am quickly learning not to expect as much)

As I mentioned earlier this would hold true if you classified homosexuality simply as deviant behavior and then lumped all deviant behavior into one category.

Do you consider homosexuality the same as being a member of the Klu Klux Klan? Both are deviant behavior; however, IMO one is a process in the brain and another is a process of culture.

But enough; I am done with this particular discussion.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(05-25-2015, 03:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Than a snarky comment (I am quickly learning not to expect as much)

I never thought I'd see bfine complaining about snarky comments. As long as I've been a member of the bengals message boards, bfine has been peppering them with snarky comments.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 04:15 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: I never thought I'd see bfine complaining about snarky comments.  As long as I've been a member of the bengals message boards, bfine has been peppering them with snarky comments.

No doubt. Just expected more from a mod.

I always said I would never qualify as one.

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 04:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No doubt. Just expected more from a mod.

I always said I would never qualify as one.

Mods can't be snarky? That's just silly. I know the mods on the old boards were snarky as all hell.

I snark because it's a way to not take things too serious. You just can't take life that serious or you'll never get out alive.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 04:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Mods can't be snarky? That's just silly. I know the mods on the old boards were snarky as all hell.

I snark because it's a way to not take things too serious. You just can't take life that serious or you'll never get out alive.

I don't recall any mod commenting in the mothership PR forum; snarky or otherwise. Please list the one(s) that posted snarkily in that forum that were not relieved of their duties.

No, folks snark in an attempt to belittle those you are having a discussion with.

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 04:59 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't recall any mod commenting in the mothership PR forum; snarky or otherwise. Please list the one(s) that posted snarkily in that forum that were not relieved of their duties.

No, folks snark in an attempt to belittle those you are having a discussion with.

Most of them stayed out of that particular forum, they were snarky in other places though. I just wasn't aware you were referring specifically to P&R since you didn't specify that.

And what was that you said about mind reading some other time? Yeah, nothing like a little pot and kettle. I use snark to inject humor, not to belittle anyone. But if you insist that it is always the case then you have engaged in it plenty.

If you have an issue with my moderating, feel free to say so and express your concerns to another staff member. I said from the beginning I would be giving a long leash, and that includes to myself. I haven't taken any moderator actions in here because no one has gone too far. I hold myself to the same standards as everyone else on this forum which isn't a strict adherence to the CoC because of the very nature of the discussions here.

But this is not really a discussion for this place. If you have complaints about my being a mod, go ahead and take them to another staff member, but stop the passive aggressive stuff and discuss the topics at hand.

[BmorePat87]

(05-25-2015, 04:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You just can't take life that serious or you'll never get out alive.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 05:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Most of them stayed out of that particular forum, they were snarky in other places though. I just wasn't aware you were referring specifically to P&R since you didn't specify that.

And what was that you said about mind reading some other time? Yeah, nothing like a little pot and kettle. I use snark to inject humor, not to belittle anyone. But if you insist that it is always the case then you have engaged in it plenty.

If you have an issue with my moderating, feel free to say so and express your concerns to another staff member. I said from the beginning I would be giving a long leash, and that includes to myself. I haven't taken any moderator actions in here because no one has gone too far. I hold myself to the same standards as everyone else on this forum which isn't a strict adherence to the CoC because of the very nature of the discussions here.

But this is not really a discussion for this place. If you have complaints about my being a mod, go ahead and take them to another staff member, but stop the passive aggressive stuff and discuss the topics at hand.

I said from the beginning that no mod should be a P/R regular; nothing personal.

Hell Benton is a J/N mod and has drastically reduced his posts in this forum and IMO the forum is worse off for it.

One cannot expect to be taken seriously as an unbiased moderator when that person continues to show their bias.

Given you are one of the more even-keel posters in this forum, but you are not above slanting to one side and it has been shown on more than 1 occasion.

As to the "mind reading" on my part. Here is the definition of Snarky:

Quote:1
: crotchety, snappish
2
: sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner

In the future if you wish to be considered humorous use humor. Sorta like the "not getting out of life alive" bit.

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 05:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I said from the beginning that no mod should be a P/R regular; nothing personal.

Hell Benton is a J/N mod and has drastically reduced his posts in this forum and IMO the forum is worse off for it.

One cannot expect to be taken seriously as an unbiased moderator when that person continues to show their bias.

Given you are one of the more even-keel posters in this forum, but you are not above slanting to one side and it has been shown on more than 1 occasion.

In my opinion it only becomes an issue if I do anything in an unfair manner. I've told the other staff this and this is my rule, I will never take a moderator action on someone with whom I have a history of back-and-forth or with whom I am actively engaged in an argument without discussing it with another staff member first. You'll never get an unbiased mod, to be honest. You will either have a regular posting mod or an absent one.

(05-25-2015, 05:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to the "mind reading" on my part. Here is the definition of Snarky:

In the future if you wish to be considered humorous use humor. Sorta like the "not getting out of life alive" bit.

I consider snark to be humorous, but that's just me. Might be because I'm a bit crotchety.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 05:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I consider snark to be humorous, but that's just me. Might be because I'm a bit crotchety.

That's sorta like changing the definition and according to you that can lead to lobotomies.

[Belsnickel]

(05-25-2015, 05:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: That's sorta like changing the definition and according to you that can lead to lobotomies.

Depends on what you're changing the definition of.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(05-25-2015, 02:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unless the definition changes

(05-25-2015, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I expected better.

When this is what your leaving us to work with, you don't leave people much to work with. Point blank you leave a lot of vague comments, we understand what you're getting at then to verify things we gotta play 20 questions with you. It's like trying to nail jello to a wall.

I like you, but you damn it's difficult to have debate with you.

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 06:04 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: When this is what your leaving us to work with, you don't leave people much to work with.  Point blank you leave a lot of vague comments, we understand what you're getting at then to verify things we gotta play 20 questions with you.  It's like trying to nail jello to a wall.  

I like you, but you damn it's difficult to have debate with you.

I'll admit I was dragging on the back and forth with Fred; however, I was at a cookout posting on a tablet (plus he never really answered). I didn't want to provide my answer until I could sit down and type a thought out response; as I knew it would draw criticism from this crowd.

BTW the mod never did answer if he considers homosexuality and being a member of the Klu Klux Klan to be in the same category.

[BmorePat87]

(05-25-2015, 05:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I said from the beginning that no mod should be a P/R regular; nothing personal.

Hell Benton is a J/N mod and has drastically reduced his posts in this forum and IMO the forum is worse off for it.

One cannot expect to be taken seriously as an unbiased moderator when that person continues to show their bias.

Given you are one of the more even-keel posters in this forum, but you are not above slanting to one side and it has been shown on more than 1 occasion.

As to the "mind reading" on my part. Here is the definition of Snarky:

In the future if you wish to be considered humorous use humor. Sorta like the "not getting out of life alive" bit.

The mod should be unbiased in how they apply the rules, but one cannot expect anyone to not show some political leanings in their posts. That's silly. If Matt started deleting posts or threads that were pro Mike Huckabee while keeping those that attacked him, that would be grounds to question whether or not he should be a mod.

Matt only spoke from a position of science and history. You stated numerous times that you agreed with everything he was saying. Considering this, how could his response to when you said "unless the definition changes" be seen as belittling you? Since you seem to be in complete agreement with him and, from your responses to him explaining the history of how mental illnesses were viewed, understand what life was like for those considered mentally ill, his response should have been as amusing to you as it was to him.

Why did you take it so personally? You don't believe that deviant behaviors should be returned to the list of mental illnesses, right?

[*bfine32*]

(05-25-2015, 06:15 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The mod should be unbiased in how they apply the rules, but one cannot expect anyone to not show some political leanings in their posts. That's silly. If Matt started deleting posts or threads that were pro Mike Huckabee while keeping those that attacked him, that would be grounds to question whether or not he should be a mod.

Matt only spoke from a position of science and history. You stated numerous times that you agreed with everything he was saying. Considering this, how could his response to when you said "unless the definition changes" be seen as belittling you? Since you seem to be in complete agreement with him and, from your responses to him explaining the history of how mental illnesses were viewed, understand what life was like for those considered mentally ill, his response should have been as amusing to you as it was to him.

Why did you take it so personally? You don't believe that deviant behaviors should be returned to the list of mental illnesses, right?

My response is to the silly notion that if Homosexuality is considered to be a mental illness, then we must include everything that has been considered deviant behavior as a mental illness. Hence, changing the definition.

I will ask you the question. To you consider being a homosexual and being a member of the KKK to be the same thing?

I wonder what folks would think if I said they were the same?

[BmorePat87]

(05-25-2015, 06:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: BTW the mod never did answer if he considers homosexuality and being a member of the Klu Klux Klan to be in the same category.

They're both deviant behavior in that they fall out of the "norm" for society. Arguably, though, being gay is no longer deviant as it is considered acceptable behavior by most of society. It's like being left-handed. This was once considered deviant and a sign of or precursor to other deviant behaviors. Now we know some people are just left handed and we, for the most part, no longer try to force them to live their lives right-handed. Hmm...

Anyways, the fact that they're both considered deviant does not mean they are the same. It would be like suggesting anxiety and schizophrenia were the same thing because they're both mental illnesses.