On the nature of ranting and gossip

[David Jamieson]

Hello everyone, how' are you all liking the forum so far?

It's pretty robust, with many features.

Now, about the topic, there are some members here who insist on circumventing the rules in regards to wasted bandwidth and continuing to write libel in the forums.

Granted, the moderators, administrators or the sponsors and publishers of Kung Fu Qigong magazine are not responsible for the content that you as members here post.

But fair warning, all ip's are logged, yes even those of you on public systems such as the ones you use at your respective schools or peripheral institutions.

If there is continued abuse of the rules and continued liable posted here, users who are posting from suspected ip ranges will be held accountable.

lieniency is key to a good forum. But so is intelligent commentary that is relative to the topics at hand.
off topic subjects are fun, but shouldn't dominate the content and contribute to a lesser quality surf for others who view these forums seeking general information or otherwise.

argue as you will, but think before you lash out at an individual or a style for the sake of lashing out at it.

Constructivness has more value and is more Kung Fu than the easy destructiveness of writing a few lines containing negative emotionalism or just plain biased judgementalism.

So, continue to enjoy but those of you who continually bridle against the set rules of this forum understand that in order to continue here you must temper yourselves and your posts or forfeit your privileges to post here. I urge you to read and absorb the rules and regs of this online community. They are well written with good intention.

peace

[diego]

[Chang Style Novice]

Hello, this is your official forum pedant, here to clarify the definitions of a couple of ****nyms.

Liable is an adjective meaning likely to occur. Libel is a noun/verb that means written falsehoods intended to damage a person's reputation, or the act of writing those falsehoods.

For example;

Foolish Canadians are liable to not understand that if a statement is true, it cannot be classified as libel.

With the pedantry out of the way, let me comment more directly on the controversy surrounding Qimaster/Rich Mooney. I agree that there seems to be a lot of wasted bandwidth on the subject. Mr. Mooney has made some claims that are difficult to believe and that defy common sense. This in itself does not mean that his claims are false, but it cannot be surprising that such claims arouse a great deal of passion in both believers and skeptics. Mr. Mooney has been both the subject and purveyor of vicious, profane attacks in various threads, although the tone of the debate seems to have taken an overall turn for the better since the forum has moved to the new hosting service.

Controversy and vigorous debate are healthy for a forum such as this; I'd even say they are one of the main reasons for such a place to exist. What is the purpose of this forum if not to spread good, real information about the CMA? And indeed, how can we know that the information posted is good and real if it is not occassionally challenged and made to 'put up or shut up'? I am of the opinion that as long as the debate focuses on the claims and rebuttals, and doesn't extend to the people making the claims or rebuttals, it is all good and fair. However, I also believe that if claims and rebuttals are made in ill faith or with poor manners, those low qualities reflect back on the speaker.

Or to quote the contemporary poet Pep Love; "What you are is what you do; you'd better watch yourself because they're watching you."

[Chang Style Novice]

Good gravy! 'H.omonyms' got censored because of the 'h.omo'? This board nanny software is a little too sensitive, methinks. It's a latinate prefix meaning 'same,' not a vulgar slur. I suppose that I drink starstarstarstargenized milk and am of the species starstarstarstar sapiens, as well.

What a nuisance.

[David Jamieson]

Thanks for the spelling correction. I have made the correction and have clarifyed the intent of my post by doing so.

This post was not specifically concerning any particular individual, but rather it was intended as a generalism.

There has been a history of many posts regarding this person that person or some other person.

To me, the question at hand is content.

For instance, i have issues and concerns regarding the published works and published interviews with the leader of the falun Gong organization and I question only that which is stated by that organization when it is contradictory to their actions.

To question something in and of itself is a good thing in my opinion, to do so in a way that precludes a biased response such as using terms like "what do you think of this BS" or "is this person a nutcase" and so on does not lead to the heart of the question at hand but rather it leads to continued bashing on the lines of the original intent behind the original message.

And, in fact, many statements made here in thse forums are "libel".

My purpose in making this post was to generate thoughtful insight into the nature of our posts before we post.
Because it is true, One's words are a direct reflection of one's character, but only to those who understand at least that point.

To the rest, it becomes just another opportunity to find community in negative rumination, which casts a dim light on us all.

peace

[Chang Style Novice]

"My purpose in making this post was to generate thoughtful insight into the nature of our posts before we post.
Because it is true, One's words are a direct reflection of one's character, but only to those who understand at least that point. "

We agree. Now is there anything we can do about the silly asterisks that obscure the meanings of perfectly good, non-perjorative words?

[qeySuS]

You cant get the IP of individual computers at schools :P Most schools only have one IP out and a big local net (usually a proxy os the only way out). And you arent going to see the local IP's (and hence what computer in school) it was

[xiong]

Actually I think he's just trying to get people to tone down the trash talking. I think that stumblefist's post is a perfect example of an intelligent counter arguement with citations that does not degenerate into calling Kung Lek a **** sucker.
I think that was the point, and it should be one well taken. Again I think it goes back to the idividual and what they are getting out of their training. I don't need Martial arts to show me the way to be an argumentative *******, I'm hoping to learn to be more compassionate and understanding as well as fit.
My two cents.

THANK YOU, Kung Lek!

I am heartened to see that KFO wishes to uphold the highest standards of integrity - not that your demands are oppressive in the least bit.

This forum is not a place for "Let the people speak and let the people decide for themselves." This is KFO, which is a kung fu BUSINESS ENTITY which is represented in no small part by its posters here.

In short, this forum is NOT your playpen.

Let's all not forget that we are GUESTS of KFO. Guests do not have the right to start fights and flame people in other people's houses.

[rogue]

Where is the fine line between a negative opinion about something/someone and libal?

[Cody]

I'm not interested in reading name-calling posts. Or, ones where the rant goes into obvious personal attack which excludes a situational setting (with or without witnesses) or even an allusion to one. So, I don't read them. Their being here, but not covering the board, doesn't bother me. There's a limit.
I am thinking that this is the right place for an occasional "pop" because one might say this is a safe outlet for disillusionment and rage re martial arts.
Feelings and words have a tenuous connection. For some people it is very raw; while with others there is a logicking which separates them and makes them appear civilized. There are some for whom cussing is an artform, some not so artful.

Libel is potentially a legal word, and at its core is the malicious and false. I don't think that has a place here, or anywhere for that matter.

However, one person's reality (and I'm going to assume this is a reliable account) might not be another's. No one is able to Prove the points really, which doesn't mean they aren't so. Or, people treat different people differently. Judging what's out there can become a guessing game.

Tough things go on in this world. Covering them up or walking on egg shells isn't an option anymore. I don't think one should be expected necessarily to talk around a hottish topic. At the same time, looking for an argument isn't the best way. I guess it's a matter of what resources the writer has, and whether the intent is constructive (which can start with a Shiva-like approach) or malicious falsification. Name calling aside, sometimes you just have to call it what it is (to you), and recognize it might be something else to someone else. That's about it.

Sometimes simple criticism or a different view of things, or what appears to be an outrageous statement based on experience, can be seen as libel by those who are not familiar with the situation or who cannot accept, perceive, deal with, a flaw in the armor.

Cody

[tnwingtsun]

'I question only that which is stated by that organization when it is contradictory to their actions."



A nice way of saying......................................

Bide your time, stumblefist.

We shall meet one day.

[SanHeChuan]

NOOO there must be balance in the force!

If very one is all cooperative and stuff, and no one fights then there will be less growth. The “I’m ok your ok” just doesn’t solve anything. There must war and fire, so that those who rise from the flames, temper buy that flame will be stronger, better, faster, like the bionic man.

Yin and Yang, good and evil, without one there is no other.

[David Jamieson]

what you speak of san, is dualism.

dualism is an inherent paradigm and not the reality at hand.

So, the bashing of styles and their bearers or practitioners of things we don't understand doesn't necessarily mean they are fraudulent, they are merely that individual's and like minded one's reality.

it serves no purpose to ridicule.

peace

p.s - qeysus, ip -ranges- are fixed, individual machines may be dynamic or fixed. but a range is a range and it is not a great task to determine who owns a fixed range and which ip's are natted out from it.