"How About Limiting Obituaries To Specific Categories?" Topic

Bill,

Just a suggestion, of course . . .

What if obituary threads were limited to ONLY the following categories?

* Family
* Friends
* Pets
* Fellow Gamers
* Individuals That Influenced Gaming

I think that would cut back on the number of posts that invite controversial posts, with pro and con opinions, about people that are in the public limelight (politicians and other public personalities), something that should really fall under current affairs.

What do you say?

Dan

How long are you going to continue flogging this dead horse?

If you can't find anything good to say about a recently deceased individual, then say nothing. It's called self-restraint, most adults manage it on a daily basis. Give it a go.

Connard,
Geez, man. You never cease to bait, do you? You want proof of "adult" restraint? Read the following:

Now, for the rest of you, I'm going back to the real topic at hand . . .

Aren't announcements about public personalities something that falls under current events?

CC

I call it as I see it. Others may disagree with my PoV, that is their prerogative.

Agreed. You have your POV, and I have mine.

So, can we agree to disagree, without making it personal? Or is that how you will continue to respond to simple questions?

CC

As you have been sent to the naughty step for making your feelings known about certain recently dead American politicians, your motives for starting this thread deserve to be questioned. If you think that's 'personal', hit the ! button.

Question my motives all you want. I already expressed my regrets there. Plus I don't have to resort to that feature, when there are more logical and mature options.

Anyway, do the rest of you feel that keeping public personalities out of our obituary announcements would contribute to more civility around here (by me, Connard and many others)?

CC

First you need to define a 'public personality'. The recently deceased Harry Patch was certainly that, at least over here in the UK. As he was the last fighting Tommy, I defy anyone to find controversy in his life or his passing.

TMP link

YMMV

In that case, another category could be to include non-controversial announcements about servicemen.

Does that sound reasonable?

CC

As you have discovered CC, 'reasonable' and the anonymity of the internet are not happy bedfellows.

I reckon Bill has enough to do around here without having to police the obits board and decide who is and who isn't a controversial stiff. Hence my first post and the 'behaving like an adult' jibe.

I walk roughshod over many people here , but I usually manage to contain my venom when the death of another human being is involved. Apart from the usual genocidal maniacs and serial killers et. al., of course. Some of whom may or may not have been members of the PIRA.

Connard: "I reckon Bill has enough to do around here without having to police the obits board and decide who is and who isn't a controversial stiff."

If Bill has to monitor the individual posts on those threads, wouldn't it be easier to monitor what threads may incite controversy and just "nip it in the bud"?

I would think the latter would be much easier to do.

Bill, what are your thoughts on this?

CC

Jesus. Yet again, someone gets dawghaused, then goes on a crusade to change the established rules to suit himself.\

If you want to attack a dead politician for whatever reason, then join the blue fez. That will allow you to "dance on the person's grave", which you quite explicitly stated elsewhere you should be allowed to do and to hell with how other people prefer to deal with such situations. There's lots of negative comments I've wanted to make about particular famous persons listed in TMP's obituary board over the years – there was one recent fellow I'd have loved to lambast as I don't think he was worth the rations he wasted over his life time – but I didn't.

Take responsibility for your actions, which were in violation of estalished rules and stop trying to make yourself "innocent" by ranting and moaning nd groaning about changing the rules. Such action serves only to make a total ass of the person who behaves in such a way.
--
Tim

Harry Patch … the last fighting Tommy…I defy anyone to find controversy in his life or his passing.

Challenge …Accepted!!!

Patch fervently believed war was "organised murder". "It was not worth it," he said. "It was not worth one, let alone all the millions."

link

What's so controversial about that, coming from a veteran, especially a veteran of WWI? Only an idiot with no historical knowledge or no experience of physically or psychologically maiming of self, relative, and/or buddies he trained with would think war is worth it. Sometimes there is no choice, but it is never worth it.
--
Tim

I like your posts, CC, they are usually quite interesting.

My advice is to let this one die.
If you can't, then join the Blue Fez.

Regards, the Gorb

there is no choice, but it is never worth it.

I quite agree
Morerover; the man has earned the right to his opinion, clearly, but:
If you are implying the opinion is completely acceptable to all parties,
non-contextually,
I thing you are being a bit disingenuous..

Only an idiot with no historical knowledge or no experience of physically or psychologically maiming of self, relative, and/or buddies he trained with would think war is worth it.

Care to wager that we have a couple of those around…?

My point was that -any- obituary is likely to get a rise out of someone=

Gorb,

Thanks. They keep bringing up my insensitive comments on the Kennedy obit.

I'm just thinking of how easy it is for many to fall for typical and atypical behavior and to come up with a possible solution to prevent that.

I'm thinking more of the future than the past. They can't see that obviously. :)

CC

Volstagg: "My point was that -any- obituary is likely to get a rise out of someone="

So you also think this suggestion is just a lost cause?

CC
PS. Bill, what do you think? Wasted effort?

I would rather see it stay the way it is. I find a fair number of obit posts are of interest to me, and are news I would otherwise miss.

Glad to see you back CC.

IrishSerb,

Glad to be back. The time away allowed me some much needed rest. I feel much more relaxed and focused. I feel a bit more like myself.

Though I do understand what you mean. There are a few times when I miss out on some interesting events.

CC

While I'd echo the comments above and am a big fan of your posts, normally, you are behaving like you have had some kind of melt down over the Kennedy death.

Thanks. They keep bringing up my insensitive comments on the Kennedy obit.
…
I'm thinking more of the future than the past. They can't see that obviously. :)

No, you are trying to justify your behaviour that got you doghoused. Like Gord says, let it die, for heaven sake.

Please go back to the sorts of posts that you usually make that are a large part of why TMP is such a great place to visit.
--
Tim

Ditto,

Sorry you feel those are my intentions. I simply had a lot of time to think and thought of how I was drawn to act in such an uncharasteristic manner. But I see how, so soon after my release, some might think I'm trying to resurrect a topic I would rather not revisit.

Maybe you, Gord and others are absolutely right. I should just let this one die.

CC

Let the dead bury the dead.
Give them a week, and then pile on.

BTW, . Not that it mattered …

Does anyone make 15mm 1969 Oldsmobiles?
Does anyone make seated 15mm female aids?
Does anyone make seated drunk 15mm senators?
Does anyone make 15mm tidal basins or 15mm bridges made from wooden pilings?

No?
Just thought I would ask.

Why are you suggesting that the poor girl had AIDS?

To quote the motto of the Franco-American Society of Biddeford, Maine, who had it engraved in stone above the entrance to their building: "Et pourquois pas?"

Elvis is still dead.

Does anyone make seated drunk 15mm senators?

I'd think the best plan would be to have one body and a large variety of heads… so you can portray your favorite public threat.

As for changing the obituary threads/rules…
Leave it as it is and leave the rules as they are… no point changing stuff because a handful of folks can't control themselves.
If you're gonna start removing any sections that cause bickering then you'll soon have nothing left.

"If you're gonna start removing any sections that cause bickering then you'll soon have nothing left."

LOL

CC

Have we had an obit for the dead horse yet?

Cavemen:

picture

picture

Dinosaurs:

picture

picture

picture

Random thought process:

link

Anyone use cotton buds/ q-tips as 1/144 biplane struts?

I agree with CC. Unless related to the military or gaming all obits belong on the CA board.

Newsflash: There is no CA board.

Since Ted Kennedy was in the Army from 1951-53 wouldn't that make his Obit "military" related :P ? Robert

I agree with CC. Unless related to the military or gaming all obits belong on the CA board.

What JJCH, kyote and kaos said. Also review my first post on this thread, especially the bit about self-restraint.

Much as I hate more control, make 'disrespecting the dead on the obit board' a DH offence and watch the problem go away.

Bill, what do you think?

My thinking is that people are going to post obits, so there might as well be a place for them to go. That way, people can "turn them off" who aren't interested. Therefore, the Obituaries board.

I'd rather not move the Obituaries board to the Blue Fez, because people will still post obits, then someone will say "Blue Fez it!" and it gets silly.

Therefore, I think the "respecting the dead" rules for that board is a practical solution, as well as reflecting traditional Western customs.

Understood. Thanks.

CC

Volstagg – you beat me to it – there was certainly some controversy as certain establishment elements poured on their "praise" that seemed to present Patch and his motives for fighting in a light that he would have not recognised.

They rather side-stepped his feeling on the "sacrifice" made by the common soldier : "It was not worth one, let alone all the millions."