Myrna_Minkoff

Myrna_Minkoff

55p

122 comments posted · 25 followers · following 9

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 6 replies · +3 points

Telling a commenter to "just stop" is asshole behavior. Sorry. That's not the type of thing that's going to keep me coming back and contributing and it sure as hell isn't going to make me donate so I can get reprimanded for asking a very simple question.

I'm done. Not that anyone gives a shit.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 15 replies · +5 points

Then nothing. I just find it ironic that they keep putting up these posts about it that overlook a major issue several people had and then claim it's all said and done, no further discussion wanted.

Bots has now told me twice that I "need to stop." Is that really the atmosphere we want here? I posted two short comments -- it's hardly a rant. Last I checked, the whole point of this place was a bunch of opinionated people talking about stuff.

We went from anarchist to dictatorship in the course of about two weeks.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 1 reply · +5 points

There's a whole lot of assumption and flat out wrong in there. They did indeed suspend his author account. I thought that was pretty obvious. And yes, he can comment. The fact that he can comment and hasn't (to my knowledge) used that to "rant and rave" pretty much disproves your second point. He said he was surprised, he never claimed to be a victim. All that shit you just wrote is you putting words in his mouth and then blaming him for them.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 18 replies · +5 points

If it was about breaking rules, why drag in Salome being more popular and the "his article sucked" angle? No one would have questioned it if you just said, "He broke the rules, so we're taking away the account." For that matter, if he was the only one breaking that rule, why the public sturm und drang in the first place?

I have no problem with taking away his author account. I'm talking about the method and tone, which again, really hasn't been addressed.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 9 replies · +3 points

He ignored private warnings, so they had to do it publicly? Wrong. They could've just disabled his account. Problem solved There is absolutely no practical purpose I have yet heard for doing so publicly.

They chose to make a big honking deal about it for reasons they still haven't really articulated -- and then expressed surprise that people took it as a big honking deal.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - The (Accidentally On-P... · 3 replies · +4 points

While there are certainly people who make a habit of falling for unavailable/taken types, there are times when you meet someone who rocks your world -- and one or both of you is not available. Even when the parties involved make every effort to keep it above board, it makes for a certain amount of drama. Trust me.

You can't really make yourself stop loving a person. You can remove a certain amount of temptation by limiting contact, etc., but the emotions are still there.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 53 replies · +10 points

Still think it sucked, sorry. You could've just revoked his author approval and been done with it.

I'm not sure I get the point of the public nature. If it was to send a message, who was the message for? As far as I can tell, OMGP was the only one breaking the self-publishing rule.

If it was to be funny...well, obviously it wasn't very funny to a lot of the commenters.

Which leaves me with what seems to have been the real point: Some folks didn't like OMGP and therefore when the chance came to be mean to him, it was taken. Quite a few of the commenters were very obviously taking utter delight in his demise. There was a distinct 7th grade feel to some of the comments.

For the record: I'm not an OMGP "fan," I don't think I even interacted with him, and I surely couldn't tell you anything about him other than he was a longtime commenter at the old place and his name made me chuckle. I'd feel this way regardless of who the actual executee was.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - A brief word about pub... · 0 replies · +2 points

I don't think that's an eye....

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - Sunday Sleep-In Open T... · 0 replies · +1 points

I call bullshit. Everyone likes cheese biscuits.

488 weeks ago @ Crasstalk - No One Here Gets Out A... · 0 replies · +1 points

It's never too soon. You aren't likely to slip into dementia any time soon, but a car accident or something similar could leave any us in exactly the same position.
https://www.intensedebate.com/people/Myrna_Minkoff
www.intensedebate.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2020-29
22454
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:I67DVMRL7Q5SFD2ZXSSEZY4OBYREBWZ6
<urn:uuid:170a32fa-014c-4dbb-8e98-c11c2f58dd66>
2020-07-14T04:20:53Z
192.0.123.246
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:HQ2BQQ2KSVKKRH3X67H3KZFYDDTOOCJJ
<urn:uuid:acef9da1-604b-4c74-b65e-4313bd679c05>
https://www.intensedebate.com/people/Myrna_Minkoff
response
<urn:uuid:968232c1-d6b6-4db3-852b-99fa16633993>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2020-29
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July 2020
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-149.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.17 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/