# General Topics > General Discussion & News >  Harsh words = no help!!

## Gail

I have seen several threads when some one has come to frog forum for help and then another person will respond harshly on the public site instead of sending their response via PM.  The only reason people are here is because they truly love the amphibians and are seeking advise from experienced people instead of all the conflicting information on the web.  And also to share in their wonderful experiences they with their amphibians. Yes it's very sad when some one loses a friend because of mis-information, and it's very frustrating to those who read it, but more so the person who lost their frog or toad because of ignorance on their part!?!  Think about how they feel!  Next time you want to respond in a not so positive way please PM the person.  My concern is that if someone is in need they won't look for help here and isn't that what community is about, helping those in need?

----------

Pandora3d

----------


## Jen

A very good reminder - - the problem with text is it is very hard to convey tone.  Something can easily be taken much harsher than intended and it can cause more harm than good.

It is also good to remember to not to "read into" the tone the poster is using - sometimes we can take offense when none is being given.

----------


## Gail

Jenna, I agree with trying to convey emotion through text which can be tricky. But then also the emotion of the person on the other side of the conversation may be running high and hard to distinguish what others are trying to say.  Most of the people on the site have a love for amphibians that is not understood by most.  My husband and friends look at me like I'm some crazy old woman when I talk about my frogs & toads and how excited I get at small things they do.  My neighbor gets me, when I'm over at her place and the frogs do something as simple as turn their heads and give you a look we both get excited and laugh.  I'm just asking that people praise in public and reprimand in private.

----------


## Terry

Hi Gail:

I do understand your concern. As Jenna mentioned, it is difficult to convey the tone of your post. That is why "smilies" should be used often, at least this helps set the proper mood. We are also aware that many people have a difficult time writing what they really feel and sometimes use the wrong word or context. The forum also has many international friends that may not have a good understanding of English. My best advice is to be patient and understanding and not to quickly jump to conclusions. 

Another idea that can really help, if someone looses a cherished pet, please don't point fingers at that person and say its their fault. Try to be compassionate and also give the best advice possible. Working together, we can make this forum even better.

----------


## Gail

bravo Terry, bravo


> Hi Gail:
> 
> I do understand your concern. As Jenna mentioned, it is difficult to convey the tone of your post. That is why "smilies" should be used often, at least this helps set the proper mood. We are also aware that many people have a difficult time writing what they really feel and sometimes use the wrong word or context. The forum also has many international friends that may not have a good understanding of English. My best advice is to be patient and understanding and not to quickly jump to conclusions. 
> 
> Another idea that can really help, if someone looses a cherished pet, please don't point fingers at that person and say its their fault. Try to be compassionate and also give the best advice possible. Working together, we can make this forum even better.

----------


## Poly

> Another idea that can really help, if someone looses a cherished pet, please don't point fingers at that person and say its their fault. Try to be compassionate and also give the best advice possible.


Hey Terry, I agree with your above statement, but to a point.

When I come across threads about people removing WC animals from their natural environments, and subsequently killing them because they did not do research, that is very frustrating, and to be honest I am thinking about how the animals death could have been avoided rather than being "compassionate"...

I realize it's different with CB animals, they were not taken from their natural enviroment, but again, when someone subsequently ends up killing them because they did not do research, it is hard to feel compassion for that person.

What I find disturbing is the "Oh well, I learned something" excuse. 

*Why does it take the death of someone's animals for them to learn, why not learn beforehand!? It dosen't make sense!*

I'm not saying harsh words are in any beneficial to a reply, but there is certainly no issue with letting someone know what they *could and should* have done to save their pet's life.

----------


## Martin

With the risk of serious emotional ****storm...

I do agree that plainly being mean have obviously no purpose at all. However, there's a difference between being mean, being neutral and just sugarcoating something that really is serious. For example, if someone loses an old frog, that lived a healthy life in good care, there's not much to say (assuming it died of old age), beside giving your condolences. However, if someone post a first post, saying their frog died after a year abruptly after being perfectly fine at the start of their ownership, there is a good reason to start asking questions. Of course, there's no reason to go all "lol u suck u shdnt hav pet ur terrible y did u do nothin?!?!", but I beleive it's not good to be all.. fuzzy, about it either. An animal died, and it could be (and in some cases, it's really obvious) their fault, if I may say so. In these cases, I beleive it can be good to be harsh, because it's simply not OK to get an animal and have no clue what-so-ever on how to care for it. Sure, it's better do to research later than never, but still... I should be done way, way beforehand. Once again, I'm not saying it's good to be rude/mean/talk sh*t, but it is a very serious situation and should be treated like that, not with  :Smile:  :Smile:  :Smile:  :Smile:  :Smile:  :Smile:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin: D :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  :Big Grin:  just because the person might feel like it's their fault (which, then again, it is in some cases).
  Using emotions like  :Smile: /:P/ :Wink:  is all good, but I think it should not be used excessively either. And in some situations, they're better left out of it. But then again, if your post can be interpreted like something that you do not want to, they're a great tool to use that situation.

One other thing, on a slightly related topic. It's not always that tempting to sound all friendly and all-loving, when it's the gazillionth time the same week a new thread is started exact same topic/question... A quick search, or just a look in the relevant section, will often reveal a ton of information. Or when people just ask questions because they're too lazy to Google it themselves (like "whats a dumpy frog"/"does exoterra have lightning bulbs"/other questions that can be found *instantly* by googling the exact same question).

Also, this forum do lack some of the very basic aspects/understandings/things that most forums have (not saying it's either good or bad, just saying, and this do alter the tone of people/what people say/how they say it.). Many (if not most) forums are much more moderated and do not tolerate (giving out warnings, eventually leading to bans) things like:
- Necroposting
- Starting threads without searching first (and thereby creating a ton of threads with the exact same substance)
- Using threads like a chat

Lastly, it's the Internet. People really should be used by the tone by now.


Now, just sit back and brace for impact...

----------



----------


## Gail

Ok, ya'll are missing my point here.  I suggest using the PM system for negative responses.  (no icon for rolling eyes)

----------


## Poly

> Ok, ya'll are missing my point here.  I suggest using the PM system for negative responses.  (no icon for rolling eyes)


And you are missing our point. Our responses arn't "negative" we are simple informing the individual what they could have done to save their animals life, how in any way is that negative?

----------


## Gail

I'm done with this...........you just aren't getting it.  If you're gonna tell somebody that if they would have done this, then their amphibians would most likely still be alive, do it on a PM.

----------


## Poly

Yeah, yeah, I've got it Gail... I'll respond to your PM now.....

----------


## Martin

This, I really don't get. How is sending a private PM better than posting in public? To me, personally, I would feel way more "abused" or attacked, if you will, if someone PM aggresively instead. Also, if you do not want peoples opinion, a public forum (where forum is the keyword) is probably not the place to post it.

Lastly, this is quite interesting. The OP is stating something and likes people who agrees. But when other people expresses their opinions, which the OP does not agree with, a very defensive and almost rude tone is used, instead of calmly continue the discussing (since there are no right and wrong in this). Quite iroinc, considering the topic of the thread...

----------



----------


## Poly

> Lastly, this is quite interesting. The OP is stating something and likes people who agrees. But when other people expresses their opinions, which the OP does not agree with, a very defensive and almost rude tone is used, instead of calmly continue the discussing (since there are no right and wrong in this). Quite iroinc, considering the topic of the thread...


Gee Martin, what an observation, it does seem that way, dosen't it? Iroinic indeed.

----------


## Gail

It comes down to this.  Label some one as a “killer” and the chances are they won't be back for help on this site.  I just hate to see some one leave and be caregivers of amphibians on their own.

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

Alright guys. Let me lay it down for you. The point is (PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND RIDICULE!) She is trying to stop this by having your fights and scoldings done through PM rather than out where everyone can see and read it. What she is saying makes perfect sence and you all are arguing for nothing. All points aside its obviously getting nowhere. Some thing should be better done in private.

Now I'm no stranger to "giving what for" to those who have bad husbandry due to lack of research and diliborate abuse of their animals for their amusement or because they saw it on YouTube. The point is that we want members and guests to come back and stay here not leave because someone was overly harsh. There is a right way to say they did wrong by their pet publically without truely offending the person.

Believe me I know first hand.

----------

kueluck

----------


## Martin

> I'm done with this...........you just aren't getting it.


To be honest, I'm not sure that it's that I don't get you, as much as it's you not getting me. Perhaps, it's a mix of both.





> I suggest using the PM system for negative responses.


I understand what you are saying, but if the forum is supposed to be "positive" responses alone, it's not going to be much of a forum and no discussion at all. Unless you're talking about being simply mean/rude without any help at all, and if that's the case, it should not be PMed at all, but rather left out all together.





> Alright guys. Let me lay it down for you. The point is (PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND RIDICULE!) She is trying to stop this by having your fights and scoldings done through PM rather than out where everyone can see and read it. What she is saying makes perfect sence and you all are arguing for nothing. All points aside its obviously getting nowhere. Some thing should be better done in private.
> 
> Now I'm no stranger to "giving what for" to those who have bad husbandry due to lack of research and diliborate abuse of their animals for their amusement or because they saw it on YouTube. The point is that we want members and guests to come back and stay here not leave because someone was overly harsh. There is a right way to say they did wrong by their pet publically without truely offending the person.
> 
> Believe me I know first hand.


"PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND RIDICULE" is of course not good. "fights and scoldings" should be done by PM, I agree. But I was not talking for any of those things, and I'm pretty sure wasn't Poly either. We both agreed with kueluck, tgampper and Jenste on that point. What we really said was this: "There is a right way to say they did wrong by their pet publically without truely offending the person", which you said yourself. Everyone agrees that it's bad to just flame someone. So, I find your "you all are arguing for nothing" strange, since we basically said the same thing, you, me and Poly (on that subject).

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

> To be honest, I'm not sure that it's that I don't get you, as much as it's you not getting me. Perhaps, it's a mix of both.
> 
> 
> 
> I understand what you are saying, but if the forum is supposed to be "positive" responses alone, it's not going to be much of a forum and no discussion at all. Unless you're talking about being simply mean/rude without any help at all, and if that's the case, it should not be PMed at all, but rather left out all together.
> 
> 
> 
> "PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND RIDICULE" is of course not good. "fights and scoldings" should be done by PM, I agree. But I was not talking for any of those things, and I'm pretty sure wasn't Poly either. We both agreed with kueluck, tgampper and Jenste on that point. What we really said was this: "There is a right way to say they did wrong by their pet publically without truely offending the person", which you said yourself. Everyone agrees that it's bad to just flame someone. So, I find your "you all are arguing for nothing" strange, since we basically said the same thing, you, me and Poly (on that subject).


Everyone has a different perspective of the same point. Me saying you all are arguing for nothing is not stange. Understand that if you all agree on the subject, then why are you 3 arguing about the same point? Instead of you 3 going back and forth over a something you agree on which if you think about it, its silly. You all agree with each other yet you and Royce are ganging up on Gail and even with Royce being a smart*** to Gail. Saying "yeah yeah, We got it Gail. Ill respond to your PM now" is uncalled for.If you all agree than why are you 3 arguing?

It doesn't make sence.

----------


## Lynn

> I have seen several threads when some one has come to frog forum for help and then another person will respond harshly on the public site instead of sending their response via PM.  The only reason people are here is because they truly love the amphibians and are seeking advise from experienced people instead of all the conflicting information on the web.  And also to share in their wonderful experiences they with their amphibians. Yes it's very sad when some one loses a friend because of mis-information, and it's very frustrating to those who read it, but more so the person who lost their frog or toad because of ignorance on their part!?!  Think about how they feel!  Next time you want to respond in a not so positive way please PM the person.  My concern is that if someone is in need they won't look for help here and isn't that what community is about, helping those in need?


Oh !!! I can't bear it . I have to chime in- with my acknowledgment to  and respect for Frog Forum.

I have (several times) been taken back by a reply to a post. I have logged off thinking I will NEVER go back. Maybe its just me; Im sensitive. I have tried very hard , personally to get along, if you will ? 

There is a pull here for ME though. It is John. ( and frogs  :Smile:  hehehe )  Read his posts ; he never sounds like this !!! Have respect for the founder of this forum! Its that simple!! 

Everyone has heard people disagreeing. Sometimes it sounds funny and sometimes it sounds merely unpleasant; but whatever it sounds like, I believe we can ALL learn something very important from LISTENING to the kind of things (FF members) say to each other. They say things like this: 'How'd you like it if anyone did the same to you?'  or You are wrong !

What is interesting about remarks like this is that the person who makes them is merely saying that the other persons behavior does not happen to please them! Unfortunately, some NEVER reply. Sadly, the just go away  :Frown:  

AND we ALL know who these members are  :Frown: 

Right or Wrong ?-  The Law of Right and Wrong aka the Law of Nature
These reactions are  human nature. But remember, if you leave a fellow FF member unsupported ( in any way )  in mid-air, they will fall like a stone.  

I hope you will not misunderstand what I am trying to say. I am not trying to preach, and I do not make believe I am better than anyone else here. I am only trying to call attention to a fact; the fact that this year, or this month, or, more likely, this very day, we have failed conduct ourselves in the way we should have. 

Lynn

----------


## wesleybrouwer

To be completely honest, i did not read trough all of the posts entirely  :Smile:  

But i think that it's just the way someone takes the advice.
I don't see much extreme harsh answers around frogforum.
Telling someone that they are keeping the frogs wrong or whatever, in my opinion, isn't ment to be rude, but to educate.
If this may only be done trough PM, there isn't anything to learn from the mistakes others make.
Maybe someone else reads the advice, and will see the way they are keeping their pets is wrong.
When taking action to this, you may just prevent another frog dying.
You simply can't expect everybody is just cheering you up, encouraging to take a new frog, when it is clearly something that could've been avoided in the first place.

Now there are lots of petstores providing incomplete, incorrect or just no info at all.
But then again, it's the responsibility of the person buying an animal, to know at least what the basic care is.
What i do see a lot, is people start asking questions when it's to late.
Now you may think "it's just a frog", but when you let a puppy die because of neglectency, i bet it's a different story?
Not in my opinion. If you descide to take care of a pet, you have to do everything in you're power to make sure it gets the best care possible.
Going about a forum telling your dog died because you did not know it needed something different then cabbage won't give you people telling you their sorry for you're loss either.

Not to be harsh or anything, but i hope you do reccon were taking responsibilty of a live that can't take care of it's own  :Smile:

----------


## Martin

> Everyone has a different perspective of the same point. Me saying you all are arguing for nothing is not stange. Understand that if you all agree on the subject, then why are you 3 arguing about the same point? Instead of you 3 going back and forth over a something you agree on which if you think about it, its silly. You all agree with each other yet you and Royce are ganging up on Gail and even with Royce being a smart*** to Gail. Saying "yeah yeah, We got it Gail. Ill respond to your PM now" is uncalled for.If you all agree than why are you 3 arguing?
> 
> It doesn't make sence.


First of all, my post have been cluttered with "personally", "I find", "I think", "I beleive" etc. This means I'm talking about my opinion on these subjects, not necessarily what's objectively right or wrong. I said that I, personally, In my humble opinion, find your statement that we are all arguing for nothing, is a little bit strange, since we are not. We are agreeing on some points, but not on some other. A civilized discussion between people with different opinion is not "for nothing". I do agree with some of the things that have been said here, which I have state several times already. But then again, I have a different opinion on some of the things that are talked about. People having different opinions, and the heart to talk about them, is nothing but good, as long as people know how to discuss without thinking that they are attacked personally. Which leads me to my next point...





> You all agree with each other yet you and Royce are ganging up on Gail


How am I ganging up with anyone? Because we have the same opinion..? If so, then you, tgampper, Jenste and kauluck are all horribly ganging up on me, assaulting me even! Of course, that's not the case, and you are not ganging up. Just as I did not gang up with anyone. I just said what I believed, and it's not agreed by everyone, but then again, some do agree. Nothing strange or assaulting in that. I really beleive that people (in general) need to discuss without feeling attacked. I think this subject is a very good one to discuss, and it obviously is since there are different opinions about it. The keyword is just to discuss, not just blinding scream at and flame everyone that does not share your opinions.





> If you all agree than why are you 3 arguing?


Just to clarify one last time, since this was the ending question in your post: We are discussing because we have different opinions (about some things, while agreeing on others), simple as that. It sometimes seems like this forum in general (not saying that you or anyone else in this discussion thinks this) treats discussion as bad thing and that it should be avoided by all means. That's bad, if you ask me. Discussion is good. Discussion is a way of learning and sharing opinions. People just need to learn that it's the topic that are discussed, not the people. A forum is meant to be a place where discussion is held, just look at actual word "forum"  :Smile: 


EDIT1: I just want to say again, that I personally think sending an angry PM to someone is far more intimidating that replying with a post. But that could very well be just me. (And again, just being plainly mean is not good in any way)

EDIT2: Lastly, I'm done clarifying what a discussion is, and will therefore not adress that anymore. I've delivered my opinion and beliefs on this topic. I will continue following this thread, but only reply to "new information", so to say. I  hope everyone reads this thread, since it's a good subject to discuss!

----------


## Flemish

To my opinioun, it does not serve "greater purpose" to flame a person in PM.
- Flaming a person for any concidered to be "wrong doing" should not take place at all.... 
 (Sending it in PM does only serve purpose leave "rest of us at peace") (!)
 Better to sit on the hands... Or leave the computer!
- If one on the other hand should feel strong urge to do so, better to it in the open. That takes more guts to do so!!
 It is just being too easy hiding behind a screen flaming another person, which is why it should not take place at all...
 (If pointing your finger at another person... 3 fingers points towards yourself!)

- I hope this post is being recieved by everyone as neutral, not directed to any in specific!  :Smile: 

 Flemming.

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

> First of all, my post have been cluttered with "personally", "I find", "I think", "I beleive" etc. This means I'm talking about my opinion on these subjects, not necessarily what's objectively right or wrong. I said that I, personally, In my humble opinion, find your statement that we are all arguing for nothing, is a little bit strange, since we are not. We are agreeing on some points, but not on some other. A civilized discussion between people with different opinion is not "for nothing". I do agree with some of the things that have been said here, which I have state several times already. But then again, I have a different opinion on some of the things that are talked about. People having different opinions, and the heart to talk about them, is nothing but good, as long as people know how to discuss without thinking that they are attacked personally. Which leads me to my next point...
> 
> 
> 
> How am I ganging up with anyone? Because we have the same opinion..? If so, then you, tgampper, Jenste and kauluck are all horribly ganging up on me, assaulting me even! Of course, that's not the case, and you are not ganging up. Just as I did not gang up with anyone. I just said what I believed, and it's not agreed by everyone, but then again, some do agree. Nothing strange or assaulting in that. I really beleive that people (in general) need to discuss without feeling attacked. I think this subject is a very good one to discuss, and it obviously is since there are different opinions about it. The keyword is just to discuss, not just blinding scream at and flame everyone that does not share your opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> Just to clarify one last time, since this was the ending question in your post: We are discussing because we have different opinions (about some things, while agreeing on others), simple as that. It sometimes seems like this forum in general (not saying that you or anyone else in this discussion thinks this) treats discussion as bad thing and that it should be avoided by all means. That's bad, if you ask me. Discussion is good. Discussion is a way of learning and sharing opinions. People just need to learn that it's the topic that are discussed, not the people. A forum is meant to be a place where discussion is held, just look at actual word "forum" 
> ...


It seems like an arguement rather than a discussion because one member that disagreed on your opinions which was seconded by Royce showing you both agreed on the same thing which inturn is frustrating and obviously makeing Gail feel ganged up on to the point to where she no longer wants to respond to a thread she started in the first place.. Since you both reply nack to her at the same time on the same pos and even with sarchasm which in itelf is rude and unecessary. When you voice your opinion in a pushy manner or use sarchasm in a "discussion" it quickly turns to arguement. I've said it a million times "There are no friendly arguements or discussions" now of course not always true, but every friendly discussion I've ever encountered on here that contains difference of opinion which all are entitled too, it ends like this. One or more people angry when all should have been avoided rather than fueled. 

I myself agree with both sides. As you both are right and I w hope you all can see that. Since there is a right way to tell someone they are wrong publically without offending them and using the PM to voice your feelings twards them on their wrongful actions. Now they will feel personally attacked IF you make it so. How we word our replies shows a lot about us does it not? To as you said flame someone infers to really lay into them which probably contains insults as well. I believe this is where ill leave this discussion because ive stated my opinion and so have you all and everyone here has made very valid points and I feel it is settled. You agree and disagree and rather to try and change someone elses opinion it should be respected and let be.

I think we all can agree on that :Smile:

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

> To my opinioun, it does not serve "greater purpose" to flame a person in PM.
> - Flaming a person for any concidered to be "wrong doing" should not take place at all.... 
>  (Sending it in PM does only serve purpose leave "rest of us at peace") (!)
>  Better to sit on the hands... Or leave the computer!
> - If one on the other hand should feel strong urge to do so, better to it in the open. That takes more guts to do so!!
>  It is just being too easy hiding behind a screen flaming another person, which is why it should not take place at all...
>  (If pointing your finger at another person... 3 fingers points towards yourself!)
> 
> - I hope this post is being recieved by everyone as neutral, not directed to any in specific! 
> ...


Its not about guts its about respect. If someone has done wrong they need to be told so. Leaving a PM can be respectful if you imply that you are doing so as to not exspress it in the open. This Forum is for learning. So if a person has done wrong or continues to do so they should be informed with little to no rudeness or humiliation. It should be avoided. Those who just don't care they are doing wrong is a different story all together.

Non the less we should be respectful and constructive not destructive. :Smile:

----------


## Martin

> It seems like an arguement rather than a discussion because one member that disagreed on your opinions which was seconded by Royce showing you both agreed on the same thing which inturn is frustrating and obviously makeing Gail feel ganged up on to the point to where she no longer wants to respond to a thread she started in the first place.. Since you both reply nack to her at the same time on the same pos and even with sarchasm which in itelf is rude and unecessary. When you voice your opinion in a pushy manner or use sarchasm in a "discussion" it quickly turns to arguement. I've said it a million times "There are no friendly arguements or discussions" now of course not always true, but every friendly discussion I've ever encountered on here that contains difference of opinion which all are entitled too, it ends like this. One or more people angry when all should have been avoided rather than fueled.


I just have to answer to this one last them, then I'm all good and onto observer-mode.
Yes, we did answered at the same time, but that was just a coincidence and we had nothing to do with each other. When I started typing, no registered member was even reading the thread. He both started and finished his reply within the time it took me to write mine, so that's not relevant in any way. I'm not aware of me ever using sarcasm (in this thread) either.




> One or more people angry when all should have been avoided rather than fueled.


Not sure who you are referring to. No-one should be angered by this. People have just expressed their opinion, and then I explained some thing further to you (since this particular discussion has pretty much been between you and me alone) and you replied, and I sure are not angry.
I also find this "discussions are bad (almost) always bad" so, so strange on a forum. If discussions are to be avoided, I should probably stop posting all together on FF (or if just you and I keep our distances  :Wink: ) 

(According to many dictionaries I've just checked (both online and paperback), argument = discussion, so I'm not even sure what you're trying to say when "discussions turns into arguments". Not trying to sound rude, I'm just not understanding entirely, since English isn't my native language)

Lastly, I just want to press that I'm not angered or offended by any of this and I hope I have not angered anyone, because that was never my intention. However, I really beleive people need to be able to handle other people not agreeing with them, especially when posting on a public *forum* on ze internet  :Smile:

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

> I just have to answer to this one last them, then I'm all good and onto observer-mode.
> Yes, we did answered at the same time, but that was just a coincidence and we had nothing to do with each other. When I started typing, no registered member was even reading the thread. He both started and finished his reply within the time it took me to write mine, so that's not relevant in any way. I'm not aware of me ever using sarcasm (in this thread) either.
> 
> 
> Not sure who you are referring to. No-one should be angered by this. People have just expressed their opinion, and then I explained some thing further to you (since this particular discussion has pretty much been between you and me alone) and you replied, and I sure are not angry.
> I also find this "discussions are bad (almost) always bad" so, so strange on a forum. If discussions are to be avoided, I should probably stop posting all together on FF (or if just you and I keep our distances ) 
> 
> (According to many dictionaries I've just checked (both online and paperback), argument = discussion, so I'm not even sure what you're trying to say when "discussions turns into arguments". Not trying to sound rude, I'm just not understanding entirely, since English isn't my native language)
> 
> Lastly, I just want to press that I'm not angered or offended by any of this and I hope I have not angered anyone, because that was never my intention. However, I really beleive people need to be able to handle other people not agreeing with them, especially when posting on a public *forum* on ze internet


Lol! No worries Martin. I'm not angered either. Gail seemed to get angry before the end of her posting. That's who I referred to as being angry. I said that when a discussion turns into an arguement it should be avoided. I wish that everyone would just respect one anothers opinion rather than try to change it. When we try to change someones opinion it usually ends in conflict. Since we both respect others opinions why should we avoid one another? :Smile:  we are not arguing, we are discussing correct? Do not misunderstand my intent. :Wink:  since all is well I think we ended on a good note.

----------


## Flemish

@GrifTheGreat
- I was also saying:

"It is just being too easy hiding behind a screen flaming another person, 
 **which is why it should not take place at all..."**

 Meaning, that I do actually agree with you saying:
"Non the less we should be respectful and constructive not destructive."
-Aye certainly. Yes, please... By all means!! (And I believe I am!)  :Smile: 

 By "guts" and "in the open"... I meant maybe one would think twice before risking making a fool of one self in front of everyone.
 Maybe the tone would be somewhat harder writing in PM, is only what I meant!

----------


## Colleen/Jerrod

> @GrifTheGreat
> - I was also saying:
> 
> "It is just being too easy hiding behind a screen flaming another person, 
>  **which is why it should not take place at all..."**
> 
>  Meaning, that I do actually agree with you saying:
> "Non the less we should be respectful and constructive not destructive."
> -Aye certainly. Yes, please... By all means!! (And I believe I am!) 
> ...


Understood, but the tone would not necessarily be harder as long as you try not to make it so.

----------


## Dehumaneyez

Flemish mate you've hit the nail on the head there 100 percent. I am in total agrreeance with your post.

It certainly doesn't pay to harrass anyone online or otherwise, and if you haven't got the nads to do it in public and put yourself up for the same kind of scrutiny than you are not worth much in my eyes, that's for sure.

----------


## Gail

To GrifTheGreat and every one else:  Im not angry at any one, just really frustrated that someone thinks its okay to tell a person that has done everything they possible could to save a frog, who also took advice from this forum, but then some one posted that if they would have done more it may still be alive and to do so in public instead of a PM.  Its hard enough on the person who lost the frog, and then to point fingers at them about the loss. Ive seen this happen more than once and it turns people away from seeking advice here because they have been reprimanded on the public forum, labeled as a frog killer. On a PM you can just ignore it if you so choose.

----------

