It’s sad that there’s such few episodes though. I rented them back in 92 and watched them all back to back. Such a short show.
Is that Fawlty Towers? Never could get into that.
In a thread not all that long ago in which I pointed out that Qt3 is deeply unwelcoming to people outside of the center-left-to-left political mainstream here (like, for instance, me), I was laughed off. Several people who support a more welcoming Qt3 in this thread told me, in effect, that my feeling unwelcomed in some contexts wasn’t just unjustified, but was altogether invalid. Frankly, for that reason I’m more sympathetic than you might expect to Nesrie’s concerns, and why I haven’t chipped in yet despite being closer to RickH than most of the other posters in this thread.
At the same time, though, I realize that my unwillingness to throw up barricades and sing the Internationale makes me a bit of an outlier here culturally, and that as Rick was saying just now, it’s incumbent on me, to a degree, to avoid getting offended. Hand in hand with that responsibility, I see one to be inoffensive to the best of my ability. That said, I’m definitely not willing to listen to moralizing sermons and tone-policing from people who have told me, when I’ve griped about Qt3’s welcoming nature or lack thereof along different axes, to put up or get out.
That means there’s no filler. I kind of prefer the shorter, more compact British model to the lengthy American model.
Yeah. It took me a couple of rewatches of the first few eps to click with me. You have to get over that Basil Fawlty is INSANELY unlikeable, and even though you might love John Cleese, watching terrible things happen to Basil Fawlty is just so satisfying.
I disagree. I felt there were a couple of episodes in each season that were mostly filler, in that they relied so much on slapstick humor and not much else. Now, granted, John Cleese is really good at Slapstick, but still, I felt those episodes dragged.
Is that true of the P&R sub-forum, or do you think it’s true of all the other forums as well? Also, did this happen before the great exodus, or after?
Well I think the not so subtle subtext here is we are not discussing making qt3 a more welcome place for conservatives or those on the right. We are discussing making it more welcoming for those in the political center, the left, women and people of colour.
Nobody has been advocating for making it more welcoming to those on the right, if you would like to, have at it.
The only assistance I can offer is the qoute from CS Lewis when he spoke about the Socratic club at Oxford which aimed to bring together voices from Philosophy & Christianity. It remains for me a useful touchstone when discussing opposing views on the internet.
"In any fairly large and talkative community such as a university, there is always the danger that those who think alike should gravitate together into ‘coteries’ where they will henceforth encounter opposition only in the emasculated form of rumor that the outsiders say thus and thus. The absent are easily refuted, complacent dogmatism thrives, and differences of opinion are embittered by group hostility. Each group hears not the best, but the worst, that the other groups can say.”
P&R doesn’t count, it exists to keep that sort of thing out of the real forum, and one of the few rules we do have is bringing up fights from elsewhere in unrelated threads. So you can be an ostracized trumpkin in P&R and still feel welcome talking about videogames and movies and whatnot.
You say that but I believe the dissect Nesire stuff mostly came from my participation and unwillingness to simmer down in the PR section, not really the rest of it.
So I think the concerns being voiced here are forum wide.
It matters though, right? I mean if someone talks about a game with you in one forum and you have a great time, then you read their posts in a another sub forum and they call everyone of your political or religious persuasion an idiot or they hold beliefs which are offensive to you then surely you will think of them differently in the main forum?
I dont have a solution here just trying to help clarify a potential problem.
They didn’t bring up anything from P&R here that I saw. Of course their biases may remain, but they don’t poison the discussion.
Understood, I was more trying to gauge the feelings of conservative qt3 here. If there is a feeling that we (OK I will just speak for myself) , if i make visiting qt3 a less pleasant experience because of my strident left views in p&r that would give me pause and I would modify my posting. That would be nothing to do with self censorship, more to do with good manners.
I suspect you are not the person making things uncomfortable, Rob ;-)
I think I’ve been consistent on this view but maybe not (I do get pissy on the regular, tbh) so I’ll be clear here. I think in P&R there are specific posters (and quite a few of them) who are downright hostile to conservatives. This is not appropriate and I try to call it out every now and then (the same way I try to call out “boys behaving badly” which happens quite a bit too).
I’m not terribly consistent about any of it because no one wants to be a thread cop, myself included.
Also I think it’s clear if you’re in P&R that I’m wayyyy over on the left, if that matters to you.
It was a few months ago, in that thread where the one new guy got piled on, took some ill-advised swings back, and got banned.
That’s the thing—I don’t really mind if it isn’t outright welcoming to those of us on the right, as long as it’s not outright hostile. To Qt3’s credit, that’s almost universally the case outside of P&R here. I can carry on a perfectly happy forum existence here shooting the breeze about games, food, and beer. I’m fine with a non-politicized hangout.
I’m also fine with being civil to people as a rule. (I hope I succeed at it. Let me know if I don’t.) Nor do I mind censoring myself, to a degree, for the sake of community. (I already do.) I just draw the line at a shifting, ephemeral definition of ‘civil’.
Assuming this is referring to me (at least in part) I’d like to respond in this context, if possible, about the way I earlier dissected your post without actually reliving that debate.
It didn’t occur to me until this post that you connected that with P&R, because whether my perception was accurate or whether my response was justified, I saw it as something to address in the way you communicate throughout the forum, not something linked to a specific topic, political or otherwise.
And to the extent I can be self aware, I look the same way at my own “someone on the Internet is WRONG”, thread-copping, pedantic tendencies—it’s my inclination regardless of the topic.
Cheers, I would hope not, but you know, there are plenty of places I can go and insult Republicans and Trump (its not like there is a shortage). If stopping doing that here would enhance the community then its a thing I could happily give up.
I appreciate your candor, and I understand where you’re coming from. You were not alone though in your approach to try and dissect and change my behavior into whatever other people think is more acceptable, and no it wasn’t actually your post I was referencing specifically when I mentioned that I think P&R is a part of this conversation.
I firmly believe, still, I am not the most aggressive person here, I don’t even say the most outrageous things nor do I run around saying thing like @WhollySchmidt I really think you just need to stop talking which is what does happen to me here, but no that’s not all a reflection of how I felt you approached.
I will say that we do have two conservative voices here, one that just posts random stuff from not reputable sources without even a conversation or a opinion and then vanishes, and another one that kind of dive bombs discussions and vanishes, but I don’t think either of those are really contributing to the less than welcoming atmosphere because the community, in general, doesn’t really respond like that’s okay.
I think conservative voices should be welcome though. If they don’t feel like they can participate in P&R, that’s a shame. But I am drawing a distinction between conservative voices and those that tell women and minority voices to get back in their corners and shut-up.
That’s just me though. I wouldn’t tell someone to leave the forum because they feel like telling me racism is in my head and water under the bridge, but i will give them a good what for in return… in PR. If they want to talk about how to grow crops in ECO, I try to leave that in PR.
I expect I don’t have to tell you, but arguing against an entire forum is exhausting. I certainly don’t have the stamina to keep it up, much optimism about changing people’s minds, or the inclination to tilt at windmills.
I don’t really read these threads to participate in them, anyway, for the reasons above. I read them because doing so is a good exercise in thoughtfulness and empathy. Occasionally I think it’s worthwhile for me to provide an opposing viewpoint in the same spirit.
Your’e right. It’s extremely exhausting. I take a week off now and then even.
The thing is though, we already have conservative voices here. I might be called out to provide stats or something but I feel like there are a members here already with this viewpoint, active members. So unlike say women and minorities, we have the participants right here so the work in this area would be different but no less important.
If someone is not comfortable voicing a viewpoint, afraid of the pile on, there must be a better way. I do have some so-called conservative views. I have felt that arguing against the forum because of them but because i encounter that so often anyway, it’s just one more notch. But for others…
I’m not sure how to address that. I think new fresh topics, monthly ones, and a welcome to QT3 topic might help new comers but the discourse between groups with differing views, even opposing ones, that’s rough. If we could figure that out we might stop wars!
Might help if we try to reduce the use of broader labels. No really likes that…
I would have no issue with making this a welcoming place for reasonable people on the right.