Wow, you are really making our point for us and I'm guessing Jeff is reading this and thinking twice about intervening considering it has put wind in your sails on this issue. I'm not the PP you're responding to, but I also weighed in on that thread and I *do* have experience with this, (your first post on this thread said "people with no experience were chiming in." I shared my genuine experiences with you. I was devastated as a child by my parents leaving me behind during a divorce. I've talked to a therapist about it, and that expert told me that it is a mistake that parents make, thinking that it will be better for the kids, and it is almost universally considered to be harmful to the children. Nobody was saying you were trying to compel her. We aren't thinking about hte mom's sensitivities here, we were asking you to consider whether or not this was best for the children. You really think it was a bunch of "meanies" picking on you? And look what you're saying, why do others think they get to control direction of a thread. Nobody thought that except you. Neither I nor anyone was controlling that thread. We were simply responding. And you decided you didn't like the responses so you cried to Jeff to shut them down. If every OP starts doing this, and Jeff intervenes, the usefulness of this thread as an open exchange of information and philosophies will be greatly diminished. And THAT will drive people away.

8:46 again. I do hope Jeff is reading this. My complaint to Jeff wasn’t because of the ‘meanies picking on’ me. As I indicated in my two posts prior to yours on that thread and several other places since, I’m not interested in ‘whether’ we should do this. I’m interested in “how”. I’m sorry your experience as a child was traumatic but your post added no value since it didn’t address my question nor did it give me any information on how we could avoid the mistakes your parents made when leaving you with relatives – other than just “don’t do it”. By itself, your post wasn’t bad and I would have ignored it had others not felt compelled to continue to discuss “whether” we should do it. It was de-railing the thread and the value of the thread to me, the OP. If you wanted an “open exchange of ideas and philosophies’ you should have started your own thread because that’s not what my thread was about. I’m not interested, as you acknowledged in your own post, on whether we should offer to be temporary guardians. Just because DCUM is an open forum doesn’t mean that it’s a free for all. If original posters don’t feel they get useful response, they won’t post any more and that would defeat the purpose of DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:
No, people were challenging the very premise of your very bad idea and you went crying to Jeff because you couldn't handle it, and, yes, he responded, but he's catching grief for it on the feedback page now because what he did, really, was stifle a legitimate discussion to appease your own delicate sensibilities. I understand Jeff's reason for doing it, although I disagree with it and believe he hurt the site's credibility to some degree. Those weren't snarky responses. Those were bonafide objections to the idea that you were trying to get custody of someone else's children.

I think you people criticizing really missed the point. The OP was being kind and conscientious in researching a possible option to offer to the mother. All of your objections should appropriately be directed to the mother to advise her against taking such an offer. But the OP was trying to offer the mother an option. While you have decent reasons for recommending that the mother not take up this option, suggesting that the OP not even offer was not a good recommendation. A person in distress from a traumatic, abusive relationship needs to have options available for digging themselves out. One of the things that contributes to despair, depression and sometimes tragic gestures is when someone feels they have no options. Sometimes even just knowing that there is a caring family that the kids know and like that would be willing to take them if the mother needed it, can give her the strength to carry on. But telling the OP to deprive the mother of even having an option of placing the children in a caring temporary home is heartless and cruel and distinctly unhelpful.

I think Jeff did the right thing to try to steer the thread back to the point.

Calling all nice people?

OP, I wouldn't exactly put you in the nice category.

LOL!

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever gotten a mean, snarky post for absolutely no reason at all? For example you complain that your house is so big that it's hard to keep clean and the mean posters berate you for complaining that you live in a big house? Or you complain that your child can't get enough play dates at his house even though you have a tennis court and swimming pool and the mean posters will be put off and unsupportive because you're rich? Or you're put off when you read women are bashing Michelle Duggar for having so many children so you argue the other point, and then the women all turn on you?

It happens with too much regularity here on DCUM. What do you think can be done about it? Should we all squash the mean poster as a way to discourage others too? Should we all start a new identical thread and keep starting new threads until the mean posters get off? Should we be more mean back to them? Any ideas on how to squash mean spiritedness and bring more civil discussions or even debates to DCUM?

Anonymous wrote:8:46 here. You still don't get it the difference between asking for information on how to do something and asking for discussion on whether something should be done. I contacted Jeff because responses like yours aren't helpful or germane and he's been clear that he wants DCUM to be both. If you couldn't resist the compulsion to opine on the merits of doing it, why didn't you start your own thread? Why do you think you get to define the direction of a thread? The site owners afford you the opportunity to start your own thread, if you feel this diminishes the sites credibility, why do you stay? Since DCUM is the sole source of the owners income, they know best what contributes to the site's success and what takes away from it. Since they will intervene, we can infer what they think contributes to the site and what doesn't. Posts like yours do not. Get over it or start your own thread about it.

Again, posts like yours that continue to misconstrue a question, diverts the thread and degenerates into speculation of an OP's motives does not contribute to this website. I was clear in my thread that I was not trying to obtain custody of someone else's kids. We were interested in "temporary guardianship". In no way were we trying to compel her or do anything in a hostile or adverse manner, we are making an 'offer'. Of course, you still can't see the difference between a post asking for specific information and a post inviting discussion and what you call 'bonafide objections', I call insinuating and misconstruing. Seems like the moderator agreed with me or he would declined to intervene. Oh, and in case you haven't read my update to the thread, we made our offer to the mother yesterday. She was most appreciative and relieved. We don't know if we will take temporary guardianship of her kids but the offer is out there and it gives her options. It doesn't really matter what you think of it but if you want to discuss it further, start your own thread.

Wow, you are really making our point for us and I'm guessing Jeff is reading this and thinking twice about intervening considering it has put wind in your sails on this issue. I'm not the PP you're responding to, but I also weighed in on that thread and I *do* have experience with this, (your first post on this thread said "people with no experience were chiming in." I shared my genuine experiences with you. I was devastated as a child by my parents leaving me behind during a divorce. I've talked to a therapist about it, and that expert told me that it is a mistake that parents make, thinking that it will be better for the kids, and it is almost universally considered to be harmful to the children. Nobody was saying you were trying to compel her. We aren't thinking about hte mom's sensitivities here, we were asking you to consider whether or not this was best for the children. You really think it was a bunch of "meanies" picking on you? And look what you're saying, why do others think they get to control direction of a thread. Nobody thought that except you. Neither I nor anyone was controlling that thread. We were simply responding. And you decided you didn't like the responses so you cried to Jeff to shut them down. If every OP starts doing this, and Jeff intervenes, the usefulness of this thread as an open exchange of information and philosophies will be greatly diminished. And THAT will drive people away.

Anonymous wrote:stfu with your tennis courts and swimming pools! jeeeeeezus. if you don't think that warrants "meanness", then I'm not sure what color the sky is in your world. this is the worst recession/economy since the 1930s, so think before your brag.

As someone else so aptly responded once: F*ck You OP and go complain to Warren Buffett.

11:27 one thread that turned ugly that really seemed absurd to me was about peeling corn at the grocery store!

OP I will go against the grain and say I am with you. These women can complain, bitch, and attack even the most harmless question. What kills me is when one of the snarkiest women thinks they knows it all and attacks the OP with miss information that they will claim is fact.

stfu with your tennis courts and swimming pools! jeeeeeezus. if you don't think that warrants "meanness", then I'm not sure what color the sky is in your world. this is the worst recession/economy since the 1930s, so think before your brag.

OP, honestly, it is representative of D.C. Look around. People here are not all that happy. They look for trouble. So when you are writing, just take that into consideration. They aren't going to run or micromanage anyone's life, they can't even run their own. Otherwise, why in hell would they be on here berating strangers? Hypothetical, of course. It is true in real life too, we have all seen them. Really, think of what sad, lonely creatures they must be to resort to what they do in the name of trying (for maybe a split second) to feel better. It's like a drug and they need intervention - NOT our problem! Don't feed into it. Ignore and move on. When you do, they will still be the miserable ones left behind.

Anonymous wrote:Have you ever gotten a mean, snarky post for absolutely no reason at all? For example you complain that your house is so big that it's hard to keep clean and the mean posters berate you for complaining that you live in a big house? Or you complain that your child can't get enough play dates at his house even though you have a tennis court and swimming pool and the mean posters will be put off and unsupportive because you're rich? Or you're put off when you read women are bashing Michelle Duggar for having so many children so you argue the other point, and then the women all turn on you?

It happens with too much regularity here on DCUM. What do you think can be done about it? Should we all squash the mean poster as a way to discourage others too? Should we all start a new identical thread and keep starting new threads until the mean posters get off? Should we be more mean back to them? Any ideas on how to squash mean spiritedness and bring more civil discussions or even debates to DCUM?

Tee hee! I'm guessing by your choice of examples you are kidding, right? Because you could clearly find better examples of unwarranted meanness.

I like DCUM, its snarky but in real life it is what most people are thinking. Everybody has those snarky thoughts in their head even when talking to friends, here it is just typed out.

Anonymous wrote:Most of the snark is amusing to me and part of the reason I visit this site-I admit it, I like watching the train wreck. However, I recently posted on the For Sale forum a short blurb describing the items I had for sale and got a snarky response there. Snark on the For Sale Forum? Isn't that a little much? I guess where there is no controvery, someone will feel the need to create some. Needless to say, I will not try to sell anything on this website again.

And THIS is why the moderators will intervene. They don't want people driven away from this website.

8:46 here. You still don't get it the difference between asking for information on how to do something and asking for discussion on whether something should be done. I contacted Jeff because responses like yours aren't helpful or germane and he's been clear that he wants DCUM to be both. If you couldn't resist the compulsion to opine on the merits of doing it, why didn't you start your own thread? Why do you think you get to define the direction of a thread? The site owners afford you the opportunity to start your own thread, if you feel this diminishes the sites credibility, why do you stay? Since DCUM is the sole source of the owners income, they know best what contributes to the site's success and what takes away from it. Since they will intervene, we can infer what they think contributes to the site and what doesn't. Posts like yours do not. Get over it or start your own thread about it.

Again, posts like yours that continue to misconstrue a question, diverts the thread and degenerates into speculation of an OP's motives does not contribute to this website. I was clear in my thread that I was not trying to obtain custody of someone else's kids. We were interested in "temporary guardianship". In no way were we trying to compel her or do anything in a hostile or adverse manner, we are making an 'offer'. Of course, you still can't see the difference between a post asking for specific information and a post inviting discussion and what you call 'bonafide objections', I call insinuating and misconstruing. Seems like the moderator agreed with me or he would declined to intervene. Oh, and in case you haven't read my update to the thread, we made our offer to the mother yesterday. She was most appreciative and relieved. We don't know if we will take temporary guardianship of her kids but the offer is out there and it gives her options. It doesn't really matter what you think of it but if you want to discuss it further, start your own thread.

Most of the snark is amusing to me and part of the reason I visit this site-I admit it, I like watching the train wreck. However, I recently posted on the For Sale forum a short blurb describing the items I had for sale and got a snarky response there. Snark on the For Sale Forum? Isn't that a little much? I guess where there is no controvery, someone will feel the need to create some. Needless to say, I will not try to sell anything on this website again.

The way I see it, people get off on here saying things they would never have the balls to say in real life, because it's not polite. If the poster who lived in a big house was my friend, I certainly wouldn't tell her to her face I thought she was a snob. But when the post clearly comes across as bragging, and I DON'T know the woman, I feel free to say it like it is: you seem stuck up and snobby. And I'll try to do it in a way that at least seems a tad funny, even (sometimes especially) at the OP's expense. The OP of that post clearly was surprised that so many people thought she was bragging...she honestly couldn't see how listing how many wonderful things she has at her house, and how it was a veritable mecca of fun, all the while self-consciously explaining that she's not rich while the hundreds of posters who have 1/10 of what she has are like "yeah right", would come across as braggy. Those of us who deal in reality felt compelled to take her down a few pegs.

I disagree with people who say that being snarky can show OPs different views of things. The truth is while those brutally honest posts are amusing to read if you are NOT the OP, often they piss off/offend the OP so much that any enlightenment that they could have taken from them is lost. Now, if people politely disagree and point out some realities to OP, that will go much further. But they aren't usually considered the "mean" posters. To me, the "meanies", of which I have certainly been one, are people who are going to call it like it is when confronted with ridiculousness.

***Disclaimer: I am not talking about the disturbing individuals who toss off one-liners that say "you're a psychotic bitch who needs therapy and I hope your mother dies in a fiery car crash so you can understand PAIN" or something equally creepy like that. They are in anther class altogether.******