Arguments attract aggressors.

The problem with that idea is who gets to decide when to chuck someone off the thread for bunfighting? I predict chaos.

I know of a forum where they have a 'hell' section for no-holds barred postings. If you go on that you know what to expect.

Here's an idea from one of the CycleChatterers:

"When a thread gets "bunfighted" (bunfought?) it is possible for the hijackers/bunfighters to carry on contributing. What I think should happen, if technically possible, is that all the contributions of a hijacker or bunfighters should be hived off into a bunfight version of the thread and they should then be blocked from further contributing to the original version of the thread.

I suspect though that the software might not be sophisticated enough to implement that."

Jingl Apparently 'CycleChat' has a dedicated bun-fight forum.
Perhaps we should ask GNHQ for one
www.cyclechat.net/threads/bun-fight-forum.8586/

What would you put in Google? "Forum bun fights"? Would that do it?

NOT ME!!!

I am innocent!

I suppose, if you are widowed, like durhamjen and many others, or on your own for other reasons, and don't have a cat, or would just like to hear other points of view, then maybe expressing your thoughts here and inviting debate opens up a wide field which you might not otherwise experience?

New members, as well as the longer established ones, contribute to the acrimony which has recently become apparent.

I do find myself a little bothered by Ana's comment about long term posters, of whom I am one.....oh dear.

A quarrelsome old biddy jingl? You? Come on!!

Surely you know by now that 'old biddy' is not an acceptable phrase on GN, being both ageist and sexist

Peace and Love, everyone

durhamjen doesn't need anyone to rant to - she comes on here and posts a few links!

There's always the cat Durhamjen

Tell us what you do jendurham.

"jings your fondness for a spot of argument is legendary"

I find that a insulting. You seem to suggest I am nothing but a quarrelsome old biddy.

And I think your original post smacks of paranoia.

So what would it do to your blood-pressure if you did not have a DH to rant to, nina?

If a post annoys me I refrain from replying, so as not to upset anyone or fuel the fire. I just have a mini rant to DH about it instead
I do however, keep an eye on the thread as battles can sometimes be amusing interesting.

I think Elegran was just trying to suggest that it is perhaps not worth responding to the few threads that seem to be deliberately designed to raise hackles and cause an argument, as opposed to encouraging a debate. Good advice - but sometimes hard to follow!

Honestly if someone says something that upsets me (rarely) I simply ignore it - quite easy as none of you are real.
I am one of the ones who love a good debate though I will put my hands up to that. I love a good mental workout.
Going to philosophy and economics classes from next week - looking forward to that.

Returning toAnya's "What gain?" (I've been away from the computer) when I did the OP, it was just an observation. After thinking about it, I suspect any "gain" would be in anyone reading the start of a combative new thread by an unknown name not rushing in too fast with a comment.

Yes, most disagreements are between established posters, some of whom have old scores still in mind, but I was thinking here of the unfamiliar names, which may well be old disgruntled names rehashed, as granjura suggests.

jings your fondness for a spot of argument is legendary, I would not expect you to agree.

I find I quite often disagree with a post, but refrain from making a comment because I think it is often possible to offend with the written word, and it is sometimes easier just to ignore something than make an issue of it. I do get quite cross with people who seem to 'nit-pick' about things which seem to me to be unimportant, but then we all have a right to an opinion, which in turn needs to be respected, I think.

I've never seen that at all! (Original post)

In fact I find it a very odd suggestion. Totally

I never actually see much nastiness on here. Just strong views and a little bit of verbal ding dong. All a fuss over nothing.

And here we go with another thread.....

I agree.
It's the personal attacks which IMO are inexcusable, and some do seem to take delight in such behaviour

As a relatively new GN I find such behaviour upsetting and avoid it, just as I would in real life.

Anyone who holds strong opinions or views on a particular subject may want to contribute to a forum on that subject and of course it's likely that there will be opinions offered that may be the polar opposite. I think some are able to argue very well without getting personal, and some aren't. C'est la vie!

Not always easy when directly (and frequently) 'attacked' by the same poster/s though. Hence my recent silence.

I am active on another Forum and there is the option of 'ignoring' poster/s who do this- I think it would be a very good addition here.

However, re seemingly 'new' posters- we are all aware that there are many posters here who make a habit of changing their names after they get in hot water for 1 reason or another (which is clearly against Forum rules)- how do they get away with it, again and again. I am who I am and would never dream of changing my identity, although at times it is tempting. Language and syntax style, etc, soon give people away anyhow.

In real life I avoid people who are rude or aggressive. It is no different on here. We can choose who to respond to.

An interesting discussion?

Gain?

Don't agree at all. Most of the real nastiness comes from a small band of long term posters who think they own the site.

The reason I rarely post is because of them. In fact I'm wondering exactly what the OP hoped to gain herself by starting this thread

And I'm fully expecting their full fury in response to this post, so I'll sit back and wait....