+1
To Haters: this needs to stop.
Sort:
Hear Hear!!
This word "haters" annoys me. There are VERY VERY few people in the world that hate something for the sake of it. It is a term which has been coined by people to use as an automatic response to criticism. Eg. Rebecca Black labels people who criticise her songs as "haters" and says they are just jealous. The truth is far from it.
I'd advise people to realise this. checkmateibeatu, no-one on these forums is a hater. The people who post comments about you are generally just doing so to get their points across, such as you do so voraciously and (in many cases) completely inappropriately and in an irritating manner to some.
Au contraire. At least one of them (if not some of them, if not most of them or even all of them), automatocally oppose everything I say. For example, in an on-going thread, someone was talking religion, and I explained to him how it was against the rules, and one of the haters said "I am loving this German (the one who was talking religion)" or sonething oike that. In their defense, someone else said that opposing me in everything is "a shortcut to always being right".
Heightened civility would be a nice improvement.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Au contraire. At least one of them (if not some of them, if not most of them or even all of them), automatocally oppose everything I say. For example, in an on-going thread, someone was talking religion, and I explained to him how it was against the rules, and one of the haters said "I am loving this German (the one who was talking religion)" or sonething oike that. In their defense, someone else said that opposing me in everything is "a shortcut to always being right".
Its not hate. Its just a complete disdain for your opinions, based on past threads. I very rarely find myself in agreement on you. They're not going to not read your posts, but people will read them and look to side against you, just because you've been irritating and completely ignorant in the past. That's life.
Exactly, they will look to side against me for a fact outside the thread we were posting in=bias=hate. No matter how much they dislike my threads, they have no right to do the kinds of stuff they have done.
Bias doesn't equal hate.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Au contraire. At least one of them (if not some of them, if not most of them or even all of them), automatocally oppose everything I say.
That's not true.
Oct 3, 2011
0
#12
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Exactly, they will look to side against me for a fact outside the thread we were posting in=bias=hate. No matter how much they dislike my threads, they have no right to do the kinds of stuff they have done.
Apparently they do or the admins. of this forum would have pulled their posts. Just because you are offended by someone else's opinion does not give you the "right" to decide what gets posted. If you want the right to decide what gets posted and what doesn't then open your own web-site. We are not going to accuse you of being a sniveling control freak because We do not wish to be labeled a "hater." >:[
Maxx_Dragon wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Exactly, they will look to side against me for a fact outside the thread we were posting in=bias=hate. No matter how much they dislike my threads, they have no right to do the kinds of stuff they have done.
Apparently they do or the admins. of this forum would have pulled their posts. Just because you are offended by someone else's opinion does not give you the "right" to decide what gets posted. If you want the right to decide what gets posted and what doesn't then open your own web-site. We are not going to accuse you of being a sniveling control freak because We do not wish to be labeled a "hater." >:[
lol
rooperi wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Au contraire. At least one of them (if not some of them, if not most of them or even all of them), automatocally oppose everything I say.
That's not true.
Yes, it is.
-waller- wrote:
Bias doesn't equal hate.
If it was bias for a particular person, it wouldn't be, but if it was bias against a particular person, it would be. I should have specified that.
ponnupazoozu wrote:
but "biasers" doesn't sound as good as "haters". so in the interests of aesthetics, i will have to side with checkmybuttyou, chuckmeinanabattoir, ... ok could we change that handle as well? it's nowhere as easy or natural to pronounce as ponnupazoozu.
It is checkmateibeatu.
khurme wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
This isn't just to haters of mine, but haters in general. Chess.com was made as a site where you can play chess, not where you can post hateful comments to other members/ have to defend yourself from them. You don't have to like everyone in this world, just keep things civil. To people who I have blocked: make your own thread so you and fellow blockees can reply.
Only some members behave like this. Please forgive them because the age factor has already punished them.
Forgiveness is not possible without regret, and they are not showing any at all.
Maxx_Dragon wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Exactly, they will look to side against me for a fact outside the thread we were posting in=bias=hate. No matter how much they dislike my threads, they have no right to do the kinds of stuff they have done.
Apparently they do or the admins. of this forum would have pulled their posts. Just because you are offended by someone else's opinion does not give you the "right" to decide what gets posted. If you want the right to decide what gets posted and what doesn't then open your own web-site. We are not going to accuse you of being a sniveling control freak because We do not wish to be labeled a "hater." >:[
It is common morals that states that you have no right to do that.
Oct 3, 2011
0
#19
checkmateibeatu wrote:
-waller- wrote:
Bias doesn't equal hate.
If it was bias for a particular person, it wouldn't be, but if it was bias against someone, it would be. I should have specified that.
Huh? We fail to see either the logic or the difference between a "particular person", or "someone". >:[
Maxx_Dragon wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
-waller- wrote:
Bias doesn't equal hate.
If it was bias for a particular person, it wouldn't be, but if it was bias against someone, it would be. I should have specified that.
Huh? We fail to see either the logic or the difference between a "particular person", or "someone". >:[
I'll edit it.
This isn't just to haters of mine, but haters in general. Chess.com was made as a site where you can play chess, not where you can post hateful comments to other members/ have to defend yourself from them. You don't have to like everyone in this world, just keep things civil. To people who I have blocked: make your own thread so you and fellow blockees can reply.