New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Jinger or Joleen?
Okay, Jinger typing right now. Me and my identical twin sister Joleen who is sixteen minutes younger than I are having a catfight. Joleen is too nervous to write this, so I'll do it. What is a better name- Jinger or Joleen? FYI this is NOT Jinger Duggar. So, which do you prefer? Joleen wanted to know if any of you thought either of these names reminded you of elephant tusks- if anything they remind me, Jinger, of wicker furniture. How 'bout u guys?
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
*smiles sweetly* Fine, folks. Encourage the troll. Whatever. Enjoy it later.
1
I apologize. [m]
I should have sent my complaint as to your own rude and condescending behavior by PM to avoid feeding any hypothetical trolls.
I should have sent my complaint as to your own rude and condescending behavior by PM to avoid feeding any hypothetical trolls.
1
Wow
Thats not really a apology is it? It is hatred made to seem like an apology. It is like saying, "I am sorry that I shot you, but you asked for it."
Thats not really a apology is it? It is hatred made to seem like an apology. It is like saying, "I am sorry that I shot you, but you asked for it."
1
Not hatred.
I like Christine as a person, but her comments in this thread were definitely condescending and rude. If I hated her, I would have been far more rude myself.
I like Christine as a person, but her comments in this thread were definitely condescending and rude. If I hated her, I would have been far more rude myself.
1
I think that was her point
whether you agree w/ it or not
whether you agree w/ it or not
1
I understand that, and she can say what she please, but it was sort of a petty "lets poke the lion" sort of remark.
1
You tried
There is an obvious show in multiple threads that this girl and/or girls are troll(s).
As you can see though, you can't make anyone believe anything they don't want to believe, even if the evidence is strewn about.
There is an obvious show in multiple threads that this girl and/or girls are troll(s).
As you can see though, you can't make anyone believe anything they don't want to believe, even if the evidence is strewn about.
1
Neither is a favorite of mine and there are other J names that I like more, but between the two, I choose Jinger because names that end in -leen don't appeal to me.
Chrisell, I am having trouble seeing what is trollish about Jinger&Joleen. Could you please explain it to me? I would like to know your reasoning.
Chrisell, I am having trouble seeing what is trollish about Jinger&Joleen. Could you please explain it to me? I would like to know your reasoning.
1
I think she found these posts trollish...
http://www.behindthename.com/bb/view.php?id=3457451&board=baby
http://www.behindthename.com/bb/view.php?id=3457443&board=baby
Really, the first was just rude, though the second was weird enough to qualify as trollish. This thread, in and of itself, only vaguely reeks of troll, in that I'm not entirely sure that I buy the fact that there are actually twins named Jinger and Joleen doing the posting here.
http://www.behindthename.com/bb/view.php?id=3457451&board=baby
http://www.behindthename.com/bb/view.php?id=3457443&board=baby
Really, the first was just rude, though the second was weird enough to qualify as trollish. This thread, in and of itself, only vaguely reeks of troll, in that I'm not entirely sure that I buy the fact that there are actually twins named Jinger and Joleen doing the posting here.
1
Exactly. Those are perfect examples of trollism
1
Well, she says she's 16. The first one could simply be a teenager's mindset in how she views things... regardless of maturity level or sensitivity... On the positive side, in that particular instance, it reveals exactly what kind of flak a child with that name is likely to receive in school. Thus, whether trollish or not, the post may have served as a warning re: what the poor kid might endure with such a name and why the girl herself may prefer the nn.
1
Alright then. I just didn't want to shun somebody without knowing why. Thank you for that.
1
1
Did you see the bit where I said to ignore the troll?
1
Did you see the bit where I said to ignore the troll?
1
Did I miss the part where you became the boss? :S
1
Did you miss the part where ignoring the trolls is one of Mike's rules?
Furthermore, did you miss the part where I used to be a mod and know how this site works? And did you miss the majority of the past five years in which the board has been self-managing? And did you miss all the other times when long-term posters have made similar requests for people to ignore trolls?
Oh, yes, you probably DID miss it. Nevermind.
Furthermore, did you miss the part where I used to be a mod and know how this site works? And did you miss the majority of the past five years in which the board has been self-managing? And did you miss all the other times when long-term posters have made similar requests for people to ignore trolls?
Oh, yes, you probably DID miss it. Nevermind.
1
Did you miss the first two words of Rule #1?
1
No, and you need to check your dictionary if you're referring me to them.
1
Your constant condescention is tiring.
1
Huge ditto to that.
1
not everyone knows who the moderators are/have been...
Since not everyone knows who the moderators are or have been, if there's not some way of marking a person as such, they're likely to get ignored or have similar responses to the one you just had. Plus, different people may have different oppinions re: what qualifies as a troll. Also, not everyone has been posting regularly for the past 5 years, so some of what you mentioned would be easy to miss like you asked.
Plus, since both are real names (as opposed to Polly Esther and some similarly silly posts), some people may have genuine opinions of them... and may find ways around saying one IS better than the other, but simply stating preferences and why...
Since not everyone knows who the moderators are or have been, if there's not some way of marking a person as such, they're likely to get ignored or have similar responses to the one you just had. Plus, different people may have different oppinions re: what qualifies as a troll. Also, not everyone has been posting regularly for the past 5 years, so some of what you mentioned would be easy to miss like you asked.
Plus, since both are real names (as opposed to Polly Esther and some similarly silly posts), some people may have genuine opinions of them... and may find ways around saying one IS better than the other, but simply stating preferences and why...
This message was edited 1/23/2009, 8:15 PM
1
I agree
From this post alone, it's not immediately obvious that the poster is a troll, and to jump on anyone who dared to respond to the post in the manner that you did only drew more attention to it. I understand that it's best not to encourage a troll, and that the best way to do that is through ignorance, but to assume the authority to enforce that ignorance is rather presumptuous - even if you were once a mod.
From this post alone, it's not immediately obvious that the poster is a troll, and to jump on anyone who dared to respond to the post in the manner that you did only drew more attention to it. I understand that it's best not to encourage a troll, and that the best way to do that is through ignorance, but to assume the authority to enforce that ignorance is rather presumptuous - even if you were once a mod.
1
*sigh*
No, I'm not being presumptuous. Mike has always encouraged long-term posters to run interference for him and help with making the rules clear.
What I did has been done countless times by myself and others. And I think it's appalling bad manners to respond to a troll after someone has identified them as a troll and given the directive to ignore them.
It's not hard to then go and read up and see that the poster IS a troll.
No, I'm not being presumptuous. Mike has always encouraged long-term posters to run interference for him and help with making the rules clear.
What I did has been done countless times by myself and others. And I think it's appalling bad manners to respond to a troll after someone has identified them as a troll and given the directive to ignore them.
It's not hard to then go and read up and see that the poster IS a troll.
1
No, I think it was presumptuous of you to take it to the level that you did. Handing out individualized "Did you see the bit where I said to ignore the troll?"'s? - how condescending. I think that one "ignore the troll" post is sufficient, and if you're not even responding to an obviously trollish post, it would make sense to point out why you're labelling the poster as a troll instead of making everyone else do the detective work.
1
I agree.
I, for one, do know you used to be a mod, Chrisell. However, I do not think you should be so condescending towards other posters. You obviously are having a bad day though, considering your condescending responses to Rachel's lounge post. I was simply hoping to point this out to you.
I, for one, do know you used to be a mod, Chrisell. However, I do not think you should be so condescending towards other posters. You obviously are having a bad day though, considering your condescending responses to Rachel's lounge post. I was simply hoping to point this out to you.
1
Furrealzy
1
Just ignore the troll, folks.
1
I see nothing trollish here
1
Really? Nothing?
This makes me doubt your judgement. :)
This makes me doubt your judgement. :)
1
Re:ally
This post is just an opinion question. It may have been posted by a couple of rather silly little girls, or it may have been posted by one silly little girl -- who, by the way, would hardly be the only silly little girl to appear on this board, and frankly far from the silliest. Either way, it's just an opinion question. Chrisell had her snotty hissysnit, sniping at other unquestionably legitimate posters, under the one post of Jinger&Joleen that was relatively innocent and inoffensive.
When I posted this I hadn't yet seen the other J&J posts, but now that I have, they don't change my mind. This one is still no big; and I don't think I should have to read an entire day's posts, verifying that all new posters are acceptable to Chrisell or any other self-important self-appointed board cop, before I answer one.
And let's call a spade a spade: if the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, Chrisell totally undermined that strategy. Her repetitive snark drew attention to and lengthened the supposedly offensive thread -- the opposite of her purported intention.
This post is just an opinion question. It may have been posted by a couple of rather silly little girls, or it may have been posted by one silly little girl -- who, by the way, would hardly be the only silly little girl to appear on this board, and frankly far from the silliest. Either way, it's just an opinion question. Chrisell had her snotty hissysnit, sniping at other unquestionably legitimate posters, under the one post of Jinger&Joleen that was relatively innocent and inoffensive.
When I posted this I hadn't yet seen the other J&J posts, but now that I have, they don't change my mind. This one is still no big; and I don't think I should have to read an entire day's posts, verifying that all new posters are acceptable to Chrisell or any other self-important self-appointed board cop, before I answer one.
And let's call a spade a spade: if the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, Chrisell totally undermined that strategy. Her repetitive snark drew attention to and lengthened the supposedly offensive thread -- the opposite of her purported intention.
1
In this post alone?
I certainly see nothing trollish, unless it is assumed from the outset that Jinger and Joleen are merely the fabrication of a single poster. And I question the judgment of anyone who makes that leap. :/
I certainly see nothing trollish, unless it is assumed from the outset that Jinger and Joleen are merely the fabrication of a single poster. And I question the judgment of anyone who makes that leap. :/
1
Well, not only that but their names, the fact that one doesn't want to write, just all of it together is a bit on the weird side. I wouldn't say it is outright trollish but it definately would keep me alert on future posts.
1
True. I'm just bothered because I don't think it's the sort of content that merits a slap on the wrist for responding to it.
ETA: In fact, I think it's rather rude to be dishing out slaps on the wrist for responding to anything, really, regardless of content, but that's another story.
ETA: In fact, I think it's rather rude to be dishing out slaps on the wrist for responding to anything, really, regardless of content, but that's another story.
This message was edited 1/24/2009, 4:12 PM
1
No, I agree
I think slaps on the wrist are wrong. That being said, I think it is also wrong to respond to known trolls, which only leads to the troll making more posts about equally trollish subjects.
I think slaps on the wrist are wrong. That being said, I think it is also wrong to respond to known trolls, which only leads to the troll making more posts about equally trollish subjects.
1
Well, but this poster was unmistakeably a the troll in the past and this post is a bit dodgy with the whole twin business. I think it's normal that, if someone has a history of trolling, it takes a little while for her to be accepted as a bona fide poster.
1
Yes, but...
To call a few posts made about half-an-hour before this post "a history" is a bit of a stretch, IMO. To find anything verifiably trollish about this poster, one has to investigate her posting history. Lillian said that she didn't find anything trollish "here," and neither did I. Dodgy, sure, but if you're going to say that someone is a troll, you need a bit more than dodginess to back that accusation up. And I don't see why anyone should be expected to look outside of this thread to find this evidence for themselves. That is the accuser's burden.
To call a few posts made about half-an-hour before this post "a history" is a bit of a stretch, IMO. To find anything verifiably trollish about this poster, one has to investigate her posting history. Lillian said that she didn't find anything trollish "here," and neither did I. Dodgy, sure, but if you're going to say that someone is a troll, you need a bit more than dodginess to back that accusation up. And I don't see why anyone should be expected to look outside of this thread to find this evidence for themselves. That is the accuser's burden.
This message was edited 1/25/2009, 1:31 PM
1
1