jar546
CBO
Just got an email from "Mr Softy". He is abandoning this board due to "personal attacks" and will not return. Sorry to see that happen.
Can't we all just get along?
Can't we all just get along?
-
Welcome to The Building Code Forum
Your premier resource for building code knowledge.
This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.
Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.
Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.
Off Topic But Please read
- Thread starter jar546
- Start date
- Status
steveray
SAWHORSE
I thought Brudgers was doing well on the road to civility with the rainbows and unicorns......Sorry Mr. Softee...come back any time....and bring a helmet or just ignore Brudgers....
That's bullsh!t Jeff; you know it, and we all know it. It's one thing to play around, it's another to make personal attacks, time and time and time again. It discourages members, especially new members from joining in the discussions. I don't think there's anyone here who doesn't welcome differing opinions and viewpoints, and I don't think there's anyone here who hasn't learned and grown from the interaction on this forum. But the constant harassment, yes, harassment, is unwarranted.jar546 said:
And no, brudgers was not on the road to civility, rainbows, or unicorns. He is what he is, and just like alcoholics and wife beaters, not likely to ever change. The small man syndrome is apparently difficult to overcome. He is a bully, and the only way to treat a bully is to punch them right in the face, or to kick them out of school.
Sorry for the rant, but this crap has gone too far, and there was no reason Mr Softy should have been treated the way he was.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, that wasn't very productive...but I couldn't resist.rooster said:
I'm a bit bummed that Mr. Softy isn't coming back. I'm still a newbie in this profession (+/-7 years) and this thread has been a good workout concerning an issue I've had to deal with a few times, and was never exactly sure how it is supposed to be dealt with. Although all parties here didn't come to a concensus, I have a much greater understanding of the issue at hand.
And judging by the volume of posts, views, and thread pages, I'm not the only one with the questions...
IMHO - We all are in the code enforcement and development business for one reason or another, whether we love what we do or not. It's just like any other industry that involves people; there will always be subjects on which not everyone will agree. We cannot take those disagreements and make them personal. Life is way too short to be taking things personally when we are as passionate about what we do as most of us are. We must agree to disagree and move on. We cannot raise positive public awareness of our industry when we're too busy pointing fingers at those that may not see things as we think they should. You could have 100 people in a room, ask a question and get 100 different answers. Why should this forum be any different? I would expect nothing less than to have some disagreements here; that's what makes doing code research so interesting - to see how there can be so many different answers for one scenario.
north star
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,596
& & & &
So that we are clear on this topic "texasbo", ...was it a case of
Mr. Softy being [ possibly ] thin skinned, or were there actual
personal attacks ?
If the latter, ...then how long does anyone think it is going to
take before we get the reputation of being as bad or worse
than The Cow ?
I'm pretty sure that harrassment and bullying of members
and guests is not the intent of this Forum.
If the former, ...then, IMO, there is a certain amount of
"give & take" on here.....I have had disagreements on here,
but nothing personal that I can recall.....I DO realize that
we all have different opinions and different levels of
enthusiasm, and take that in to consideration whenever
I post something on here.....It's going to take more than
someone [ on here ] hurting my feelings to make me not
continue to be an active member.....If someone starts
a campaign to lobb personal attacks at me, ...then I will
cross that bridge when I come to it.
& & & &
So that we are clear on this topic "texasbo", ...was it a case of
Mr. Softy being [ possibly ] thin skinned, or were there actual
personal attacks ?
If the latter, ...then how long does anyone think it is going to
take before we get the reputation of being as bad or worse
than The Cow ?
I'm pretty sure that harrassment and bullying of members
and guests is not the intent of this Forum.
If the former, ...then, IMO, there is a certain amount of
"give & take" on here.....I have had disagreements on here,
but nothing personal that I can recall.....I DO realize that
we all have different opinions and different levels of
enthusiasm, and take that in to consideration whenever
I post something on here.....It's going to take more than
someone [ on here ] hurting my feelings to make me not
continue to be an active member.....If someone starts
a campaign to lobb personal attacks at me, ...then I will
cross that bridge when I come to it.
& & & &
Last edited by a moderator:
Good question, and each person may have a different opinion; that's why I posted the link.
Personally, I don't think it's a case of being thin skinned, because the attacks were directly pointed at Softy. It's not a case of brudgers saying something Softy didn't like, it's a case of constant personal harrassment during the course of the thread.
But maybe it's just me; again, scan the thread and see what you think. I think quitting the board may have been a little rash, but I'm not shocked, nor would I be surprised if it hasn't happened before.
Personally, I don't think it's a case of being thin skinned, because the attacks were directly pointed at Softy. It's not a case of brudgers saying something Softy didn't like, it's a case of constant personal harrassment during the course of the thread.
But maybe it's just me; again, scan the thread and see what you think. I think quitting the board may have been a little rash, but I'm not shocked, nor would I be surprised if it hasn't happened before.
north star said:
cboboggs
Moderator
I just re-read the postings and didn't see anything that was necessarily "personal". I looked like it was two people with very strong differing opinions on an issue. Personally, I think Mr. Softy was a little thin skinned. I don't always agree with everything brudgers says, but sometimes he makes some valid points.
jar546
CBO
I would like to know what part of the posts were personal attacks?
There are cocky statements, there are brash comments and then there are personal attacks.
What is the consensus for the legitimacy of the complaint about this thread?
I am wondering if Brudgers would have spoken in such a manner at a professional meeting concerning one of his projects. The relevance is how one conducts themselves in person vs. behind a keyboard and monitor.
The moderators will be called to a private thread to discuss this particular thread.
There are cocky statements, there are brash comments and then there are personal attacks.
What is the consensus for the legitimacy of the complaint about this thread?
I am wondering if Brudgers would have spoken in such a manner at a professional meeting concerning one of his projects. The relevance is how one conducts themselves in person vs. behind a keyboard and monitor.
The moderators will be called to a private thread to discuss this particular thread.
I've said what I would do when encountering the type of approach described by our friend here in the thread.
http://www.inspectpa.com/forum/showthread.php?5634-defining-the-work-area&p=56310&viewfull=1#post56310
That reality can be brutal.
But I have no more tolerance for architects who act irresponsibly toward the law than for code officials who do so.
http://www.inspectpa.com/forum/showthread.php?5634-defining-the-work-area&p=56310&viewfull=1#post56310
That reality can be brutal.
But I have no more tolerance for architects who act irresponsibly toward the law than for code officials who do so.
jar546
CBO
The moderators will be reviewing this thread and making a group decision on its content. There is a private discussion underway with admin and the moderators as I type this. We will post an opinion when we have one. Until then, please feel free to continue to debate this issue so we can get an idea of what the consensus is from those of you who post opinions. Thank you.
ccbuilding
Sawhorse
From a lurkers point of view – And yes I realize I may be blasted for this, but here goes.
I followed the thread with interest. The differing points of view help me look from several different angles at something that I may consider an easy black and white code area (not that this area is one of those).
The lively debate and sometimes humorous jabs and soft punches are part of the debate and part of the learning experience this bulletin board offers. I also realize having a thick skin is part of this bulletin board experience. I feel the necessary thick skin should be shielding us from professional code related differences, not pointed personal attacks. That is why I and possible many others post very rarely and post with some trepidation because our skin is not always as thick as it should be against the overzealous and at times off the point or extraneous posts.
The debate I followed regarding the ‘work area’ question was extremely informative. At no time did I feel that Mr. Softy was advocating or proposing illegal activity in regards to his point of view or his issuance of permits. I felt his questions were more towards trying to clarify his understanding of a confusing section by looking at all sides of the question.
Brudger has an interesting point of view at times, and is very active and passionate in his points of view. In placing this point of view in a written form, his enthusiasm may at times come across as bullying. This is something all of us need to be aware of. The written text can seem harsh, extreme, and abusive, when it may be meant merely as a strong desire to sway someone else’s point of view.
I guess I’m trying to advocate a slightly “kinder, gentler’ discourse, so that more of us lurkers may come forward with less fear and be able to receive the value of the huge base of experience this board offers.
The loss of one member may not seem much to some of you, but how many others have been chased off due to some of the stronger and unneeded personalized comments, and how much experience and help has been lost.
I, for one, hope Mr. Softy changes his mind and returns.
I followed the thread with interest. The differing points of view help me look from several different angles at something that I may consider an easy black and white code area (not that this area is one of those).
The lively debate and sometimes humorous jabs and soft punches are part of the debate and part of the learning experience this bulletin board offers. I also realize having a thick skin is part of this bulletin board experience. I feel the necessary thick skin should be shielding us from professional code related differences, not pointed personal attacks. That is why I and possible many others post very rarely and post with some trepidation because our skin is not always as thick as it should be against the overzealous and at times off the point or extraneous posts.
The debate I followed regarding the ‘work area’ question was extremely informative. At no time did I feel that Mr. Softy was advocating or proposing illegal activity in regards to his point of view or his issuance of permits. I felt his questions were more towards trying to clarify his understanding of a confusing section by looking at all sides of the question.
Brudger has an interesting point of view at times, and is very active and passionate in his points of view. In placing this point of view in a written form, his enthusiasm may at times come across as bullying. This is something all of us need to be aware of. The written text can seem harsh, extreme, and abusive, when it may be meant merely as a strong desire to sway someone else’s point of view.
I guess I’m trying to advocate a slightly “kinder, gentler’ discourse, so that more of us lurkers may come forward with less fear and be able to receive the value of the huge base of experience this board offers.
The loss of one member may not seem much to some of you, but how many others have been chased off due to some of the stronger and unneeded personalized comments, and how much experience and help has been lost.
I, for one, hope Mr. Softy changes his mind and returns.
Last edited by a moderator:
jar546
CBO
Your link is the wrong thread, it is for this thread.texasbo said:
All from brudgers, all in the same thread, all individual posts, all directly to Mr Softy, a new member, who was having a legitimate code discussion. Look at Rooster, Tim, MT, JBI and others in the same thread. None of them agreed, but were respectful. Brudgers was relentless, and yes the attacks were personal. AS I said, Softy apparently is a little thin skinned, but he didn't deserve this:
"Or to put it another way, why are you inclined to interpret the code as if the public is your enemy?"
"Of course, it's not likely you're interested in actually approving the plans given that your argument hinges on the absurdity that 35% is close to 50%."
"I can tell that you prefer to err.
It comes with having someone else to ultimately take responsibility for getting it right.
The "You can always appeal" my decision approach, is what I call "holding the permit hostage."
Like Inspector's remorse, it is another common practice with code officials. "
"Getting inside a decision loop like yours is trivial."
"You're pushing an agenda which goes beyond code requirements.
And treating the building code like mere suggestions in the process.
As it has become apparent, making something up and holding the permit hostage when the code doesn't say what you want it to say appears to be your M.O."
" As if further evidence that you rely on holding the permit hostage to your made up requirements was needed.
"And unsurprisingly, they don't have carte blanche to make stuff up.
Even when they think they do.
As any city attorney will tell you."
" By "we" you must mean, you and the mouse in your pocket"
"The only reason that you have an issue with that approach is because you are pushing an agenda rather than enforcing the building code. Holding the permit hostage is how you forward your agenda and your rationale is that the public is your enemy."
"Just to break your heart.
Seriously, every one of your posts falls into the same pattern.
"I know what the code says - but..."
We can only hope that one day fairness and justice replace your personal agenda and willingness to break the law. "
"Those whose personal agenda requires making the public dance to their whims, feel they are."
"And despite your wishing the world was full of rainbows and unicorns"
Again, this isn't brudgers and Uncle Bob having a go at it, this is brudgers clearly bullying a new guy who was trying to conduct a legitimate, rational discussion.
Uncalled for.
"Or to put it another way, why are you inclined to interpret the code as if the public is your enemy?"
"Of course, it's not likely you're interested in actually approving the plans given that your argument hinges on the absurdity that 35% is close to 50%."
"I can tell that you prefer to err.
It comes with having someone else to ultimately take responsibility for getting it right.
The "You can always appeal" my decision approach, is what I call "holding the permit hostage."
Like Inspector's remorse, it is another common practice with code officials. "
"Getting inside a decision loop like yours is trivial."
"You're pushing an agenda which goes beyond code requirements.
And treating the building code like mere suggestions in the process.
As it has become apparent, making something up and holding the permit hostage when the code doesn't say what you want it to say appears to be your M.O."
" As if further evidence that you rely on holding the permit hostage to your made up requirements was needed.
"And unsurprisingly, they don't have carte blanche to make stuff up.
Even when they think they do.
As any city attorney will tell you."
" By "we" you must mean, you and the mouse in your pocket"
"The only reason that you have an issue with that approach is because you are pushing an agenda rather than enforcing the building code. Holding the permit hostage is how you forward your agenda and your rationale is that the public is your enemy."
"Just to break your heart.
Seriously, every one of your posts falls into the same pattern.
"I know what the code says - but..."
We can only hope that one day fairness and justice replace your personal agenda and willingness to break the law. "
"Those whose personal agenda requires making the public dance to their whims, feel they are."
"And despite your wishing the world was full of rainbows and unicorns"
Again, this isn't brudgers and Uncle Bob having a go at it, this is brudgers clearly bullying a new guy who was trying to conduct a legitimate, rational discussion.
Uncalled for.
jar546 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr Softy
Silver Member
mods - as my complaints about brudgers have become public, i would like you to answer a question, publicly -
how is referring to ones professional conduct as 'your personal agenda and willingness to break the law' not a personal attack? particulaly in light of brudgers having had no professional interaction with me ever.
call off your discussion. the outcome makes little difference to me. who cares.
as brudgers conduct is condoned, and i can come to no other conclusion, then your forum suffers for it.
i went back and read the thread. if one notices, i actually agree with brudgers frequently, on quite a few points. but as i do not agree with him on all points, apparently that's cause for ridiculous speculation and baseless allegations in an effort to belittle me (and presumably make himself look like the ultimate authority).
having been in this busines for 15+ years, i have developed rather thick skin. except when it comes to questioning my integrity. i work very hard at making sure i'm doing the right thing - for all parties involved in a project. and if i am making a tough decision, backing it up with code. what would your reaction be if the shoe were on your foot?
brudgers - do not bother to respond to my points, or posts, unless you plan to apologize for crossing the line. i will not read them nor shall i respond to you. (doncha just love the forum's ignore function?)
texasbo - i thank you for your posts.
rooster - awesome post! (in the other thread)
jar546 - you have a nice forum here. too bad one member wants to come in and defecate on your carpet.
how is referring to ones professional conduct as 'your personal agenda and willingness to break the law' not a personal attack? particulaly in light of brudgers having had no professional interaction with me ever.
call off your discussion. the outcome makes little difference to me. who cares.
as brudgers conduct is condoned, and i can come to no other conclusion, then your forum suffers for it.
i went back and read the thread. if one notices, i actually agree with brudgers frequently, on quite a few points. but as i do not agree with him on all points, apparently that's cause for ridiculous speculation and baseless allegations in an effort to belittle me (and presumably make himself look like the ultimate authority).
having been in this busines for 15+ years, i have developed rather thick skin. except when it comes to questioning my integrity. i work very hard at making sure i'm doing the right thing - for all parties involved in a project. and if i am making a tough decision, backing it up with code. what would your reaction be if the shoe were on your foot?
brudgers - do not bother to respond to my points, or posts, unless you plan to apologize for crossing the line. i will not read them nor shall i respond to you. (doncha just love the forum's ignore function?)
texasbo - i thank you for your posts.
rooster - awesome post! (in the other thread)
jar546 - you have a nice forum here. too bad one member wants to come in and defecate on your carpet.
Papio Bldg Dept
REGISTERED
texasbo, I too have re-read the posts, and although many of the comments were reflective of personal opinions, I did not see them as attacks. Albeit brudgers doesn't always bring out the sunshine and unicorns for everyone, I did not, however, get the sense that his posts were "criminal" in any way, and I did not see MrSofties comments and questions as such either.
I myself enjoy both McSofty and Brudgers (there are limits of course)posts, whether I agree or not with their opinions and perspectives. While I did not consider the comments personal attacks, I can only speak for myself, and that consideration is different for each individual.
I myself enjoy both McSofty and Brudgers (there are limits of course)posts, whether I agree or not with their opinions and perspectives. While I did not consider the comments personal attacks, I can only speak for myself, and that consideration is different for each individual.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this says it all. These are pretty powerful words.ccbuilding said:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for any particular action; I'm not even implying brudgers has violated any terms of use. But I did want to get this thread moved out of an obscure little backwater forum, and in a forum so people can see what brudgers has done to a new member.
Of course you did.View attachment 459texasbo said:
View attachment 459
/monthly_2011_07/572953c10737a_favrequeen.jpg.39fdec22fe02f1b6dd1e4362982dae06.jpg
- Status