• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
jar546 said:
I would like to know what part of the posts were personal attacks?
I believe the post referencing the word "criminal" was taken as personal reflection upon one's character. That does not in my opinion make it true, and I do not believe anyone other brudgers, feels that any viewpoint in this thread should be perceived as criminal, or detracts from anyones character (except for brudgers).

jar546 said:
What is the consensus for the legitimacy of the complaint about this thread?
I feel that the comments can be viewed in at least two different ways, and even for those of us who have experienced brudgers before. I for one would not have taken brudgers comments as personal attacks, but rather as personal opinions of brudger (respect and tact are subjective concepts and not prerequisite to adding meaningfully to our forum discussions). In that regard I do not feel that the complaint warrants an action. It is what it is, and in my opinoin should be left at that.
 
I like open discussions. Passion is a virtue. I'd like to think a discussion among us is kind of like the wolf and sheep dog. At the end of the day, clock out and carry on.

I did not see any personal attacks. No one is right 100% of the time. Live and let live.
 
IMO,

FWIW, I did not see any "personal attacks".( BTW, Thanks for hanging

around Mr. Softy! ) I am encouraging you to stay here on this forum.

I, for one, appreciate your 15 + / - yrs. of experience. Keep it coming...

I DID observe a very good & lively discussion on a ( somewhat ) gray area

topic within the IEBC. I believe that there will never be a consensus on

the terms "work area" or "reconfigured space".

Was the Topic & Associated Discussion Helpful Overall: IMO, "yes".

Was "brudgers", or even "Mr. Softy" out of line in their

statements to each other, or other forum members: Define out of line.

Could more civility and respect for every member & guest be

displayed regularly: Absolutely!

Jeff & Rick astoria even cautioned all parties to be more civil and

to not let the discussion get off course, BUT, ..not to the point

of locking the topic completely.

One suggestion that I did not see was, if the AHJ is having a

difficult time in interpreting these various code sections, why not

set out to discuss & formulate a more definite, clear description

for future use. We do not have to rely ( solely ) on ICC's interps.

Also, as was mentioned, ..get onto a committee and actively

help clarify these "less than clearly understood" code sections.

It is clear that "brudgers" has his own style of communicating on

here. Most have chosen to ignore him, or understand that that

is just the way he is and simply pity him. He has chosen to be,

at times, ..caustic, ..rude, ...petty, ..uncivil, ..juvenile, ...self

centered, ..anal, ..negative and just downright awnery, however,

he has been thanked for his viewpoints and input numerous

times.

I think that we all could apply the scripture of Micah 6:8 - "He

has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the

LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to

walk humbly with your God." A strong dose AND daily

application of humility would be good for all of us, ..starting with

me!

Once again, Mr. Softy I DO hope that you will not be deterred from

staying as a member on this forum.

To the lurkers: I hope that you will join in the topics &

discussions more. Do not let any one member or guest prevent

you from "coming forward" and joining into the discussions /

topics.

I do not believe that anyone on this forum can change "brudgers" except

"brudgers" himself. With that, I would encourage "brudgers" to read

Galatians 6:7 & 8.
 
ewenme said:
Was it Brudgers that ran off Uncle Bob? OR am I misakten?
He freaked out that the advertising was targeting him based on the location indicated by his IP address.

Determining if you are mistaken is left as an exercise for the reader.
 
I see nothing wrong with brudgers comments. If you do not like them just ignore them, act as they do not exist. If you choose to engage then do so with facts and passion. Many may not like his tone but there is no denying his knowledge.
 
Min&Max said:
I see nothing wrong with brudgers comments. If you do not like them just ignore them, act as they do not exist. If you choose to engage then do so with facts and passion. Many may not like his tone but there is no denying his knowledge.
Don't make Ben's head any bigger. ;)
 
Beat me to it Jeff :D



Big Willie:



To the lurkers: I hope that you will join in the topics & discussions more. Do not let any one member or guest prevent you from "coming forward" and joining into the discussions / topics.


Exceptional and fully agree!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top