Hillarysworld

You are concerned that you may be ruining your good, well-established, hard-earned reputation in the blogosphere.

There are a couple of key points that caused what happened there. Firstly, we are highly sensitive and charged not having our good friends who understand our perspective to be discussing with.. and what you describe is a bi-product of that. Second, the CGP's current approach is a bit different from what you are/were used to... and you waded back in to discover the sharply different viewpoints in the same thread; remember, they are not personal criticism.

It is not that you said anything wrong over there; you posted a sharp retort to a sharp post, showing all who read that the person posting "got to" you. And you got a sharp post or two in return. In such a ground, tit-for-tat posting and being vulnerable to other people's sharp perspectives is not ideal.

Just refuse to get "nibbled" or bent out of shape. Simply be true to who you are, and dont let the recent mishaps take you off-center when you visit elsewhere. Take care.

-----On your topic - healthcare and arbitrary invoicing criteria--

Yes, I agree with you. Arbitrarily charging healthcare providers based on what may be viewed as "high risk" health profile features of the person will lead us to want to be blonde, not brunette, some day!

There is indeed a difference between charging for overweight person vs. for a smoker, something many corporations do at present in combination with smoking cessation classes... The latter is being justified in terms of "proven to be risky" addiction. Even behavior-based discounts are sometimes suspect when the linkage to health consequences are not very well proven. For example, while I would love a discount for being a vegetarian, it is unclear that vegetarianism is necessarily better than other food habits. Hence, it would be arbitrary and not something I would endorse.

Glad you're here kbently. CGP and StFu are apparently sending emails to villagers inviting them to join. I can't go back to CGP because of the way we were treated when Murray's other personality kicked in, and he turned on us after the election. The other one claims to be all about openness, explicitly stating that HV strongly oppressed free speech. I can't get past the fact that they published private conversations there, so guess I won't be visiting much. I'm so grateful for this place. Thanks, again Hmg16 and Optix.

I still wonder if Murray is really Murray and his roommate didn't take over the nite of the election (the Obama fan).  Strange.....................

i am not banned but a little irritated. i am trying to promote my Bill Clinton blog so when i start a new thread about Bill, i post my blog link. i make them go to it to read the entire story. somebody laura edited my post deleting my blog link and putting in the original source link .

in the spring someone named Hillforceone did that to EVERY new thread i started and nobody from HCF ever got to see my blog. i am not hurting anybody by doing this.

Hillarysmygirl16 wrote:

---

Amy Dugan wrote:

---

i am not banned but a little irritated. i am trying to promote my Bill Clinton blog so when i start a new thread about Bill, i post my blog link. i make them go to it to read the entire story. somebody laura edited my post deleting my blog link and putting in the original source link .

in the spring someone named Hillforceone did that to EVERY new thread i started and nobody from HCF ever got to see my blog. i am not hurting anybody by doing this.

---

You can feel free to post your blog here. I don't care about that. I would love to promote any site provided its not pro obama.

 here is my Bill Clinton blog link. i posted this forum on my blog lists

http://adugan-billclintonblog.blogspot.com/

---

 

Annab wrote:

---

My sentiments exactly.  Evidently, he has some resentment toward HV because so many people joined and left there.   He feels he was betrayed.  But excuse me wasn't he the one who went "2nd personality" after election night?.  And didn't he close the forum for a while?   What was he expecting?    If anyone should be resentful, it should be those of us who were members and were "stunned" by his political about-face.

---

STAMP!!!

 

Annab wrote:

---

My sentiments exactly.  Evidently, he has some resentment toward HV because so many people joined and left there.   He feels he was betrayed.  But excuse me wasn't he the one who went "2nd personality" after election night?.  And didn't he close the forum for a while?   What was he expecting?    If anyone should be resentful, it should be those of us who were members and were "stunned" by his political about-face.

---

Please, I would really like to see that we do not do this. It is all water under the bridge..  What we saw as "about face" was a matter of timing; his decision was long-since made; timing of its implementation was hurtful to us.

But it was not a betrayal of confidence in the sense of releasing private information shared in confidence to public... That did not happen in CGP nor in HV.  It did in the STFU site.   There is a big difference.

It was simply a fork in the road, and his objective was Common Ground discussion and HV's objective was continuation of what was original HCF's goal.  I do believe he has come to understand and accept as much.

Peace.

 

-- Edited by Sanders on Sunday 26th of July 2009 01:20:23 PM

-- Edited by Sanders on Sunday 26th of July 2009 01:21:10 PM

Sanders wrote:

---

 

Annab wrote:

---

My sentiments exactly.  Evidently, he has some resentment toward HV because so many people joined and left there.   He feels he was betrayed.  But excuse me wasn't he the one who went "2nd personality" after election night?.  And didn't he close the forum for a while?   What was he expecting?    If anyone should be resentful, it should be those of us who were members and were "stunned" by his political about-face.

---

Please, I would really like to see that we do not do this. It is all water under the bridge..  What we saw as "about face" was a matter of timing; his decision was long-since made; timing of its implementation was hurtful to us.

But it was not a betrayal of confidence in the sense of releasing private information shared in confidence to public... That did not happen in CGP nor in HV.  It did in the STFU site.   There is a big difference.

It was simply a fork in the road, and his objective was Common Ground discussion and HV's objective was continuation of what was original HCF's goal.  I do believe he has come to understand and accept as much.

Peace.

 

 

Sanders, you are right.  CGP's timing for the change was frustrating, but really was not malicious.  Pantsuitpolitics which is now a different site branched off at the same time, and they also had a different focus.  Each of them is popular in their own right and have loyal members.  Each of them has a different feel and some of our members were able to participate in all three, and enjoy all three for what they brought to the table.  I do not hold any anger toward either of those forums, I just don't participate in them because I have a stronger affiliation with HV.

Amy Dugan wrote:

---

what was the STFU site

---

Stealthfusion

 

Is that all you care about???

And, by the way, so did HV.. I always went thru your Blog pages.

-- Edited by Sanders on Sunday 26th of July 2009 02:51:43 PM

Yes, Amy, and those goals requires that sites such as HV flourish. It requires that the moderators and administrators be able to trust their Technical Administrators and staff to keep the site safe. Please read my post above to get more insight into what happened with inside communication that is months old being aired in public over at STFU.

In general, when you post a link, it would help to add a FEW lines of preview before you add the link; you will get MORE traffic to your link that way. Just a thought. I want people to read what goes on your site but title and link alone looks like marketing.. Bring a bit of the words, it becomes more of a blog. Thanks.

Jen the Michigander wrote:

---

I spent some time lurking over at CGP when HV first went down and before this nice forum was established. But I couldn't bring myself to post anything. CGP doesn't have as many bots as it once did, but even two or three are too many for me. I don't want to waste my time arguing with bots, but they're like mosquitos-- when you try to ignore them, they still buzz around and bite you.

---

I completely agree. I think us here are so over arguing what we believe in we want to start working toward goals rather than proving them to obots.

 

Kbentleyis wrote:

---

I'm so glad we're all getting together.  I've been making a complete fool out of myself on Common Ground Politcs and someone, who I guess I insulted announced leaving because he/she couldn't take my mentality.

All I said to Soren (sp) was "the Nazies would love his/her views".  She/he had a bulleted list of who should be charged more for health care (overweight people, smokers, drinkers, etc.) and what everyone should be doing to be healthy....etc.

And, I was wrong.  But, I saw RED, you know--government control BS.  And, I went on to say things like why not charge ugly people more... etc.  I couldn't help myself.  And I went on to write the Nazies wanted all blonde-blue-eyed... etc.

Then a gal named Susan, guess she's a mod, complimented me on my informative posts and threads, but told me not everyone has to agree with me... and so on.

I wasn't banned, well not yet, but the day is young.

---

If it helps at all, I don't think you made a fool of yourself at all over at CGP.  Of course, I agreed with everything you said in all of your posts, so maybe I'm a bit biased.   

 

Xyndau wrote:

---

KB - It is really sad what happened at HCF.  I joined HCF in April 2008, shortly after it was created, and together we created that forum for what it became.  But it changed, and despite the name "common ground politics" there is very little tolerance for anything critical of Obama.  So, I would not worry much about being flamed by a HCF post.  You're among friends here .

---

stamp