Cyprus-Forum.com

[MicAtCyp]

Kifeas,
My argument about the way houses were built followed a previous argument on the values of properties. So I don't think I should have analysed on this particular point further. I know very well the reasons why the situation was like that. In fact I dare say I know and understand the TCs, the past and present events that concern them, almost as much as they themselves.
However this forum is/or turned to be, a debating forum. Each one presents his own side.

Viewpoint,
My style is sometimes aggressive and attacking. Not always. That's quite different than being offensive.And if you notice carefully I do the same against some GCs too.
I use this style because I came to beleive this is the only way to fire the discussion and force my "opponent" to reveal his REAL thoughts. Otherwise he would stay diplomatic, and the whole discussion be so "pinky and rosy" that it would not reflect his/hers real thoughts.
On the other hand I noticed that some people get stuck to the "unpolite part" like the "pisses me off part", and fail to see the arguments that follow. Notice dear VP I ALWAYS support my arguments, and I beleive it's upto each individual to make the right use of them.

So Insan should be allowed to air his views without being given abuse which he was only trying to counter, if you dont like his ideas then its easy dont respond if you going to be rude.

Can you tell me what was my abuse to Insan?

-mikkie2- why are you always going on about egg shells....

Because like Mikkie said the egg shell spreading is a way to detroy the line of thinking of your "oponent". If he would first think " I should not say this because it might be considered offensive, I should not say that etc etc in the end he will not say what he really wants.
No matter how many egg shells are put in front of me, when someone comes with an argument which is insulting by itself e.g that the 1974 Invasion was a peace operation, I will not think more than a second to brake all the egg shells and reply the way I want.

For me it is obvious Kifeas wants ALL his OWN land back.

Try reading his response, under the circumstances he would have accepted compensation reluctantly but he has issues with the compensation procedures.

See what I meant above? Kifeas did not actually say that. in his effort to be polite he answered you diplomatically avoiding the real issue. So you ended up with the wrong assumptions...

If you are right in what you say then we did the right thing by saying YES, if it was so much in our favour dont you think???otherwise you would have called us idiots for saying if we had of said NO, but thats what you wanted us to say???

Of course I am right! If you were in this forum last May you would see many GCs said quite clearly that you would be "idiots" if you said NO to the Anan Plan.They even went further and said thats what they would vote if they were TCs!. Piratis said that more than 100 times....

[-mikkie2-]

VP,

The way MicAtCyp explained my 'egg shells' description is spot on. It is made that we should not broach certain subjects for fear of offense. To me, this is a way of drawing 'red lines' on the discussion and as such is not a constructive approach to debate.

[erolz]

VP,

The way MicAtCyp explained my 'egg shells' description is spot on. It is made that we should not broach certain subjects for fear of offense. To me, this is a way of drawing 'red lines' on the discussion and as such is not a constructive approach to debate.

Surely the intent of the moderator is not to place red lines on what is (or can be) said but how and why it is said. If the how is 'rudely' or 'overtly agresssive or personal' and the why clearly to 'insult,annoy and inflame' then red lines are necessary and wanted imo. You can say what you like if you say it politley and your intent (as deemed by moderator) is not to cause offence. No where (forum or country) has no limits at all on free speech. Free speech carries responsbilites and limits.

[-mikkie2-]

Yet more misunderstandings!

The red lines seem to be drawn by TC's, not the moderator! That was my point. Some things that are said, even if they slighly lean towards offense, seems to kick off a disproportionate response by certain people. We are all grown up adults here. We should be able to take ceratin things on the chin. The moderator did his job with a certain post by Andrik which was totally offensive. I have not seen anyone say the sort of things he said and the moderator was right to remove that post. However, a combative approach to debate is not wrong in my opinion. You can't sit here and talk nicely about certain issues, particularly if you have strong opinions. Fear of hurting peoples feelings stifles debade!

[MicAtCyp]

Mikkie just watch the forum dying out pretty soon. This elementary school mentality "to report you to the teacher" already started affecting the forum as far as I see...
I really wouldn't like to be at the position of the admin. I mean whatever decision this person will take will result to someone getting annoyed...

[Viewpoint]

MicAtCyp -mikkie2-, you to are both unbelieveable, you seem to be arguing that inflaming an arguement will stimulate and produce rationale expression of opinion, think again, all it will induce is an abusive response that will be unproductive and not help us understand each others views. We are all human and naturally if we read something that insults us personally or our community we automtically put up our defences and concentrate more on the insult rather than the real core of the subject. But if this is a reflection of your own characters then continue to hurl inuendos and inflamatory sentences, but be prepared to get the same shit thrown back at you in the same form, where will that get us???? nowhere.

[MicAtCyp]

but be prepared to get the same shit thrown back at you in the same form, where will that get us????

To a balance of shits perhaps?

[-mikkie2-]

To a balance of shits perhaps?

We would probably argue whose shit smelled nicest!

[brother]

No my shit stinks, so you win.

[Viewpoint]

So do we agree that Ahmet should have first refusal in exchanging his land in the south for the property he has been living on for 20 years??
he doesnt want to return to the south, plus his land is more valuable in the south compared to the land he used in the north, should he get paid the difference????
We are offering Yiorgos either compensation or alternative land close to Ahmet.