rotary Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 You're free to point out I'm wrong if that's your opinion. You're free to post information which you feel contradicts what I'm saying. The point where the discussion goes off the rails on this site is when you feel indignant about my opinion and feel the need to express that indignation as character assassination. Nobody here cares about your indignation. Nobody here cares that you're offended. Least of all me. And to return to the point of this topic. It is that sort of thing which should be moderated, for that is what brings down the quality of discussion, not me calling the Syrians illiterate desert dwellers I think there are many here who would assess your erroneous description of Syrian refugees as what actually brings down the quality of discussion here. I suspect by your comments about immigrants that you have had the opportunity to travel a lot to actually know the people you seem to discount so quickly. But ignorance is not always bliss.
Argus Posted March 28, 2016 Author Report Posted March 28, 2016 I think there are many here who would assess your erroneous description of Syrian refugees as what actually brings down the quality of discussion here. I suspect by your comments about immigrants that you have had the opportunity to travel a lot to actually know the people you seem to discount so quickly. But ignorance is not always bliss. I am as unimpressed and uninterested in your opinion of me as I am in almost everything else you write. I also don't care if ignorant progressives want to bleat and snivel that I'm being rude to some pet ethnic group they've decided needs their 'protection'. And if you want to call me names, I'm actually okay with that - as long as I'm allowed to give my unvarnished opinion of you right back. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
rotary Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 I am as unimpressed and uninterested in your opinion of me as I am in almost everything else you write. I also don't care if ignorant progressives want to bleat and snivel that I'm being rude to some pet ethnic group they've decided needs their 'protection'. And if you want to call me names, I'm actually okay with that - as long as I'm allowed to give my unvarnished opinion of you right back. What about the knowledgeable progressives?
Argus Posted March 28, 2016 Author Report Posted March 28, 2016 What about the knowledgeable progressives? Assuming there were any on this web site they would be able to put their case for why they think my opinions are wrong without resorting to character assassination. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
rotary Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 Assuming there were any on this web site they would be able to put their case for why they think my opinions are wrong without resorting to character assassination. Oh I think the character assassination begins at source. You've just reaffirmed that.
WestCoastRunner Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 Brilliant only in comparison to some. I, at least, am capable of articulating my opinion in a logical and coherent manner on the subjects under discussion. You evidently lack that ability, and so resort to insults in attempts to shut down discussions.It is your schtick here. There it is. I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
eyeball Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 Assuming there were any on this web site they would be able to put their case for why they think my opinions are wrong without resorting to character assassination.No one is more capable of assassinating your own character than you yourself. Anyone standing with you stands to be fragged as well. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 No one is more capable of assassinating your own character than you yourself. Anyone standing with you stands to be fragged as well. I think that is the point....thank you for confirming the member's contention and enjoy any "fraggings". Economics trumps Virtue.
Argus Posted March 28, 2016 Author Report Posted March 28, 2016 I think that is the point....thank you for confirming the member's contention and enjoy any "fraggings". Certain members here habitually write posts so laden with bitterness and conspiracy laden nonsense, and so lacking in value that I put them on my ignore list. They seem to enjoy subjecting the rest of you to their whining, though. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Charles Anthony Posted March 28, 2016 Report Posted March 28, 2016 (edited) Guys, Stop nagging. Stop the personal banter too. If you do not like something, Report it, ignore it and move on. Edited March 29, 2016 by Charles Anthony update We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
poochy Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 Methinks I apologize if it offends you. I have been assured by a poster I find particularly irritating, that he/she will not read anything from Big Guy after he/she reads "methinks". I am quite prepared to accept that restriction on my communications if it guarantees that I receive no comments from the irritating poster. The moderation standards here create an environment that is equivalent to a play pen for stupid children and people who are only interested in doing their best within the rules trolling. Some of these people like the above are good for nothing but this, but their stupidity is almost celebrated. There are too many others of this ilk to name, stupid rules for stupid people on a poorly managed forum. Let them have it.
Michael Hardner Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 Sorry to see you go, Poochy. We will all try to do better moving forward. Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
cybercoma Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 With all the post you've deleted in the past month, you leave those insults standing?
Michael Hardner Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 It's a lot harder to moderate against generalities such as 'stupid people on here' or 'stupid Canadians' ... who is that insulting ? Stupid people ? Is somebody going to come to me and say 'I am stupid and this post insulted me' ? I call these IANs or 'Insults Against No-one-in-particular' ... Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Guest Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 Is there any way you could just lock posts, mark them in red, with a buzzer or something, instead of deleting them? I'm missing out on a lot here.
Argus Posted March 29, 2016 Author Report Posted March 29, 2016 It's a lot harder to moderate against generalities such as 'stupid people on here' or 'stupid Canadians' ... who is that insulting ? Stupid people ? Is somebody going to come to me and say 'I am stupid and this post insulted me' ? I call these IANs or 'Insults Against No-one-in-particular' ... There are blanket insults such as I admit to having made use of. But it's also often very clearly and obviously targeted at individuals during a discussion. That's particularly in cases where the progressives don't like someone saying anything about a group. Then you start getting posts about 'xenophobia' and 'racism' which are clearly targeted at individuals involved in the discussion. For example, if you have two groups engaged in a discussion, and someone then posts, naming no names, a congratulation to one side for putting up with all the xenophobes and bigots, you know his purpose is to insult everyone on the opposite side of the discussion. People have accused me of being sensitive to the accusation. And they're right, on two counts. First, I'm trying to discuss something which I regard as important, and these cretins are retargeting the discussion onto me because they disapprove of my opinion. I have no desire to discuss me, as wonderful as I no-doubt am. Second, if someone was to make such suggestions in real life I'd respond by calling them morons and idiots and worse (which of course they are) but I'm not allowed to do that here. You can't say "Yeah? Go f*ck yourself" here or you'll get suspended. And quite rightly. But it leaves you stuck for a proper response if you're not a 'turn the other cheek' kind of guy. And I most definitely am not. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
eyeball Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 There are blanket insults such as I admit to having made use of. But it's also often very clearly and obviously targeted at individuals during a discussion. That's particularly in cases where the progressives don't like someone saying anything about a group. Then you start getting posts about 'xenophobia' and 'racism' which are clearly targeted at individuals involved in the discussion. For example, if you have two groups engaged in a discussion, and someone then posts, naming no names, a congratulation to one side for putting up with all the xenophobes and bigots, you know his purpose is to insult everyone on the opposite side of the discussion. People have accused me of being sensitive to the accusation. And they're right, on two counts. First, I'm trying to discuss something which I regard as important, and these cretins are retargeting the discussion onto me because they disapprove of my opinion. I have no desire to discuss me, as wonderful as I no-doubt am. Second, if someone was to make such suggestions in real life I'd respond by calling them morons and idiots and worse (which of course they are) but I'm not allowed to do that here. You can't say "Yeah? Go f*ck yourself" here or you'll get suspended. And quite rightly. But it leaves you stuck for a proper response if you're not a 'turn the other cheek' kind of guy. And I most definitely am not. What he said but insert the word conservative where progressive is used and lefties where racists and bigots are used. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Big Guy Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) I suggest that with Islamophobes, xenophobes, racists and/or bigots that it is sensible to apply the "duck" rule: "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck." If you want to duck (sic) the label then don't opine like one. But there are advantages to using anonymous opinion boards rather than face to face. For example, if somebody says ""Yeah? Go f*ck yourself" to someone face to face, they may find themselves being made painfully peaceful. Here, one is restricted to false bravado because of the anonymity and the guarantee that your sputtering goes the way of hot air. Generally, people who call other people morons and idiots or worse in the real world are held accountable for their words and actions. They generally do not repeat that error. Edited March 29, 2016 by Big Guy Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 It could be a platypus. The unusual appearance of this egg-laying, duck-billed, beaver-tailed, otter-footed mammal baffled European naturalists when they first encountered it, with some considering it an elaborate hoax. Wiki A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 I suggest that with Islamophobes, xenophobes, racists and/or bigots that it is sensible to apply the "duck" rule: A better suggestion would be to actually counter the argument. Then, if successful, one has proved it's a duck. If one can't do that, then one is just blowing smoke.
eyeball Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 A better suggestion would be to actually counter the argument. Hence my contention that being mealy-eared is the real problem. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Guest Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 Hence my contention that being mealy-eared is the real problem. It just requires a better argument. I've tried and tried again, but I just can't make myself understood sometimes.
Big Guy Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 A better suggestion would be to actually counter the argument. Then, if successful, one has proved it's a duck. If one can't do that, then one is just blowing smoke. I do not disagree. There are still those who will see a bird that looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck but are prepared to argue that it is only a misunderstood swan. But that is the restriction of abductive reasoning. Besides, where there is smoke there is fire! Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted March 29, 2016 Report Posted March 29, 2016 It just requires a better argument. I've tried and tried again, but I just can't make myself understood sometimes. I still think better listening is the real prerequisite. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Recommended Posts