eyeball Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 I think there's as much unwillingness as anything now. A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
GostHacked Posted July 21, 2016 Report Posted July 21, 2016 From the same film, "What we've got here is failure to communicate." I wonder where the failure is.
Big Guy Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 My perception is that certain people take offense whenever anyone disagrees with their opinions, immediately resort to insults, and then play the innocent, as if none of it were their fault. As in B says something hypocritical. A points out how hypocritical it is, and then B starts insulting A while proclaiming himself above the fray. Keep the stats and let the numbers show who is the problem around here. The numbers are easy to find: Keep track of those who initiate and try to stir up trouble. I have seen many posters REACT to an insult with an insult and then both get a warning and posts disappear. I suggest that if A and B were involved in personal attacks and A and C got involved in personal attacks and A and D got involved in personal attacks then it is very easy to spot where the problem is originating - give A a holiday. That kind of stat is very easy to keep track of and would solve some of the problems. 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.
August1991 Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) Greg, Charles, In case you see this comment - I read through the last few screens of this thread. I think you're doing well. (Charles, your posts were beyond reasonable.) Kimmy, I often disagree with you but in your recent posts elsewhere/in other threads, you have done nothing wrong. I kinda like the idea of a moderator/participant - if you know how to wear the hat well. ===== MapleLeafWeb, 10 or so years later, this is still a work in progress. Give it time. The University of Lethbridge is sitting on the best secret of English-Canada. (I wish a university in French-Canada could also have good administrators, someone like Greg, and people like Charles/Kimmy.) I may live in Montreal but I trust Alberta for diversity. Edited July 22, 2016 by August1991
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 Keep the stats and let the numbers show who is the problem around here. The numbers are easy to find: Keep track of those who initiate and try to stir up trouble. I have seen many posters REACT to an insult with an insult and then both get a warning and posts disappear. I suggest that if A and B were involved in personal attacks and A and C got involved in personal attacks and A and D got involved in personal attacks then it is very easy to spot where the problem is originating - give A a holiday. That kind of stat is very easy to keep track of and would solve some of the problems. Unless, of course, A is someone who takes positions that screechy, self-righteous people all get outraged by, and all resort to insults because they're not smart enough to actually discuss things intelligently. Then you'd be punishing A for his or her opinions while rewarding screechy, insulting ignorant people. "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
Smallc Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Sometimes, there's nothing intelligent to discuss. It goes both ways.
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 Sometimes, there's nothing intelligent to discuss. It goes both ways. What does that even mean? The fact is that the Left has decided that there are certain subjects that are 'closed', and they get offended whenever anyone brings them up. Any social conservative, for example, is bound to be insulted if they speak supportively of social conservative beliefs like anti-abortion, say or the death penalty or gay rights. Likewise, you cannot discuss immigration in a negative manner without brainless lefties hurling the same tired old insults at you, regardless of how many economic cites and justifications you provide for your position. The Left is insular, close-minded and utterly intolerant of any opinions which contradict their cherished beliefs. So if you challenge those positions people are going to insult you. That's just a given. And that means those who do challenge them are going to get involved in more rancorous discussions than some bland, middle of the road poster. "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
Big Guy Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 When problems of fighting occur in schools, sometimes the easiest solution is to remove the cause. If one fight involves A and B, while another fight involves A and C and yet another fight involves A and D another one involves A and E, then it becomes obvious who the problem person is - student A. Either force student A to change his behavior or remove him from the school. It is very obvious who student A is in MLW school. There is a solution if you want to apply it. 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.
Guest Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 When problems of fighting occur in schools, sometimes the easiest solution is to remove the cause. If one fight involves A and B, while another fight involves A and C and yet another fight involves A and D another one involves A and E, then it becomes obvious who the problem person is - student A. Either force student A to change his behavior or remove him from the school. It is very obvious who student A is in MLW school. There is a solution if you want to apply it. That's actually nonsense. You do realize that, right? Is that what trolling is?
Smallc Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 What does that even mean? Exactly what it says. The fact is that the Left has decided that there are certain subjects that are 'closed', and they get offended whenever anyone brings them up. Any social conservative, for example, is bound to be insulted if they speak supportively of social conservative beliefs like anti-abortion, say or the death penalty or gay rights. For the most part, those debates are long settled, with any of the opposition rooted in ignorance and or bigotry. Likewise, you cannot discuss immigration in a negative manner without brainless lefties hurling the same tired old insults at you, regardless of how many economic cites and justifications you provide for your position. The Left is insular, close-minded and utterly intolerant of any opinions which contradict their cherished beliefs. So if you challenge those positions people are going to insult you. That's just a given. And that means those who do challenge them are going to get involved in more rancorous discussions than some bland, middle of the road poster. Civil debates can still be had. It really depends on the content.
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) For the most part, those debates are long settled, with any of the opposition rooted in ignorance and or bigotry. Thanks for proving my point for me. Edited July 22, 2016 by Argus "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
Smallc Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Thanks for proving my point for me. There's no rational opposition to things like same sex rights, gay marriage, gender issues, etc.
The_Squid Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Thanks for proving my point for me. If someone is basing their argument on bigotry and ignorance, it's not surprising their arguments will be ridiculed and not considered valid. Ignorant, stupid viewpoints do not carry the same weight as well thought out arguments based on reason and knowledge.
poochy Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 There's no rational opposition to things like same sex rights, gay marriage, gender issues, etc. the etc. is where the problem lies
poochy Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 If someone is basing their argument on bigotry and ignorance, it's not surprising their arguments will be ridiculed and not considered valid. Ignorant, stupid viewpoints do not carry the same weight as well thought out arguments based on reason and knowledge. You mean ignorant and stupid like suggesting your precious little province shouldn't suffer the indignity of an oil pipeline just because you would rather someone else suffer the burden of the production and transportation of the oil the people in the province consumes? Stupid things like that? Well reasoned arguments indeed. What a joke.
BC_chick Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding.. So just to be clear, there's lefty wing nut, left wing biased, moderate centre left/right, and foaming at the mouth. Got it. I agree with you, all the moderators here tend to be somewhat centre/left wing biased, with the exception of Kimmy who is likely moderate right. There are no mods foaming at the mouth. The wingnut moderates are the worst! It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
The_Squid Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 You mean ignorant and stupid like suggesting your precious little province shouldn't suffer the indignity of an oil pipeline just because you would rather someone else suffer the burden of the production and transportation of the oil the people in the province consumes? Stupid things like that? Well reasoned arguments indeed. What a joke. That's not what I said. lol But carry on...
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 If someone is basing their argument on bigotry and ignorance, it's not surprising their arguments will be ridiculed and not considered valid. Ignorant, stupid viewpoints do not carry the same weight as well thought out arguments based on reason and knowledge. The problem is that I consider many of the positions taken by those on the left to be ignorant, stupid and bigoted too. And I point out just how stupid they are with argument and cites. Those on the Left, however, at least many of those here, seem to be incapable of doing that, and almost always resort fairly quickly to insults. Thus those who take a position which the Left disdains will be subject to insults almost automatically. So how can we with any logic decide to punish them for becoming involved in the exchange of insults more often when they are merely the victim of intolerance and ignorance from the Left? Unless, of course, we put in the rules that people are not allowed to take certain political or social positions. Which I know many on the Left here would love to see. "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
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 (edited) There's no rational opposition to things like same sex rights, gay marriage, gender issues, etc. Who are you to decide whether there can be rational arguments for or against something? I notice, btw, that you've narrow-focused on gay rights, yet that is certainly not the only one of the Left's holy grails. Edited July 22, 2016 by Argus "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
The_Squid Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Your entire "the left, the left" diatribes are hardly based on anything logical. They are mere assertions that you present as fact. You're right. When someone presents arguments like yours, there can be no serious debate about the issues. Take your judges thread... you were asked repeatedly for cites about how the judges were less qualified. You couldn't offer any, but kept on with the same refrain about skin colour and them not being qualified.
Smallc Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Who are you to decide whether there can be rational arguments for or against something? I notice, btw, that you've narrow-focused on gay rights, yet that is certainly not the only one of the Left's holy grails. That's because other issues, such as abortion, are slightly more open to debate. There are degrees. You don't get to decide, nor anyone else, that the rights of others as human beings, as guaranteed to all Canadians, are up for debate. They aren't.
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 Your entire "the left, the left" diatribes are hardly based on anything logical. Yes, I personally invented the Left/Right political divide, and there's actually no similarity whatsoever in people's political views. Take your judges thread... you were asked repeatedly for cites about how the judges were less qualified. You couldn't offer any, but kept on with the same refrain about skin colour and them not being qualified. I actually expected to be able to provide more information on that, to be honest. I mean, given this was a long delayed appointment of a pile of judges I was expecting there to be a series of articles detailing them and their history. But nobody covered it. Nobody. There was one article in one paper, and that was it. Now that the Liberals are in power again the media has gone to sleep and doesn't care what they do. However, basic logic says that when 70% of experienced judges and lawyers are white men and yet 90% of judges picked are neither, that they aren't being selected on merit but gender and ethnicity. Btw, I never said they were unqualified. Any lawyer is 'qualified'. It's just that some are WAY more qualified than others. "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
Argus Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Posted July 22, 2016 That's because other issues, such as abortion, are slightly more open to debate. There are degrees. You don't get to decide, nor anyone else, that the rights of others as human beings, as guaranteed to all Canadians, are up for debate. They aren't. You don't get to decide that what constitutes a 'right' is set in stone and cannot be discussed. There used to be some fairly practical 'rights' that were well understood. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, of the media, freedom to not be arrested without cause, freedom not to be tortured or beaten. How did the right to have an abortion become affixed to those rights? I mean, I'm pro choice but even I can see that's weird. How did 'right to have your marriage recognized by the state' become a 'right' that can't be questioned? Or 'right not to be offended", or "right to go to a needle exchange and have the state supervise you shooting heroin". There has been a big expansion of rights over the past twenty five years, and the position of the Left is that none can be open to discussion. "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
jacee Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Our modus operandi is simple: 1st infraction yields a warning 2nd infraction yields a 2nd warning with a threat of suspension for a 3rd infraction 3rd infraction yields a 1 day suspension 4th infraction yields a 1 week suspension 5th infraction yields a 1 month suspension and then we lose count. Really? Only once have I received just a warning. Every other time the message "You have received a warning" is accompanied by a suspension. Hmh.
BC_chick Posted July 22, 2016 Report Posted July 22, 2016 Really? Only once have I received just a warning. Every other time the message "You have received a warning" is accompanied by a suspension. Hmh. Where there goes the whole 'mods are lefty-lovers' narrative. Forever victims... It's kind of the worst thing that any humans could be doing at this time in human history. Other than that, it's fine." Bill Nye on Alberta Oil Sands
Recommended Posts