DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: BT on September 08, 2008, 11:50:19 AM
-
Stop Them
-
Stop Them
I will, but you know this place wont be any fun without them. Few really say anything of any worth or substance in here. It is the personal attacks that make the place almost interesting.
-
Please observe that nearly all the personal attacks seem to begin with some deliberately annoying, provocative and insulting remark by Kramer.
-
I will
Thank you.
-
Please observe that nearly all the personal attacks seem to begin with some deliberately annoying, provocative and insulting remark by Kramer.
As BT would say, control yourself.
-
Please observe that all the personal attacks begin with some deliberately annoying, provocative and insulting remark by XO.
-
Please observe that all the personal attacks begin with some deliberately annoying, provocative and insulting remark by XO.
"As BT would say, control yourself."
-
I shall strive to not insult Kramer if he refrains from his vile insults upon me.
-
I can`t make any promises
but I`ll try and cut down on my swearing also
-
I shall strive to not insult Kramer if he refrains from his vile insults upon me.
So, you can't control yourself?
-
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article4703539.ece (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article4703539.ece)
If his aim was to be noticed by America, Russell Brand more than achieved his goal last night as he ranted that President Bush was a “retarded cowboy” while hosting the MTV awards.
The British comedian, who is a virtual unknown in America, left the crème of the music world stunned as he championed Barack Obama, ran down George Bush and made lewd jokes about the Christian pop band Jonas Brothers.
Ignoring the renowned patriotism of Americans, Brand told the Hollywood audience they must vote for Barrack Obama “on behalf of the world”, before insinuating that America had lower standards than Britain when it came to picking leaders.
-
What standard could be ower than electing a clown like Juniorbush.
I imagine that the music world was in agreement rather than stunned.
Juniorbush lumbers about DC in cowboy boots and tries really hard to sound like some sort of retard. His diction is more a parody of a Texas drawl than an actual realistic Texas drawl. My father was from Texas, and I know an authentic Texas drawl, and Juniorbush's is fake.
If you don't want to be called a cowboy, take off the riding boots. They aren't office wear.
If you don't want to be called a retard, stop saying stupid sh*t like "They hate us for our freedoms", and try to sound literate. Lots of Texasn sound literate, but Juniorbush is not one of them.
-
What standard could be ower than electing a clown like Juniorbush.
I imagine that the music world was in agreement rather than stunned.
Juniorbush lumbers about DC in cowboy boots and tries really hard to sound like some sort of retard. His diction is more a parody of a Texas drawl than an actual realistic Texas drawl. My father was from Texas, and I know an authentic Texas drawl, and Juniorbush's is fake.
If you don't want to be called a cowboy, take off the riding boots. They aren't office wear.
If you don't want to be called a retard, stop saying stupid sh*t like "They hate us for our freedoms", and try to sound literate. Lots of Texasn sound literate, but Juniorbush is not one of them.
Would you describe yourself a flaming liberal?
-
No, I am a moderate Socialist.
-
So, you can't control yourself?
Apparently not.
-
No, I am a moderate Socialist.
Were you born that way?
Please enlighten me as to when, why and where did this conversion happened to you?
-
Sorry, any explanation would merely invite you to insult me. You are incapable of understanding anyone's motivation for anything.
You are only seeking excuses for dropping flaming bags of poo about.
Michael Tee has enumerated many reasons for similar beliefs, as have I. If you are truly interested, they are still posted. You could have paid better attention, but your goal is not to learn, merely to insult in the most sophomoronic manner possible.
No one enjoys your flaming bags of poo.
-
Amazing how this thread has generated so many responses in such a short time, and it's merely a request for us to be more civil. Is this some form of rationalization exercise? Trying to find a loophole in the request?
Like Ami said, referring to Bt, Control yourself. If someone makes some asanine comment about you, either don't respond in kind, don't respond period, or best yet, refocus the conversation on the topic/issue at hand, minus the pathetic 3rd grade name calling
Is that possible with what are supposed to be grown-ups, around here??
-
This place wouldn't be the same without its flame wars. Kramer is the front-runner in initiating personal attacks with sirs a far distant second. I enjoy responding to both in kind, and I think most of the posters in the group can take care of themselves very nicely without the paternalism. I can't speak for Kramer or sirs, but as far as I'm concerned, when it's over, it's over. I don't hold grudges.
The downside of the no-holds-barred policy is that some members might have a valuable contribution to make but hold back because they fear an overly sharp riposte. My first reaction to that is, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen," but again, that may be a kind of short-sighted response if in fact it is costing us the POV of someone who really has some good insight into a particular situation.
If you are going to have a "no-flames" policy in effect, I think it should start with the first stone thrown (sorry for the mixed metaphor) and not wait until the guy who responds naturally has to be lumped in with the instigator. Step in at the beginning or not at all. And IMHO, I'd prefer to see the free-for-all policies of the group continued, but I'll play by the rules.
-
Mikey,
I think you misunderstood my post.
This is not negotiable.
Those who cannot refrain from personal attacks will be dealt with.
End of story.
-
This place wouldn't be the same without its flame wars. Kramer is the front-runner in initiating personal attacks with sirs a far distant second. I enjoy responding to both in kind, and I think most of the posters in the group can take care of themselves very nicely without the paternalism. I can't speak for Kramer or sirs, but as far as I'm concerned, when it's over, it's over. I don't hold grudges.
The downside of the no-holds-barred policy is that some members might have a valuable contribution to make but hold back because they fear an overly sharp riposte. My first reaction to that is, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen," but again, that may be a kind of short-sighted response if in fact it is costing us the POV of someone who really has some good insight into a particular situation.
If you are going to have a "no-flames" policy in effect, I think it should start with the first stone thrown (sorry for the mixed metaphor) and not wait until the guy who responds naturally has to be lumped in with the instigator. Step in at the beginning or not at all. And IMHO, I'd prefer to see the free-for-all policies of the group continued, but I'll play by the rules.
Mike,
You are not a bad guy, I even like you. Your word is good because you bought me that bottle of wine after you lost the bet we had. You are a charismatic fellow, that is hard to deny. XO I haven't been able to make a connection with him (obviously he can't either -- could be something that goes back to my non-existent relationship with my great great grandfather), XO seems to have a different kinda anger than you. It might be that a conservative beat the crap out of him and he never got over it. Yeah I'm with you, insults roll of my back. But I guess when BT speaks it's like EF Hutton and we have to abide by his rules. After being gone for a couple of years I was pretty nice to people but didn't think I had to be nice to Obama or groups of people like his supporters in general without singling a specific person out. But anyway the first thing Brass did was call me a racist. XO insulted me first too. As far as you are concerned I think we just insulted each other simultaneously but in a kidding way. I guess maybe some people thought we were serious. I certainly don't mind you calling me a fascist, Nazi, etc (whoops for the slow people I guess I better say just kidding) Maybe XO takes things more personally though.
-
This place wouldn't be the same without its flame wars.
That, I believe, is the point.
If you are going to have a "no-flames" policy in effect, I think it should start with the first stone thrown (sorry for the mixed metaphor) and not wait until the guy who responds naturally has to be lumped in with the instigator.
If someone "responds naturally" by acting like a jerk, he should be excoriated just as much as the individual who "threw the first stone." In fact, given the nature of this forum it is likely that the person "responding naturally" will see and respond to the "first stone" prior to the moderators seeing and responding. Furthermore, it is a rationalization to equate a "natural response" to a retaliatory flame. Rather than "respond naturally" I think it would be better to "respond responsibly." (I guess, if we use those "cover our ass" alcohol ads the booze companies air as a frame of reference for that slogan, that means either don't respond too much or don't respond while driving!)
The flame wars only male this place interesting for flamers. The debate is what I come here for. That's one reason I give up on the flame wars more than I used to. What's the point. I don't evern bother with many of the posters on this site because they never offer anything worth reading. Frankly, Michael, I ignored your repeated posts about McCain's "phony torture" because I wouldn't be civil in such a debate. I won't lump you, personally, with those who add virtually nothing substantive to this forum because you do make good points from time to time and you have half a brain (the left half, apparently :D . But I will much more gladly engage in a debate (even one that may get heated) with people like UP, Ami, BT, Sirs, Plane, Domer, Lanya, XO, fatman, Cindy and others. Even some of the old shouting matches I used to have with Mint and (damn I miss) terra were often substantive behind the emotion. I'd love to see Leslie (Plum) and Kim around here. Freak was another A-1 debater. Each of these might get mad and even throw an insult in heated debate. But they didn't make a point of it (OK, maybe Terra did occasionally :D ). Most of what they wrote was interesting and worth reading and responding to.
Wouldn't be the same? Wouldn't that be great?
-
I think Kramer's about the only guy here who understands what no-holds-barred debate is all about, but what the hell, when BT speaks, everyone listens. He got THAT right. So fuck it, why not give it a try? Civility is the new order of the day. Let's all give it a try. Let's make the Oxford Union look like a bunch a fuckin barbarians.
-
I think Kramer's about the only guy here who understands what no-holds-barred debate is all about, but what the hell, when BT speaks, everyone listens. He got THAT right. So fuck it, why not give it a try? Civility is the new order of the day. Let's all give it a try. Let's make the Oxford Union look like a bunch a fuckin barbarians.
Well he did bring the ball and the bat.
Wasn't long ago I tired of the responsibility of being a monitor , I think I took it too seriously.
And every trick I knew was used up , I was exausted with trying to come up with something that would work.
I feel for BT since I left him holding the bag full of responsibility , but I don't want to return to my former office yet , things are working just about as well without my maintenence and authority , so I just wonder what I was doing instead of what thought I was doing?
My hand is a little better , but I need to stay breif and not respond to everyone.
-
This place wouldn't be the same without its flame wars. Kramer is the front-runner in initiating personal attacks with sirs a far distant second. I enjoy responding to both in kind, and I think most of the posters in the group can take care of themselves very nicely without the paternalism. I can't speak for Kramer or sirs, but as far as I'm concerned, when it's over, it's over. I don't hold grudges.
The downside of the no-holds-barred policy is that some members might have a valuable contribution to make but hold back because they fear an overly sharp riposte. My first reaction to that is, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen," but again, that may be a kind of short-sighted response if in fact it is costing us the POV of someone who really has some good insight into a particular situation.
If you are going to have a "no-flames" policy in effect, I think it should start with the first stone thrown (sorry for the mixed metaphor) and not wait until the guy who responds naturally has to be lumped in with the instigator. Step in at the beginning or not at all. And IMHO, I'd prefer to see the free-for-all policies of the group continued, but I'll play by the rules.
Mike,
You are not a bad guy, I even like you. Your word is good because you bought me that bottle of wine after you lost the bet we had. You are a charismatic fellow, that is hard to deny. XO I haven't been able to make a connection with him (obviously he can't either -- could be something that goes back to my non-existent relationship with my great great grandfather), XO seems to have a different kinda anger than you. It might be that a conservative beat the crap out of him and he never got over it. Yeah I'm with you, insults roll of my back. But I guess when BT speaks it's like EF Hutton and we have to abide by his rules. After being gone for a couple of years I was pretty nice to people but didn't think I had to be nice to Obama or groups of people like his supporters in general without singling a specific person out. But anyway the first thing Brass did was call me a racist. XO insulted me first too. As far as you are concerned I think we just insulted each other simultaneously but in a kidding way. I guess maybe some people thought we were serious. I certainly don't mind you calling me a fascist, Nazi, etc (whoops for the slow people I guess I better say just kidding) Maybe XO takes things more personally though.
Bt does have a sort of educator charm about him, I must admit. ;)
Oh and btw, that was a complement. I notice that folks here really do not always want to engage in a debate, however. More often than not, it's opinions along with a few googles. I would never question someone's trade, or profession on this board, and yet I hear many who just refuse to respect the facts that are presented from the stance of the person's direct experience/not necessarily a POINT OF VIEW. So, this is a great place to settle in with a cup of coffee, but a debate group...I would give it an NP (nearing proficient grade).
-
BT
Pooch
Amianthus
Thanks for saying what needed to be said.
And I'm with you Pooch, I'm here for the debate.
-
BT
Pooch
Amianthus
Thanks for saying what needed to be said.
And I'm with you Pooch, I'm here for the debate.
I know. It shows.
And Hnumpah's another one I like debating with. See, never make lists - you always forget people.
-
I`m all for civility
but truth be told
flaming is very boring and near zero information to learn
I`m here for the exchange of ideas
a few weeks ago I gave thanks to how much I learned here.
I`m still learning.
but sometimes it gets to be a monty python skit.
the one which a man is willing to pay money for an arguement.
-
I`m all for civility
but truth be told
flaming is very boring and near zero information to learn
I`m here for the exchange of ideas
a few weeks ago I gave thanks to how much I learned here.
I`m still learning.
but sometimes it gets to be a monty python skit.
the one which a man is willing to pay money for an arguement.
lol
Love that skit, and yes, it does remind me of that at times.
Just trying to keep up with Mint made me learn how to use Google more effectively. (Well I could never keep up with Mint but I tried.)
-
but sometimes it gets to be a monty python skit.
No it doesn't.
-
No it doesn't.
==============
There is a very famous Monty Python skit as kimba described. John Cleese is a character who has been hiured to naysay everything that another actor (Michael Palin?) says. Then they argue about how the argument is not a proper one.
-
Then they argue about how the argument is not a proper one.
No they didn't.
-
The Argument Clinic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k&feature=related)
-
lol!!!
I really didn`t see that coming.
I am humbled
-
I am getting the feeling BT's denials were actually a parody of this skit.
-
I am getting the feeling BT's denials were actually a parody of this skit.
Yeah, I laughed when I saw that.
-
I am getting the feeling BT's denials were actually a parody of this skit.
Yeah. Mine too. I did that deliberately. The first time I ever heard that skit was on AFN (Armed Forces Network) radio in Belgium. It's absolutely priceless.
I only tried to make a joke. I wasn't expecting a sort of a Spanish Inquisition . . .
-
Didn't .
Did!
Thanks for putting this up. This and the dead parrot sketch are some of my favorites.
-
I wasn't expecting a sort of a Spanish Inquisition . . .
¡No espera nadie jamás a la Inquisición española!
-
I wasn't expecting a sort of a Spanish Inquisition . . .
¡No espera nadie jamás a la Inquisición española!
Yeah, cool, but try saying THAT with a silly British accent!