EPTAnd what the fuck does anyone care about internet respect? I had none for you, shame? I dont know you like you dont know me so why do you presume that A. I care about your respect or B. posting on an internet forum should dictate non-tangible levels of "respect" between two people that have absolutely no relation?
Net users are liberal atheists? - Page 2
| Blogs > Phyre |
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
And what the fuck does anyone care about internet respect? I had none for you, shame? I dont know you like you dont know me so why do you presume that A. I care about your respect or B. posting on an internet forum should dictate non-tangible levels of "respect" between two people that have absolutely no relation? | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
you win this flamewar | ||
|
bumatlarge
United States4567 Posts
Media is definitely liberal. Most of it at least. | ||
|
gwho
United States632 Posts
On May 11 2008 06:17 Eatme wrote: I thought right wing christians had a huge slice of the us tv cake. Mostly thinking about fox network but also others. Do liberal atheists really dominate? is fox right winged and christian at all? i don't really care for this right wing and left wing business, but i look at things in terms of constitutional and unconstitutional. left and right are just both new faces of unconstitutional. the only true constitutionalists are people like ron paul, kucinich to an extent, and others who don't pledge allegience to their party or money, but true principles- "ones such as trade with all, war and alliance with none" "congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof (not the FED, a private, for-private corporation)", individual liberties over big government, "all rights are reserved by the states". we really don't rule and govern by any of those principles anymore. =/ | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
|
bumatlarge
United States4567 Posts
GO RON PAUL! AND MONDI! | ||
|
man
United States272 Posts
yes and yes | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On May 11 2008 06:50 {88}iNcontroL wrote: uhhh I flamed him because he "believes the majority of the internet users" is liberal... If you cannot appreciate good ol human decay I dunno what to say to you. Btw, it's are, not is. Quite honestly, your parodying sarcasm didn't come off as that clear in the post you made. You can't expect everyone to have a hot link to your inner thoughts, and you certainly can't expect everyone to know how to interpret your (often) far fetched intentions. What's more, you lash out at them for not getting it?! True parody doesn't need someone defending it. It should stand on its own, with misinterpretation only adding to the comedic value. Poorly done parody however, needs defending... Frequent visitors of this site know sarcasm is your deal, but they still regularly misinterpret your posts. They eventually learn never to quote though, since it's pretty clear you own the sole rights to interpretation. Enough with bashing you in general though; winning the internets will land me nowhere. We were discussing the thread in question. Personally I don't feel he was guilty of doing any "generalizing". He's clearly modest in the way he presents his claim. Asking for statistics and help if anything ought to make this more of a hypothesis than an actual generalization. This is the definition of "generalization" that I, and most logical human beings, would interpret you most likely are referring to incontrol: "3. Logic. a. a proposition asserting something to be true either of all members of a certain class or of an indefinite part of that class." I expect no less than you disputing this interpretation of definition with "more reliable" dictionaries/definitions in your next post. However, that will not change the fact that most people will have had this definition in mind. (See, this was actually a generalization. I asserted most people would believe something without full evidence). The point of this whole post being: the thread starter made no asserting. He presented everything as a hypothesis. He stated that he made a claim to his brother. That he wanted supporting evidence in his favor. He actually came off as modest to me (and I bet to most people). Your post was TOTALLY off. And that's why no one got it. I didn't get what the hell it had to do with the thread, even with previous knowledge of your posting "habits". I join the ranks of ahrara_ claiming you owe an apology to NotSupporting and Sway. If you can't put aside your pride and admit you might've been wrong or exaggerating, at least apologize for being a complete dick. Seriously. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
And no, I don't owe a fucking apology. He made a retarded statement. You guys jumped on a number I pulled out of my ass knowing damn well if itsn't fucking 80% it is some high ass number because he is literally staking claim over anyone that has used the internet. | ||
|
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
| ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On May 11 2008 04:22 Hypnosis wrote: well the internet is full of politically incorrect stuff and sensitive christian conservatives are offended by everything. nuff said Uh... it's usually the other way around. Bleeding heart liberals are offended by racist/sexist/etc. The super conservative ARE racist/sexist/etc. And I don't think the OP's statement was accurate. You would make the assumption based on the majority of people you talk to over the internet being liberal atheists, but I'm willing to bet part of the reason for that is the forums/websites you hang out in. I have no idea whether there's more liberals, conservatives, atheists or theists but I can say there's a TON of every group. I think at one point I would've ignorantly agreed with the OP, but that's before I started reading some of the ridiculous replies and positive marks they got on Yahoo Answers. :X EDIT: Holy shit. My grammar was terrible in that post but my head and eyes hurts from watching 30 Rock all day. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Phyre
United States1288 Posts
By the way, by "internet user" I was mainly referring to those that user the internet fairly often for more than just checking e-mail for example. They don't need to live on a forum, but be fairly avid. Specifically, when I made that statement I was thinking about people that regularly express their opinions in one way or another online via things like facebook, forums, youtube, etc. But I digress. I'm interested to see the statistics to show what the actual break down is. | ||
| ||
