|
On July 18 2018 04:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ok, ok, band of brothers, you can circle jerk together over whether or not my intention is to shift the goal posts over arguing over foe/economic foe/military foe/whatever.
In fact I'll be gracious and announce open season, that you can discuss what are my true intentions in absentia, and I'll entirely resist the urge to reply whatsoever for 5 days, so you can get it out of your system.
Meanwhile I'll just remain happy that writing #fakenews is essentially banned.
I think we all get that you don't understand what the problem with your posts is. However, did it not strike you as problematic that, not only did people from across the political spectrum describe to you what the problem was, but not one person came to your defense? You need to exercise just a little more self-awareness.
|
I didn’t think his post was that bad. But clearly this argument does not end until someone is declared winner.
|
i think its safe to say that having read through the last couple of pages, we are all winners.
|
Having someone declared winner seems like it might have been better in the long run; ofc the loser wouldn't accept the conclusion, so maybe not.
and I doubt there's someone they could mutually agree upon to be the judge; which would just leave the moderators, who've already acted as they chose to on the matter.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
By the power invested in me by TeamLiquid, I hereby declare you all to be winners! Everyone happy now? 
|
On July 17 2018 08:08 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I get ganged up on all the time. For instance one poster here does so at every possible instance to the extent that I simply don't read his posts anymore. Yet I manage to not do an xdaunt and play a victimisation card. It can be difficult admittedly.
Also, I don't get why xdaunt thinks my posting is unacceptable. What exactly is unacceptable? Care to give an example? Preferably one that isn't from the old pol thread? You frequently write that I should be banned under the rule, without specifying what rule. So here is another chance to be specific. That you view my "rash of posting" as impudence that I would argue against you and point out the gaping holes in what you write, does not my posting unacceptable make.
IgnE gives the example
On July 18 2018 04:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ok, ok, band of brothers, you can circle jerk together over whether or not my intention is to shift the goal posts over arguing over foe/economic foe/military foe/whatever.
In fact I'll be gracious and announce open season, that you can discuss what are my true intentions in absentia, and I'll entirely resist the urge to reply whatsoever for 5 days, so you can get it out of your system.
Meanwhile I'll just remain happy that writing #fakenews is essentially banned.
Don't ask for a doctor's diagnosis and then ignore the result.
For comparison, this is from five months ago in the thread.
On February 17 2018 03:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I got to ask, do people I argue with really have problems with my posts? Everytime I engage in debate I seem to always get some weird brush off about my "post history" or "other people already criticise you" or "you have been such a massive ass". Is it really that different in tone to everyone else? What is it in particular?
|
On July 18 2018 05:33 BigFan wrote:By the power invested in me by TeamLiquid, I hereby declare you all to be winners! Everyone happy now?
Ecstatic.
|
On July 18 2018 05:39 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2018 08:08 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I get ganged up on all the time. For instance one poster here does so at every possible instance to the extent that I simply don't read his posts anymore. Yet I manage to not do an xdaunt and play a victimisation card. It can be difficult admittedly.
Also, I don't get why xdaunt thinks my posting is unacceptable. What exactly is unacceptable? Care to give an example? Preferably one that isn't from the old pol thread? You frequently write that I should be banned under the rule, without specifying what rule. So here is another chance to be specific. That you view my "rash of posting" as impudence that I would argue against you and point out the gaping holes in what you write, does not my posting unacceptable make. IgnE gives the example Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 04:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ok, ok, band of brothers, you can circle jerk together over whether or not my intention is to shift the goal posts over arguing over foe/economic foe/military foe/whatever.
In fact I'll be gracious and announce open season, that you can discuss what are my true intentions in absentia, and I'll entirely resist the urge to reply whatsoever for 5 days, so you can get it out of your system.
Meanwhile I'll just remain happy that writing #fakenews is essentially banned. Don't ask for a doctor's diagnosis and then ignore the result. For comparison, this is from five months ago in the thread. Show nested quote +On February 17 2018 03:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I got to ask, do people I argue with really have problems with my posts? Everytime I engage in debate I seem to always get some weird brush off about my "post history" or "other people already criticise you" or "you have been such a massive ass". Is it really that different in tone to everyone else? What is it in particular?
We are all Winners. Get it? You already won!
|
On July 18 2018 06:25 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 05:39 Danglars wrote:On July 17 2018 08:08 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I get ganged up on all the time. For instance one poster here does so at every possible instance to the extent that I simply don't read his posts anymore. Yet I manage to not do an xdaunt and play a victimisation card. It can be difficult admittedly.
Also, I don't get why xdaunt thinks my posting is unacceptable. What exactly is unacceptable? Care to give an example? Preferably one that isn't from the old pol thread? You frequently write that I should be banned under the rule, without specifying what rule. So here is another chance to be specific. That you view my "rash of posting" as impudence that I would argue against you and point out the gaping holes in what you write, does not my posting unacceptable make. IgnE gives the example On July 18 2018 04:19 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ok, ok, band of brothers, you can circle jerk together over whether or not my intention is to shift the goal posts over arguing over foe/economic foe/military foe/whatever.
In fact I'll be gracious and announce open season, that you can discuss what are my true intentions in absentia, and I'll entirely resist the urge to reply whatsoever for 5 days, so you can get it out of your system.
Meanwhile I'll just remain happy that writing #fakenews is essentially banned. Don't ask for a doctor's diagnosis and then ignore the result. For comparison, this is from five months ago in the thread. On February 17 2018 03:09 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
I got to ask, do people I argue with really have problems with my posts? Everytime I engage in debate I seem to always get some weird brush off about my "post history" or "other people already criticise you" or "you have been such a massive ass". Is it really that different in tone to everyone else? What is it in particular? We are all Winners. Get it? You already won!
I love being the winner. I didn't even have to do anything this time!
|
I would argue that saying that we're all winners is offensive in that once someone has 'won" they can do no more good to their cause. I would prefer to be stated as one with the man of Panthera blood in to be "winning"
|
On July 18 2018 08:14 Sermokala wrote:
I would argue that saying that we're all winners is offensive in that once someone has 'won" they can do no more good to their cause. I would prefer to be stated as one with the man of Panthera blood in to be "winning"
Ever heard of “win moar”? Still a chance for that.
|
On July 18 2018 08:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 08:14 Sermokala wrote:
I would argue that saying that we're all winners is offensive in that once someone has 'won" they can do no more good to their cause. I would prefer to be stated as one with the man of Panthera blood in to be "winning" Ever heard of “win moar”? Still a chance for that.
This is mearly a motto for those that limit themselves merly to rationalize their further success to themselves. One must have one gear and one speed: go.
|
On July 18 2018 05:33 BigFan wrote:By the power invested in me by TeamLiquid, I hereby declare you all to be winners! Everyone happy now?
This feels suspiciously like a participation award. Or is it a continuation of the ABL 3K celebration?
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 18 2018 12:15 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 05:33 BigFan wrote:By the power invested in me by TeamLiquid, I hereby declare you all to be winners! Everyone happy now? This feels suspiciously like a participation award. Or is it a continuation of the ABL 3K celebration?
If everyone wins, no one loses! Nah, that celebration is done at this point. It was a once in a couple of years chance to post a meme and not get actioned unless you were the 2nd poster. Too bad only a single person actually took advantage of it lol.
|
I cringe at my older posts from my teen years, but you can tell the level of moderation was completely different, and depended on who you knew from the community. Now, it's been pretty equal moderation across the board. So yea, I miss the old TL at times, but then it reminds me that better moderation just improved people posting here in general, including myself.
|
On July 18 2018 12:23 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2018 12:15 ticklishmusic wrote:On July 18 2018 05:33 BigFan wrote:By the power invested in me by TeamLiquid, I hereby declare you all to be winners! Everyone happy now? This feels suspiciously like a participation award. Or is it a continuation of the ABL 3K celebration? If everyone wins, no one loses! Nah, that celebration is done at this point. It was a once in a couple of years chance to post a meme and not get actioned unless you were the 2nd poster. Too bad only a single person actually took advantage of it lol.
seems like something thanos would do. balance in all things.
|
Is it acceptable to change the subject without warning? I have a question I'd like to ask the thread, but I also understand that a discussion is currently going on.
The question I wanted to ask, and how it would be posted in the actual thread:
+ Show Spoiler +I have a longer question that I'd like an answer from xDaunt or Sermokala (or someone who considers themselves to the right on this forum) on, as well as the viewpoints which I am almost guaranteed to get when posing a question; I think it might make for an interesting discussion as well.
How do you view the American Dream, and in what context?
Points that I believe interesting to address are:
-What do you think the American Dream is? (Please, not the Wikipedia definition. Your own words would be preferable, as even the way you phrase it is important to understanding how you think. I'm asking as an attempt to educate myself on your views.)
-Does the idea of the American Dream (what your idea of it is) extend to immigrants? Should they be considered the sane as any poorer citizen of the United States, where they can lead a successful and fulfilling life in the United States if they choose to come here? How should policy on immigration effect this?
-Does the American Dream entail more or less government intervention? Is it more in line with guaranteeing everyone a minimum quality of life (which can be considered success compared to life in less developed countries) or the spirit of competition in the market (the American Dream does not work if a lazy person can be guaranteed the same standard as a diligent worker)? How should regulatory practice and types of services provided by the government reflect this?
I'd rather ask if it's okay in here than take a warning to the teeth.
|
On July 18 2018 15:18 Howie_Dewitt wrote:Is it acceptable to change the subject without warning? I have a question I'd like to ask the thread, but I also understand that a discussion is currently going on. The question I wanted to ask, and how it would be posted in the actual thread: + Show Spoiler +I have a longer question that I'd like an answer from xDaunt or Sermokala (or someone who considers themselves to the right on this forum) on, as well as the viewpoints which I am almost guaranteed to get when posing a question; I think it might make for an interesting discussion as well.
How do you view the American Dream, and in what context?
Points that I believe interesting to address are:
-What do you think the American Dream is? (Please, not the Wikipedia definition. Your own words would be preferable, as even the way you phrase it is important to understanding how you think. I'm asking as an attempt to educate myself on your views.)
-Does the idea of the American Dream (what your idea of it is) extend to immigrants? Should they be considered the sane as any poorer citizen of the United States, where they can lead a successful and fulfilling life in the United States if they choose to come here? How should policy on immigration effect this?
-Does the American Dream entail more or less government intervention? Is it more in line with guaranteeing everyone a minimum quality of life (which can be considered success compared to life in less developed countries) or the spirit of competition in the market (the American Dream does not work if a lazy person can be guaranteed the same standard as a diligent worker)? How should regulatory practice and types of services provided by the government reflect this? I'd rather ask if it's okay in here than take a warning to the teeth.
I'm not a mod, but I'm going to say of course this would be ok. Current efforts are trying to weed out posts without content. If your post is at least facially genuine and not completely off topic you'll get the benefit of the doubt.
|
Immigration is on the page and it's a legitimate question. The hard part is not dog piling on whatever response it gets. I find myself struggling not to preemptively shit on it already. I'm fairly familiar with traditional conservative positions on the matter so it's mostly just a matter of seeing whether they are shared by those considering themselves right of center or whatever.
I find the question more intriguing to ask liberals personally though. So I suppose if I had a request it would be that anyone wishing to critique someone's response first put forth their own answers in a separate post (and don't double post).
|
idk where to ask and it surely doesn’t deserve its own thread so, sorry; what’s the deal on emojis? are we cool with using them on TL? because i almost never see them. i felt a little out of place using it in the thread. but is that just in my head?
i know twitch emotes are strictly off the table so idk if that’s the same sort of frowned upon non-verbal communication or what? with the bbcode smilies i feel like i’m sort of in a gray area here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
