|
On November 08 2016 08:59 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 08:57 xDaunt wrote:On November 08 2016 08:49 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:42 xDaunt wrote: Well let me lay this to bed so that y'all have something to cite in the future when the topic comes up: I believe that a country should do whatever is necessary to win a war if it is engaged in a war. This may include "total war." The point is that strict "morality" or "legality" shouldn't be the main considerations. Winning should be. And to the extent that a nation is unwilling to do what is necessary to win, then it should get out/stay out of the conflict. That only raises further questions. Of course it should. Do you believe that if you're unwilling to torture infants to death if that's what it takes to win the war then you should just completely stay out of all wars? And this is why I never talk to you anymore. Tired of being made to feel wrong all the time? No, because all you do is troll. You're not interested in real discussion, which is why you're an embarrassment of a mod.
|
i'ts pretty clear that xdaunt did in fact support an extreme method of fixing issues, whether genocide would be an applicable term depends on which definition is used. at any rate, xdaunt is clearly in the wrong based on his response to my post, wherein he states a specific intent to not look at the reality of the situation and takes free rein to be disingenuous instead. (note this is the kind of problem that has to be dealt with tofu, or else it breeds further problems). So I feel the matter is reasonably addressed here, and how the mods wish to handle it is up to them. I assume xdaunt will rant that my correct claim is incorrect. I'm not interested in discussing it with him since he's chosen as he has, and the discussion can not usefully progress with one who can and will choose as he has. I leave the last word to you xdaunt (on this specific subtopic, obviously i'll have other posts in this thread).
edit: in response to stuff posted since I started on this post, you're the one in the wrong xdaunt, that's why you have problems when you post sometimes, because of the error you are making. but you refuse to accept that and cannot see it, so explaining is futile. PPS you troll a lot too daunt.
|
United States41991 Posts
On November 08 2016 09:04 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 08:59 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:57 xDaunt wrote:On November 08 2016 08:49 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:42 xDaunt wrote: Well let me lay this to bed so that y'all have something to cite in the future when the topic comes up: I believe that a country should do whatever is necessary to win a war if it is engaged in a war. This may include "total war." The point is that strict "morality" or "legality" shouldn't be the main considerations. Winning should be. And to the extent that a nation is unwilling to do what is necessary to win, then it should get out/stay out of the conflict. That only raises further questions. Of course it should. Do you believe that if you're unwilling to torture infants to death if that's what it takes to win the war then you should just completely stay out of all wars? And this is why I never talk to you anymore. Tired of being made to feel wrong all the time? No, because all you do is troll. You're not interested in real discussion, which is why you're an embarrassment of a mod. All you did was restate your support for a "genocide or stay out of it" approach to war. I asked for clarification and gave examples of the obvious issues with that. You whined about it.
Just because you cannot engage in a straight discussion with me does not mean I'm a troll. It just means you're incapable of winning an argument on even terms with me. Which honestly should be embarrassing to you given you're meant to argue for a living.
|
On November 08 2016 09:04 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 08:59 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:57 xDaunt wrote:On November 08 2016 08:49 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:42 xDaunt wrote: Well let me lay this to bed so that y'all have something to cite in the future when the topic comes up: I believe that a country should do whatever is necessary to win a war if it is engaged in a war. This may include "total war." The point is that strict "morality" or "legality" shouldn't be the main considerations. Winning should be. And to the extent that a nation is unwilling to do what is necessary to win, then it should get out/stay out of the conflict. That only raises further questions. Of course it should. Do you believe that if you're unwilling to torture infants to death if that's what it takes to win the war then you should just completely stay out of all wars? And this is why I never talk to you anymore. Tired of being made to feel wrong all the time? No, because all you do is troll. You're not interested in real discussion, which is why you're an embarrassment of a mod. Oh, come on, what ever gave you that idea?
On November 08 2016 09:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 09:02 Ghostcom wrote: I highly recommend visiting a white trash family in a trailer park and talking to them before trusting a textbook telling you that they supposedly can count on police protection rather than harassment. But then again, that's just my lived experience and I recognize that it is nothing more than an anecdote and anecdotal evidence is shit-tier. Hi, The concept of privilege is not disproved by individual exceptions as it refers to broad sociological trends and not to the specific outcomes of individuals. Thanks.
|
On November 08 2016 09:06 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 09:04 xDaunt wrote:On November 08 2016 08:59 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:57 xDaunt wrote:On November 08 2016 08:49 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2016 08:42 xDaunt wrote: Well let me lay this to bed so that y'all have something to cite in the future when the topic comes up: I believe that a country should do whatever is necessary to win a war if it is engaged in a war. This may include "total war." The point is that strict "morality" or "legality" shouldn't be the main considerations. Winning should be. And to the extent that a nation is unwilling to do what is necessary to win, then it should get out/stay out of the conflict. That only raises further questions. Of course it should. Do you believe that if you're unwilling to torture infants to death if that's what it takes to win the war then you should just completely stay out of all wars? And this is why I never talk to you anymore. Tired of being made to feel wrong all the time? No, because all you do is troll. You're not interested in real discussion, which is why you're an embarrassment of a mod. All you did was restate your support for a "genocide or stay out of it" approach to war. I asked for clarification and gave examples of the obvious issues with that. You whined about it. Just because you cannot engage in a straight discussion with me does not mean I'm a troll. It just means you're incapable of winning an argument on even terms with me. Which honestly should be embarrassing to you given you're meant to argue for a living. I have great discussions with a lot of people who disagree with me. That you're one of the very select few with whom I don't have such rewarding discussions is highly telling. That multiple people have pointed out the obvious problems with your posting in this thread is also highly telling. And that you lack the self-awareness to see why only a troll who has no interest in having a good faith discussion would make the post that you just did in response to my position on the prosecution of war is the most telling of all.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves. This isn't an extension of the US politics thread, this is a meta-thread concerning the US politics thread. Off topic discussion ends now.
|
United States41991 Posts
Nuked. This discussion is over. -- Plexa
|
Hyrule18980 Posts
So when I said if you have an issue with another poster and to take it to the feedback thread, I didn't mean to keep posting the same stuff just in a different thread.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
You know the sad thing is, this flame war in here is actually more compelling than the "what is racism/privilege" flame war in the main thread.
|
plexa -> I do not understand what your statement is getting at here, as my understanding of the situation is: there was a problem/dispute in the US politics thread, that problem was issues relating to posters' and moderation standards, the posters were told to take the issue to the feedback thread and did so. they were not trying to have a US politics discussion, but to clarify their case as to why it was the other side who was behaving improperly.
|
Look I'm a guest to the thread and my interest is only invigorated by the provocative election. I feel that I should temper any advice or feedback with the policy of not being a long term poster there, even if I have been on TL for a fair bit now.
TL for a while lost its small community identity but some of that is preserved within the US Politics thread. There are regulars who post daily and offer their insight and views on topical news.
On the subject of bans: Excluding someone from a community has to be considered a last resort option. You can teach, and protect with bans. To teach a person who shows a lack of civility that they should treat others like their peers. To protect other posters from someone who's only interest is derailment, attention, and belittling their peers. These "Oh they should moderate THIS GUY" posts do not help us as a community. They divide us even further. Instead of working against each other through the janitorial staff, please, work with each other to see through disagreements and respect each other as your peer who has similar interests even if your views oppose each other. Trying to piss the other guy off will not make you superior to him. You will win nothing. You will not be a better person, or more intelligent, or showered with internet adoration. It will just be another chip in the foundation of this small community of friends and peers. Before you ask for a third party to come in and force another person to behave in an agreeable way please ask them without bitterness or inciting them to act with the candor and respect they expect towards themselves. In particular, KwarK I have played EVE with you many years ago ganking random ships in my little dinky rifter you gave me and xDaunt I have been appreciating your contributions to TL for years. I don't agree with either of you on many topics but I still appreciate your views as a valuable insight that is different from my own. Please see each other as I see you.
On the subject of the thread as a whole: I believe it was recently suggested that the thread should be pruned and replaced with a fresh one. This is an idea I can get behind. It is difficult to keep track of what page an interesting discussion took place on when there are thousands!
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On November 08 2016 09:22 zlefin wrote: plexa -> I do not understand what your statement is getting at here, as my understanding of the situation is: there was a problem/dispute in the US politics thread, that problem was issues relating to posters' and moderation standards, the posters were told to take the issue to the feedback thread and did so. they were not trying to have a US politics discussion, but to clarify their case as to why it was the other side who was behaving improperly.
No, they were behaving like children and continuing their petty feud in another thread.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On November 08 2016 09:22 zlefin wrote: plexa -> I do not understand what your statement is getting at here, as my understanding of the situation is: there was a problem/dispute in the US politics thread, that problem was issues relating to posters' and moderation standards, the posters were told to take the issue to the feedback thread and did so. they were not trying to have a US politics discussion, but to clarify their case as to why it was the other side who was behaving improperly.
It honestly should be self-evident why that discussion was a gigantic nope that needed to just be killed before it continued.
|
Hyrule18980 Posts
I said to take issues with posters to the thread, not to split off and continue a debate on posters' personalities in feedback.
At this point I'd consider going Milton all over the US Politics thread, but that would probably not end well.
|
I think I'll just be withdrawing for a long time as it doesn't look like most people, except some like Falling, appreciate what the thread is or get what the challenges are.
|
On November 08 2016 09:28 tofucake wrote: I said to take issues with posters to the thread, not to split off and continue a debate on posters' personalities in feedback.
At this point I'd consider going Milton all over the US Politics thread, but that would probably not end well. then I'm afraid I didn't understand what you meant. when you said "the thread" in the context of the prior discussion, I assumed that meant "the website feedback thread". hence take it (it being the discussion) to the thread (the website feedback thread).
if that's not what you meant, then I'm simply not sure what you mean. what does it mean to "take issues with posters to the thread?"
|
Hyrule18980 Posts
I meant this thread, but I meant more "X is derailing US Politics by arguing against point Y as if it were point Z", not "let's continue arguing over how we post in the feedback thread"
Essentially: stay on topic and debate points in the general thread, but do not argue about the poster or the points themselves
|
On November 08 2016 09:46 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2016 09:43 KwarK wrote: After making the mistake of telling H4P my email I'm being bombarded with Hillary ground game emails about how to volunteer with the canvassers and door knockers tomorrow. Could anyone who has made a similar mistake from the other side share whether they're getting the same?
Just as a datapoint for the relative degree of organization behind the ground game. the magic words are "i already voted for hillary plskthxbai and i have a recurring donation set up which i will cancel if you dont stop bothering me". User was warned for this post
tofu, are you serious? this is 100% what i told the callers to get them to stop.
|
Hyrule18980 Posts
yep, I jumped the gun on that one. It's erased. Sorry.
|
k, appreciate it.
|
|
|
|