US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 39

it's not a pointless ad hominem deflection. it's a pointful ad hominem. the point is i'm asking you to please stop it. as have others in the thread. it's not helpful or productive in the slightest.
and it's not a deflection cuz it's on topic.

we know. WE KNOW already. you repeating it ad nauseam doesn't help. you're being like CNN when they cover the same event 24/7 for 6 months repeating the same stuff over and over.

why not try discussing solutions instead of harping on it over and over? or at least harp on it less often, like no more than once a day.
why do you insist on repeating it so much? anger? disgust at the situation?

Going to just put this very bluntly: piss off with your self-acknowledged ad hominem attack. You made your point, I disagree, and at this point it's clearly grudge-making rather than a contribution to the discussion.

tofucake

Hyrule19026 Posts

January 05 2017 01:50 GMT

#763

how about both of you just stop?

zlefin

United States7689 Posts

January 05 2017 02:53 GMT

#764

I'd gladly stop if he does. he's not contributing anything ot the discussion either, rather rich to complain about me not contributing when his post was doing that very thing. he's just repeating ad nauseam, literally.

only just noticed this thread started up again, as I don't check website feedback as often.

tofucake

Hyrule19026 Posts

January 05 2017 03:15 GMT

#765

there isn't "stop if he stops", there's "stop or get banned for derailing"

enjoy

zlefin

United States7689 Posts

January 05 2017 03:23 GMT

#766

you can use any rules you like, but fixing the root problems is important, so it's preferable to do that if you can; though I do understand that's the overall path you've chosen not to take in moderation standards, which does have some merit in ease of administration.

tofucake

Hyrule19026 Posts

January 05 2017 04:42 GMT

#767

the root cause is ignoring the "contribute or go away" system that we've got here. It's a pretty easy fix

zlefin

United States7689 Posts

January 05 2017 05:11 GMT

#768

Yes, that would work fine, which is what I wanted in the first place. so i'll take your statement as agreeing with me.

tofucake

Hyrule19026 Posts

January 05 2017 15:10 GMT

#769

I'm not agreeing with you, I'm telling you to stop as well, regardless of what he does.

BigFan

TLADT24920 Posts

January 05 2017 16:11 GMT

#770

On January 06 2017 00:10 tofucake wrote:
I'm not agreeing with you, I'm telling you to stop as well, regardless of what he does.

agree, enough already. Last thing we want to see is the thread go down the gutter after the discussion has been fairly productive for the last while.

zlefin

United States7689 Posts

January 07 2017 04:43 GMT

#771

I would like to complain about the unjustified accusation of being an idiot herein:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=6518#130344

there's no need for him to start trouble in such an unjustified manner.
much as I do like the word idiot and using it, it needs to be applied judiciously and correctly.

Seeker

Where dat snitch at?36999 Posts

January 07 2017 08:19 GMT

#772

On January 07 2017 13:43 zlefin wrote:
I would like to complain about the unjustified accusation of being an idiot herein:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=6518#130344

there's no need for him to start trouble in such an unjustified manner.
much as I do like the word idiot and using it, it needs to be applied judiciously and correctly.

He's not being abrasive or aggressive though. One use of the word "idiot" every now and then is acceptable. We don't want to prevent people from having opinions. And people often say things in the heat of the moment. That's just all a part of being a human being. We makes mistakes. Now if he goes out of his way to insult you constantly or consistently, then yes, we'll definitely step in and take action.

Danglars

United States12133 Posts

January 07 2017 16:47 GMT

#773

You're one of those kind of people relying on [things] that have been proven to not actually work in the real world. I was wondering when I'd first meet some

perhaps the problem is that you haven't thought through the positions enough yourself

If the two options, both users warned for calling each other idiots, in so many words, and neither, I'm siding with leaving the red text out. It would be in every third post if that was the standard.

xM(Z

Romania5281 Posts

January 07 2017 17:20 GMT

#774

can we get the rape dudes out of there?; they have no argument and just say "BUT RAPE ..." so they win.
whatthefuck.

zlefin

United States7689 Posts

January 07 2017 17:27 GMT

#775

On January 08 2017 01:47 Danglars wrote:

Show nested quote +

If the two options, both users warned for calling each other idiots, in so many words, and neither, I'm siding with leaving the red text out. It would be in every third post if that was the standard.

and danglars makes an invalid point, no surprise there

i didn't call him an idiot. most people are unaware that those things have been proven not to work in the real world.
and my second is also far less abrasive than calling him an idiot.
and also it's correct. citing again, that book.

xmz -> why bother coming here to complain if you're going to strawman the argument they made?

PS i'd happily move to another forum if I knew of a better one for political discussion. but there's not many such places on the internet, and none seem to want me to run one.

xM(Z

Romania5281 Posts

January 07 2017 17:41 GMT

#776

anyone dragging actual rape in a politics argument should get waterboarded.
there's absolutely no comparing, no similarities and nothing gets explained from doing it; it's not even a goddamn tangent.
politics is a human cesspool made up of depraved individuals that stain everything they touch. comparing anyone like that with a rape victim should get one instant banned.

Liquid`Drone

Norway28621 Posts

January 07 2017 21:12 GMT

#777

I think that view on politics and politicians is more wrong and misguided, and more detrimental for fruitful political discussion, than flawed rape allegories are.

xM(Z

Romania5281 Posts

January 08 2017 15:23 GMT

#778

are you really going to try and preach me about that little engine, that one dude, that one country then expect me to ditch my whole fruity line of thought because exceptions do exist?; come on ...
one dude whitewashing a whole establishment ... yea, nope.

Liquid`Drone

Norway28621 Posts

January 08 2017 16:39 GMT

#779

it's the other way around. Most politicians are local politicians who try to positively influence their local communities without ever getting much money or power or benefits out of it. In Norway, I guess I could identify something like 250-400 politicians by name and picture. I have a somewhat bad impression of like, 50-100 of them. But we have 12000 elected politicians. Those 11500+ I've never heard of, they have never been in the media, they're largely unpaid, if they're paid then they're paid much less than their talents could get them in other professions. I know that Norway and Scandinavia are exceptions, but I also know people who have been involved in local politics in other countries, and with the exception of my polish father in law, I have a great amount of respect for mostly all of them.

The exceptions that distort the impression of the entire group are the ones who are corrupt and at the top. I can agree that if you examine top positions in the non-west and some western countries, corruption is rampant, desire for personal power and glory trumps desire for societal improvement, but I absolutely disagree with the idea that 'politics is a cesspool made up of depraved individuals'. It's a stupid and wrong generalization.

xM(Z

Romania5281 Posts

January 09 2017 11:03 GMT

#780

firstly, i think we have a different definition for corruption(as an example - lobbying and influence peddling(which has a very broad definition within the western sphere(it's literally legal in some contexts unless you call it "undue influence peddling")) is corruption to me.
secondly, the reply was in the US politics thread and the discussion was about DNC/dems political side.
now, even if i were to say i made that generalization thinking about worldwide politics(and i did) you'd still have to come up with numbers to back up your claim that my generalization was wrong. from what i saw in polls on Gallup and other sites, the public trust in politicians is ~40% - 45%(Scandinavians were the exception obviously and some others) but overall the numbers were way under 50%.
democracy dictates that who has over 51%, wins and the 49ers% are irrelevant; you agree(tacitly approve) with that because, to quote other TLers, "it's the best system you have".

and to bring it closer to home: i've read things that said there's a really good chance due september, that the Labor party(socialist, progressive, democratic(?)) would take the lead in governing and replace the current Conservative party in Norway. so where is that trust/approval there?.

my guess is that, on a personal level, you separate the individual from the apparatus of politics and start seeing virtues. i can not afford to do that because ... history and because i believe a system corrupts by the ways of "the rite of passage".

note: in general, i don't think i could ever understand why one sees 51% ruling over 49% as fair/democratic but then object to that special 1% that would be outside the scope of a generalization anyway?.
hell, you even accept without flinching some form of collateral damage(which amounts to more than 1%) but when someone touches that 1% with a generalization(which is not an absolute btw; one can generalize absolutes), all hell breaks loose.

User was warned for this post

Prev 1 37 38 39 40 41 322 Next

Please or register to reply.

US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 39

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming