Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

So I got irritated recently.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • So I got irritated recently.

    Most of probably did not know or care, but I recently took a short break from the website. The reason was because I noticed that the arguments I was getting involved in were more and more inane. And it got me to thinking, is there really a point to be arguing? Is anyone's mind ever changed on anything? Nope. We just argue AT each other. There's usually not even any intention to argue about anything relevant. People will always start making posts and inevitably we'll get stuck on some stupid minutae or semantic argument. For example, we'll be discussing Social Security and suddenly on the twenty-fourth page you realize we're arguing about the thickness of tin cans in 1947 versus the thickness today and you're like "what the hell? Could everyone just STFU?" Or we'll be talking about education and you can't ever say that anyone is lazy or stupid. You have to pretend like everyone is hard-working and "the system" or "society" failed, even though everyone who has been in any school knows that's not true.

    Most of my posts say "this is hilarious ..." because most everything people say IS hilarious. Everyone tries to make things complicated when they're very simple. Like I'll be talking to someone and it'll be:

    Them: Everyone deserves a living wage. So we need to increase the minimum wage.
    Me: OK, but then employers won't hire anyone. They're not going to pay $15 for a job that's worth $2.
    Them: Those greedy corporations! We need to create a union and force them to hire people!
    Me: Fine, now the company goes out of business and everyone is unemployed.
    Them: Then we need to give them unemployment.

    Every one of their ideas leads to another problem and that's solved by another idea that creates another problem. All because they're terrified of real life. Like, I'll never be able to tell them that a pension is silly. You're living for twenty years and getting paid even though you're not working. That's realistic. Or if I say that they get all insulted like "what else are we supposed to do??" And they're not kidding, either. So I've come to the sad conclusion that there will always be people who work and there will always be people who try to live off the work of others. There will always be people willing to compete and there will always be people who cannot compete. There will always be people who take responsibility for their actions and there will always be people who refuse to.

    Thing is, I realized also that in the short term, maybe they'll win. Who knows? But in the long term, they'll lose. You can redistribute money, but at some point you run out of other peoples' money to spend. Then what? Like, we're in this argument about Social Security and how it's "not a Ponzi scheme." It's a terribly stupid argument, to be quite honest. I sort of don't care any more. Why? Because at some point it'll end and then all the people who were arguing on the other side will just be sitting there and going "what? What happened?? How ...?" Of course, at that point they'll immediately try to parasitize other people in another way, but apparently that's life. Like, I used to get really worked up about handicapped placards for cars, right? You'd always see a car like that and the person in the car was completely normal. (Now, if I say that, a liberal will go "don't make assumptions, they're probably just borrowing the car from their handicapped mother!" and smile triumphantly. Game, set, match. OK, but they know they're not handicapped regardless, so why are they parking in a handicapped spot? And actually, I can't believe I'm having this argument like we have to pretend that people who aren't handicapped don't get handicapped placards even though we all know it's true.) But the point is, some people are born to be losers. That's their "win." They "won" because they got a guaranteed parking spot. Someone scores food stamps and they don't have to work, that's their "win." Now they can die happy. I mean, they're never ACTUALLY happy because they always think society owes them more and more, but you understand what I mean.

    Same thing with "the corporations." I'm seriously tired of "the corporations" arguments. It's like people get hard-ons about "the corporations." There was a piece on CNN about how people didn't have "jobs" until "the corporations" made them. They just grew their food and LIVED! Then "the corporations" came along and shackled them in cubicles, I guess. Who the hell cares? If you hate the corporations so much, stop buying stuff from them. Or make your own retarded corporation and run it the way you want. But those are never options. It's always like "no, I don't have to!" OK, dudes, whatever. Do whatever you want.

    Or it'll be like we argue about how healthcare in America is worse than in Cuba. "I have a study!" OK, uh, I have real life. Like, I don't know why you think I give a crap about your study, which isn't even about quality. It's like some survey about "equity" or "fairness" of healthcare. I hear people argue that you could fly to India and get surgery and it would cost half as much as getting it in America and be better quality. Cool. So why don't you fly to India and stop bugging me? "No, I don't have to!" What are you, like five years old or something? Actually, I wish they were five years old. Instead, I'll be having this conversation with someone and they're like fifty-three and I'll be amazed that they made it that long. Hey, it's cool that you have a survey that 100% of Americans are against pollution. Last time I checked, they're all polluting and littering and urinating in the streets. "I know, but they agree with me, they just don't know how to do it! So I'll make them!" Yeah ...that's the conclusion to take from that study. Let me guess. Harvard? Brown? Dartmouth?

    And half the time, people don't even have the balls to say what they mean. Like, if you don't mind welfare recipients using drugs, just say so. Don't make some phony-ass argument about the topic where we dance around the REAL issue like imbeciles for fifteen pages. What a waste of time. If you're that terrified that someone will be turned off by your ACTUAL stance on the issue, maybe you should reconsider your stance. Instead, everyone is all tricky like "oh, I'll just incrementally implement this ...it works all the time!" Yeah, I know. It actually does. But that doesn't make you any less of a douchebag. Congratulations.

  • #2
    Re: So I got irritated recently.

    Okay....first let me say...I've been HIGHLY enjoying your posts. I like your positions, and your ability to articulate them.

    However....I am a little confused....you say you "recently took a break"...but then end that you ARE "taking a break." I'm confused.....did you take a break....come back....and now re-breaking? Either way....I'd hate to see you stop posting....so, please.....just pick fewer fights. You don't have to fight EVERY dragon. You might just be suffering dragon fatigue, right now. Stick around, and keep posting.

    Kind Regards!!

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: So I got irritated recently.

      Maybe your coming to the same realization that we all have to come to. People are formed by genetics and environment.

      The only thing you can do is learn ... maybe you have an unformed opinion and you form it based upon presentation or information you did not previously know.

      Debaters opinions are pretty well formed. We are what we are.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: So I got irritated recently.

        Originally posted by kwilliam10 View Post
        Okay....first let me say...I've been HIGHLY enjoying your posts. I like your positions, and your ability to articulate them.

        However....I am a little confused....you say you "recently took a break"...but then end that you ARE "taking a break." I'm confused.....did you take a break....come back....and now re-breaking? Either way....I'd hate to see you stop posting....so, please.....just pick fewer fights. You don't have to fight EVERY dragon. You might just be suffering dragon fatigue, right now. Stick around, and keep posting.

        Kind Regards!!
        I took it and now I'm back. I just forgot to get rid of my sig, lol.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: So I got irritated recently.

          I also enjoy reading what you have to write, CBM, even when we disagree.

          I wonder if you're sort-of new to this whole political/philosophical forum arguing. Not trying to be condescending here but some of us have been arguing in this format for years and years and those diversions and distractions are pretty much how things go.

          It has been my observation that either side of the argument gets closed down (by a better argument or a more rational argument), the last thing most of us (but DEFINITELY not me ... of course) want to do is acknowledge we got bested. So we typically start the argument down a different path that is SORT of similar to the original one on which we got bested, hoping no one notices. For example, any time anyone brings up that Obama encouraged us to tone down the hate rhetoric but then accuses Obama of fostering the hate rhetoric, the response is almost always something to the effect "...well, the REPUBLICANS do it TOOOOOO!" They can't deal with the accusation so they try to divert the discussion down a path they believe they CAN deal with.

          I look at it this way: If they cannot respond to my posit, their argument fails, regardless of whether or not they acknowledge it. Any time my question or accusation or argument goes unanswered (and particularly when they try to divert the topic away from what I've asked/argued), it is a flag to me that they cannot respond.

          It's all good, anyway.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: So I got irritated recently.

            Originally posted by Good1 View Post
            It has been my observation that either side of the argument gets closed down (by a better argument or a more rational argument), the last thing most of us (but DEFINITELY not me ... of course) want to do is acknowledge we got bested. So we typically start the argument down a different path that is SORT of similar to the original one on which we got bested, hoping no one notices.
            I agree, but it's more than that. It's how people aren't even mature. Like, this isn't intended as a "call out," just as an example. I was discussing with someone on here how America's healthcare was dead last in "studies." Right? This guy was throwing out studies like nobody's business. So I looked at the studies and they're all surveys on things unrelated to quality. I point that out. Now, an adult would be like "oh, OK." But instead it's just like "...so I see you have no response to my argument!" At that point, I'm like "well, f**k, I could have been doing something more productive, like watching television, this whole time. Or drowning myself in my toilet."

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: So I got irritated recently.

              Originally posted by Good1 View Post
              It has been my observation that either side of the argument gets closed down (by a better argument or a more rational argument), the last thing most of us (but DEFINITELY not me ... of course) want to do is acknowledge we got bested.
              Indeed, it's pretty rare around here for someone to admit they're wrong, or misinformed, etc. It takes a big person to admit it. Sometimes I wish we had more big people.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: So I got irritated recently.

                Coming here to change people's minds is a brutal and frustrating task. Coming here to learn the positions of others and perhaps teach them a little bit about your own position can be highly rewarding, though.

                Basically, viewing this place as less a competition and more of an exchange of ideas may result in one needing to take less breaks.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: So I got irritated recently.

                  Originally posted by Speakeasy View Post
                  Coming here to change people's minds is a brutal and frustrating task. Coming here to learn the positions of others and perhaps teach them a little bit about your own position can be highly rewarding, though.

                  Basically, viewing this place as less a competition and more of an exchange of ideas may result in one needing to take less breaks.
                  Says the dirty pinko commie zombie lover.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: So I got irritated recently.

                    I dunno. Learning about some of the positions people have horrifies me, frankly (and of course I realize that they feel that way about my positions).

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: So I got irritated recently.

                      Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                      Says the dirty pinko commie zombie lover.
                      Hey, let's be fair, I took a shower this morning..

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: So I got irritated recently.

                        Originally posted by C-B-M View Post
                        I dunno. Learning about some of the positions people have horrifies me, frankly (and of course I realize that they feel that way about my positions).
                        Well, you can either stick your head in the sand and pretend their postions don't exist, or you can learn more about their positions in order to better hone your own counter-positions. Or something.
                        Last edited by Jefe; 09-16-2011, 06:50 AM.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: So I got irritated recently.

                          Originally posted by C-B-M View Post
                          I dunno. Learning about some of the positions people have horrifies me, frankly (and of course I realize that they feel that way about my positions).
                          Yeah, i have to agree with you there. Though, it isn't so much to do with the position or opinions of others, but with the amazing levels of ignorance that informs those positions and opinions. I have no problem with someone having a different opinion than me, but only as long as I think that opinion is an informed one.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: So I got irritated recently.

                            Agreed. I find that I'm not even having a discussion about the underlying philosophy of the opposing argument, mostly. It's just "this is what I want, so 'society' (meaning, someone else) should pay for it."

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: So I got irritated recently.

                              Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                              Yeah, i have to agree with you there. Though, it isn't so much to do with the position or opinions of others, but with the amazing levels of ignorance that informs those positions and opinions. I have no problem with someone having a different opinion than me, but only as long as I think that opinion is an informed one.
                              Says the warmongering fascist nazi zombie lover.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X