View Full Version : Everyone, Please Read This!!!
Okay, I've been looking on for awhile as Yoda has been slaughtering his opposition left, right and center in the "Vlad takes no prisoners" thread under "Birthdays and Introductions". It strikes me that I agree with everything that jackfrost (poor corpse) said in his post that was so conveniently removed from the public eye. As such, I am reposting his message here for all to see, in bright, bold letters. I defy Yoda to let this message remain untouched. If he deletes this message or bans my login id, it will completely prove everything that jackfrost has said!
I also want to add here that Yoda's farcical forum has turned into nothing more than a propaganda machine for his pompous political agenda. Silence the opposition so that your own point of view remains undisputed--classic Stalinist tactics.
How long before Yoda bans me and deletes this thread? Remains to be seen. I will keep on reposting it, though, every time it gets deleted, to maximize its exposure.
The issue I'm concerned with here is Yoda's arbitrary exercise of power.
Basically, from what I gather, Yoda is the petty authoritarian of this forum--the Sheriff, if you will. As such, he is supposed to maintain order and decorum in the forum and prevent things from getting out of hand.
From where I stand, Yoda has seriously abused his authority.
First of all, Django, the guy who seems to be behind the whole situation, from what I gather from my reading of past threads, was arbitrarily singled out by Yoda and his yes-men for a relentless barrage of hostility based on personal likes and dislikes. It had nothing to do with his conduct on the forum. I don't see his behavior as having gotten out of hand or him having posted any profanity or slander or obscene messages on the forum, which would be genuine grounds for antagonism against him. On the contrary, Yoda arbitrarily began to pick on him either because of the political views he expressed or because of his ethnic origins, or simply because he didn't like him. But it didn't just go as far as antagonism on the board--Yoda began deleting his threads, and editing and deleting his posts--all, apparently, in an attempt to make him unpopular and to harm his image on the board. While, at one point, he enjoyed considerable support and popularity on the board for his views and ideas, after Yoda had finished hounding and defaming him, he became a social undesirable--the public enemy, which was hardly what he started out as. In my opinion, it is solely because of Yoda's abuse of his powers as forum administrator that Django became as unpopular as he did.
Secondly, Vlad--the guy Yoda banned outright from the forum--again, for what reason? Because Yoda didn't like Vlad's personality? Because Yoda felt personally threatened by Vlad? Whatever, the reason, Vlad was hardly posting obscenity or profanity or slander--rather, from what I gather, he was simply kidding around and engaging in a little hammy play-acting. Grounds to ban him from the forum? I hardly think so.
Thirdly, Yoda's threat to ban me for questioning his exercise of authority.
What more need I say?
Yoda owns and operates a forum which is supposed to be a venue for the free and healthy exchange of ideas and opinions. That means that as long as you abide by the guidelines spelt out at the outset, you ought to be free to express yourself in here without hindrance.
But what Yoda needs to add a clause to his disclaimer: so long as you agree with me at some level, you are free to remain a member of the forum. The moment I (i.e. Yoda) object to your point of view or feel threatened by you or dislike you on some personal level, you are history.
Basically, why bother with a forum at all, Yoda? Why don't you simply employ a group of yes-men and spend all your time listening to them agree with you and everything you say? Surely it would be a heck of a lot easier than managing a message board! If what you want is to be the petty totalitarian dictator of your tiny little universe on the Internet--the king of your obscure little hill--then why bother with an online forum at all?
Fact is, your antagonism towards Django and Vlad and myself has no rational grounds at all--it is pure personally motivated hostility. The fact that you feel compelled to go out of your way to rationalize it says that you feel a need to protect your very flimsy credibility on the forum by whatever means you can--another reason you engage in all the underhanded artifices of arbitrary censorship, etc. It is all a massive sham on your part, and you know it. Question is, how long will you continue to fool the others on this message-board, before conning them all into either becoming your yes-men or arbitrarily outlawing them outright.
Which brings me to the question of why there is such a lack of serious diversity of opinion on this forum. No doubt, any people who seriously express their genuine opinions are simply done away with or hounded out of here, leaving a shallow remnant of yes-men who agree with Yoda at some basic level. Which makes this a club of the like-minded who basically only come here because they enjoy the sound of their own voices and hearing others agree with them instead of to really express their honest opinions about the issues, for fear that if they did, they would be hounded out of here and outlawed by the Sherriff of MoFo--Chris Bowyer, a.k.a. Yoda.
What a joke this is, Yoda. This is no forum at all, just you pathetic little online playground, of which you are the schoolboy bully.
Go ahead and ban me if you like! It will only PROVE everything I have been saying!
HA! HA! HA! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
r3port3r66
05-02-03, 12:51 AM
Django, I think you're a bit paranoid. Are you doing any sort of methamphetimines? I mean no disrespect to you honestly. If you need help, there is help out there. Don't let drugs control your life, it will only get worse. I know, I've been there.
You really do seem out of control. You are not living in reality. This is just a simple movie site. Your extreme behavior leads me to believe you are very unstable. I implore you, re-think what you're saying and in what forum you're saying it. You'll see that it is highly irrational.
No, I don't do drugs. Never have. Never will. I don't smoke either and only drink socially.
Fact is, what I said above, stands, for me.
It comes from my personal experiences on this forum--threads mysteriously deleted, posts edited, persecution by the forum admin.
Agreed, this is only a movie message board. Nothing substantially important. But it is a model of the real world. I am the sort of guy who can't take injustice lying down. I feel compelled to speak out against it, however minor it may seem.
Basically, the fact is that you all seem to be acquainted with Chris on some personal level. That's why he tolerates your points of view, if they diverge slightly, from his own. For all I know, this is a forum for Yoda and his buddies to get together and gas it off. Which is fine! But then, don't advertize it as a message board in which anyone and everyone is welcome and is on equal footing. Advertize it as what it is--a club for the select few--for Yoda and his like-minded colleagues and social acquaintances.
I personally know nothing about Christ Bowyer other than the biased, high-handed, officious treatment I have received in here.
Maybe I exagerrate things a bit and get a little too upset over trivialities. But given what is happening in this country, I think Yoda's behavior in here is a symptom of what could happen on a nation-wide scale, if someone doesn't address it at some point.
I get along fine with most people I am socially acquainted with, other than the few people I occasionally have a gripe with, Yoda being one. I usually go out of my way to avoid conflict, unless I feel compelled to take it on. Then I go out of my way to state my case, as I am doing here.
Sure, this is nothing but a movie message-board, one of several on the internet. Sure, I could just move on and forget this whole ridiculous deal. But I do not--at least, not immediately. I come back here to state my case, out of the concern that if I do not address it, it will only happen again to me at some later date. So, out of personal interest and in the interest of justice and truth, I must state my case.
No, I am not the schizophrenic social reprobate as you like to make me out to be. That a few people say so doesn't make me that at all. Perhaps it would be convenient for some people if I was. But I am not, and that is the inconvenient truth. That everything I say in here is turned against me in the most petty, unsavory manner and that I experience a hostile bias from the people who control this forum and who have the power to distort my words and turn my friends and supporters against me is the inconvenient reality. And this, of course, is accomplished by the almost Stalinist tactics of false propaganda, editing my posts, deleting my threads, etc. It may seem trivial in the context of a movie forum, but it is far from trivial in the context of the real world.
I'm only here to emphatically state my point of view. That's all. I want to make sure that it is heard and not conveniently deleted after my back is turned. Again, if it is, it will only UNDERSCORE everything I have said!
It may seem like a trivial joke to you to malign my reputation and turn me into a social undesirable through underhanded propagandistic manipulations. It is far from a joke from where I stand.
Also, one further point--I had absolutely nothing to do with the demise of the other message board I mentioned in my previous thread. Like I said, it got totally out of hand because of 9/11 and people tossing racial slurs and making death threats. If anything, I was the voice of reason and stability on that forum, but it's hard to say anything with a bunch of crazed people screaming obscenities in your ear, which is what I had to deal with there. Fact is, I got along just fine with other reasonable people on that forum and even tolerated the crazed, screaming maniacs. But when some of them started stalking me and threatening me with physical harm and making profane remarks about my parentage, that's where I drew the line.
What I'm concerned with here, though, is totally different--namely, the fairness of the forum admin. It's a much more subtle issue and harder to see, offhand, but, in my opinion, it is a valid issue. Feel free to disagree with me and state your point of view. My concern is that everybody has the fair opportunity to state their point of view without getting arbitrarily censored or banned from the forum. I think that that totally defeats the purpose of the forum in the first place.
*ahem*
if I were silencing anyone who I didn't like, why didn't I ever ban your original account? Why haven't I banned sunfrog or Pidzilla's? You never answered these questions, because they completely destroy your accusations. I guess that's why you ignore them. The truth is annoying, isn't it?
my friends and supporters
Like who?
r3port3r66
05-02-03, 01:55 AM
Django, actually I'm glad that you aren't in trouble with drugs; you seem to be alot smarter than that!
Yes the wieght of the world is not tipped in our favor at this time Django. Sure, you and I can see the manipulation of the media, and who's in whose back pocket. And where are the chemical weapons...and so on, and so on....
But, Yoda only brings to light, in an intellegent way, the other side of what you and I think is going on. The fact that he can articulate that in knowing and coherent terms earns my deepest respect.
As far as editing your posts, I don't know. I have seen no proof of this, and I've even asked him about it. None of my posts have ever been censored. I mean if that were the case then a member named Sunfrog would never have posts that show up. I just think your accusations are unfounded.
Please give me an instance where you wrote something and someone came in and changed it. It doesn't have to be word-for-word, just give me the jist of what you wrote and what it turned out to actually say after the "editing". If you can give me an example of this, I might consider your accusations.
Also Django, since you know this is a movie site, why don't you ever post in threads about movies? I mean if you were to post inside threads regarding movies you might not get such heated debate. But if you keep posting in threads about war and politics all the time, you're more likely to spar with the opposition.
LordSlaytan
05-02-03, 03:40 AM
WHO THE **** CARES!!!???!!!??? Jesus ****ing christ this is pissing me the **** off. I don't give a flying **** about your mother ****ing message you ****ing little CHILD!!! Instead of replying to ANYTHING he says, IGNORE THE ****!!!!
****ING A!!!
Piddzilla
05-02-03, 09:38 AM
Yoda, you're saying you don't like me??? :bawling:
:laugh:
Sexy Celebrity
05-02-03, 11:47 AM
Oh my god....
Uday, you're gonna throw the earth off its' axis with this.
Sir Toose
05-02-03, 11:59 AM
Hey, Djickhead...
I deleted this thread and Chris brought it back. So much for your pointless arguments.
I don't know why but you irritate me beyond the point that you should be able to.
I'm going to take a break for a while. Someone email me when this jerk is done.
^^ what Slay said...spot on as always :yup:
and i just might add my own here....just one word....
parasite!!
sunfrog
05-02-03, 11:32 PM
I haven't done anything to be banned. I don't drink, smoke, do drugs, or even curse. So there! :p I used to be a regular member when this board first started but I wasn't allowed to post anything other than movie stuff so I had to leave. Yoda doesn't believe in having fun. Seriously. He outlawed having fun. Looking around here there's more squittle than there ever was before, and not good clean squittle either. Some inuendo is almost raunchy. Squittle is non-movie discussions purely for the sake of having fun, btw.
I agree with the stuff in red, it's all yes men! Altho I've never seen Yoda block someone's ip, but then I haven't read the Vlad thread yet. But I have seen him and his yes men gang up on someone more than once.
I agree with the stuff in red, it's all yes men!
Let's see...Silver and I disagree constantly...fire and I disagreed on everything...Pidzilla and I disagree on everything...and you stop by only to argue with me. Yep, all yes men! :rolleyes:
You really need to stop taking sides of morons just because they agree with your political views. It ruins any credibility you have.
used to be a regular member when this board first started but I wasn't allowed to post anything other than movie stuff so I had to leave.
Quit warping things. I said if you came to just chat randomly you're probably in the wrong place, but no rule was enacted, nor was any ever planned.
Seriously, supporting people who are dead wrong just because you're looking to muster up political support for debates you can't handle on your own is nothing short of intellectual fraud.
sunfrog
05-03-03, 12:00 AM
How long did it take you to think of that? How fast can you type? I'm trying to catch up on everythig I've missed in the last week or so. Slow down a little. :P
Here:
from what I gather from my reading of past threads, was arbitrarily singled out by Yoda and his yes-men for a relentless barrage of hostility based on personal likes and dislikes. It had nothing to do with his conduct on the forum. I don't see his behavior as having gotten out of hand or him having posted any profanity or slander or obscene messages on the forum, which would be genuine grounds for antagonism against him.
I've seen that before. I think you know what I'm talking about.
Quit warping things. I said if you came to just chat randomly you're probably in the wrong place, but no rule was enacted, nor was any ever planned.
We chatted about movies too, remember the squittle posts vs movie posts count thing? If no rule was enacted why did you gang up on P?
Originally posted by sunfrog
How long did it take you to think of that? How fast can you type? I'm trying to catch up on everythig I've missed in the last week or so. Slow down a little. :P
I wrote it all off the top of my head; I very rarely "plan" my replies at all. I'm a very fast typist. :p
Originally posted by sunfrog
I've seen that before. I think you know what I'm talking about.
Actually, I don't. If I had to guess, I'd say you have it in your head that PLite was ganged up on, but he wasn't. Check the posts if you don't believe me. No one's ever been ganged up on like this before, and the only reason it's happened this time is because Django patronized the hell out of everyone who disagreed with his ridiculous claims. There was no organized plot against him, it's just that nobody likes his childish nonsense.
Originally posted by sunfrog
We chatted about movies too, remember the squittle posts vs movie posts count thing? If no rule was enacted why did you gang up on P?
Uh, we didn't gang up on P at all. He needs to drop this helpless victim stuff. You're putting up a lot of fuss for what amounts to a minor suggestion that has never been enforced in even the slightest way. Hardly comparable to this "fascist!" nonsense.
sunfrog
05-03-03, 12:21 AM
You really need to stop taking sides of morons just because they agree with your political views. -Chris Yoda
I wanted to post that in the quotes thread but I don't want to mess it up for your mom. She's nice. :)
Why don't you finish your interview thread? I want to ask you some questions myself. Who was the one who objected to the word MoFo? I don't think it's racist to call someone a MoFo, just bad manners.
Been pretty busy. I'll reply to r66's question before the night's through, though.
theshape82
05-03-03, 02:01 AM
just wondering django but are you insane?
yoda started this forum
if it were his wish he could do away with it just as easily
so how dare you come in here and say that he's abused his power
it's his to do with as he pleases
besides...he's never done anything but try to maintain a great site
you should thank him
BTW, Sun: I'm just going to assume you've dropped the argument. Of course, you'll go back to MV and resume the customary back-patting with PLite about how right you both are and how Django's description suits me perfectly, blah blah blah. Hey, maybe you two can commiserate over your shared custom of taking inflammatory positions you can't defend...I'm think he's the one you learned it from.
sunfrog
05-03-03, 12:05 PM
What arguement?
Last post on page 1...but it doesn't matter, because I was more just using it as an opportunity to point out that you two are very similar and love to talk about how right you are, even if you seemingly have no reason to believe so.
sunfrog
05-03-03, 01:19 PM
Oh that! P was ganged up on. It wasn't minor it was a civil war. You all ganged up on poor P'Lite because he's witty. Btw, look at how there's like 43,000+ posts in the Miscellaneous Forums section. That's more than the other two sections combined. That's some major squittle you got there.
P'Lite wasn't disruptive either, and he didn't do anything to get banned like spam or curse or post porn etc.. I know he wasn't banned but you all ran him out of town which is almost the same.
There was no ganging up. He, however, became rather scathing when a few members agreed with my suggestion. He didn't sit there with a halo on his head waiting for his sentence. He got downright pissy. And no one came on him with guns-a-blazin'.
I think PLite summarized the whole ordeal awhile ago on MV, or something (I haven't really visited in weeks, so you'd have to go check) as saying something like "and he said perhaps I should find another forum if I haf no interest in the movies." So even he doesn't pretend he was "run out."
Heh. PLite's replying now. Silver, you're my witness: I so called it.
PigsnieLite
05-03-03, 06:09 PM
Puh-leez, you SUGGESTED in the strongest possible terms that I didnt belong here on MoFo becuz I squittled too much. And I didnt get all pissy like you said either -- I just posted a heartbreaking goodbye poem, sob! -- which you didnt understand, becuz of your lack of interest in the Humanities, haf you ever read LYSISTRATA? -- and then other lovely people got pissy on my behalf. Anyway, I knew then that you wanted me OUT so I left. "Lack of interest in the movies," my eye.
So now I will leave you to your minions & wish you an UnPleasant Good Day, soor. Hahaha! I really quite dislike you, TWT and thats saying a lot becuz I like everybody.
PigsnieLite
05-03-03, 06:11 PM
I even like Mr Potato head, compared to you. And yeah SIlver, witness this! :yup:
Puh-leez, you SUGGESTED in the strongest possible terms that I didnt belong here on MoFo becuz I squittled too much.
Bullsh*t. I just re-read some of the posts and I went far out of my way to broach the subject and explain my reasoning politely.
I just posted a heartbreaking goodbye poem, sob! -- which you didnt understand
See, that's your problem. "TWT didn't like my poem! Waaah! He doesn't understand it!"
NEWS FLASH: it's possible for people to understand you and your attitude, and still not like it. It's possible for people to love a good laugh, but not find YOU particulary funny. How arrogant to assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you and what you do must not understand it. This reeks of freddie's similar "anyone who disagrees with us is either envious or confused" line of reasoning, and it's nothing less than unadulterated self-aggrandizement. Sorry to break it to you, but you are not the Way, the Truth and the Light.
becuz of your lack of interest in the Humanities, haf you ever read LYSISTRATA?
Nope. Have you ever read Pilgrim's Progress? How about Up From Slavery? Next time, at least try to hide your patronizing elitism a little.
So now I will leave you to your minions & wish you an UnPleasant Good Day, soor. Hahaha! I really quite dislike you, TWT and thats saying a lot becuz I like everybody.
I must be doing something right.
PigsnieLite
05-03-03, 07:42 PM
LOLL, you crack me up TWT, you really do. You can rationalize ANYTHING. Funny that Pigsnie, Anne, Freddie, Sunfrog, Wortle, Arthur Dent, El Cootie & even Toose thought differently. I now kiss your a$$ goodbye, beloved, because that is the most kissable part of you. Loll. :love:
El Cuteness
The Silver Bullet
05-03-03, 09:02 PM
Don't come back now, y'hear?
Hey, it's an ally-counting contest. Can I play, too? Let's see: Sadie, Kent, Grace, Linda, Peter, Miriam, Ryan...that's all I can come up with for now. Whoever lists the most names wins, right? :rolleyes:
And, for future reference, it's really obvious when you deliberately change the subject like that. The fact that you fell back on some sort of show of hands as soon as I started talking bluntly about your personal shortcomings says a lot. Don't bother hopping into these discussions if you've got nothing more than a weak popularity contest to support your assertions, dig?
sunfrog
05-04-03, 12:05 AM
Lol! See how witty P is, and see how you called your minion Silver to help you gang up on P. Why didn't you address the fact that this forum is full of squittel? You and your friends badgered sweet innocent P'Lite out of this forum for doing the same thing everyone else does. I think you owe us an appology.
Do you screen your comments at all before posting them, or is it all just one unfiltered stream of accusatory consciousness? My money's on the latter.
1 - I didn't call Silver. Not in any way whatsoever.
2 - The forum is not full of squittle. Even if it was, though, it doesn't change anything.
3 - You've got to work on that selective memory stuff. There was no relentless badgering at all. You're completely making that up.
theshape82
05-04-03, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Yoda
Hey, it's an ally-counting contest. Can I play, too? Let's see: Sadie, Kent, Grace, Linda, Peter, Miriam, Ryan...that's all I can come up with for now. Whoever lists the most names wins, right? :rolleyes:
Count me on your side there Yoda
It's not worth it. None of the old MoFo refugees have shown themselves to have any interest in any point of view but their own on this particular matter. They're going to exaggerate what happened, they're going to justify this by inventing motive, and they're going to do whatever they can to convince themselves that I sit around bitterly envying and/or resenting their joyous existence. :D
They're also going to seemingly take notice every time they're mentioned on here (which isn't often, but still). I have no idea why. Apparently a number of them still visit regularly. Go figure. Whatever the reason, I'm losing interest rapidly. Arguing with that crowd makes me feel like I'm interviewing replacement candidates for the office of Iraqi Information Minister.
The Silver Bullet
05-04-03, 06:05 AM
...minion Silver...
Screw you.
Just for the record, I hate Chris' politics, I disagree with him on most things, and every post I ever make is made because I want to make it. It is no secret that I hate a lot of people around the traps, but it's a gross misconception on your part that I hate the people Chris asks me too. You guys made it to the list all by yourselves.
Sun, you think you're clever. But you're just self-absorbed. Deal with it, please.
Originally posted by The Silver Bullet
Sun, you think you're clever. But you're just self-absorbed. Deal with it, please.
http://www.rbcwin.com/images/Bingo.gif
Caitlyn
05-04-03, 03:11 PM
Anyone who has ever actually taken the time to read the threads on here would know that Silver is unique and definitely has a mind of his own…
Silver and Chris have gone at it worse than Beale and Django on a few occasions, including the Abortion Thread. Silver has most definitely a unique mind, to borrow Caitlyn's well-put fraise.
The Silver Bullet
05-04-03, 07:21 PM
I have a unique mind, and Chris has sex with Uday.
It started out as a simple arrangement. He just needed a green card, but somewhere along the way, we forgot it was all an act.
The Silver Bullet
05-04-03, 08:58 PM
It is a weird sexual thing we have going at MoFo.
Toose rapes sheep. And then sends me pictures.
Bestiality rocks the house.
sunfrog
05-04-03, 10:10 PM
1 - I didn't call Silver. Not in any way whatsoever.
Heh. PLite's replying now. Silver, you're my witness: I so called it.
Did you tell him, watch Silver, now P'Lite will post. He's so evil blah blah blah, and Silver said yeah, he is. Who did you call it to? Silver? Did you have a conversation with Silver about P'Lite before you posted that? When you said "Silver, you're my witness" were you calling Silver into this thread to help you?
2 - The forum is not full of squittle. Even if it was, though, it doesn't change anything.
You are a squittel and your friends are squittels. You badgered P'Lite because he is a squittel. Why don't your own rules apply to you?
hy·poc·ri·sy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
3 - You've got to work on that selective memory stuff. There was no relentless badgering at all. You're completely making that up.
You and your friends jumped on P and didn't quit til he left. We were all there, how can you say it didn't happen?
Don't come back now, y'hear?
Why did you say that Silver?
Count me on your side there Yoda
Why did you say that Shape?
As I said before, none of ya'll are going to be reasoned with on this matter, and I'm really losing interest in it all, but I'm kinda bored, so I'll reply.
were you calling Silver into this thread to help you?
Nope. I've never called him or anyone else into any thread to "help" me. I was referring to the fact that I predicted that morning that he'd show up and post. He's pretty self-centered and always takes great interest when he's mentioned.
You are a squittel and your friends are squittels. You badgered P'Lite because he is a squittel. Why don't your own rules apply to you?
Probably because those rules you mentioned don't exist. There's a preference against it, but that's all there is, and that's all there's ever been.
We were all there, how can you say it didn't happen?
Because it didn't. I even went back and read most of the posts recently. I broached the subject very politely and explained my reasoning. This shouldn't shock you. It's hardly abnormal for people (let alone this person) to flatter themselves through exaggerated injustice.
The Silver Bullet
05-05-03, 05:00 AM
Why did you say that Silver?
Because. I dislike you both muchly. There are are those who back up their politics, and then there are those who believe they are unquestionably right, and attack everyone else regardless.
If you think I said what I said because Yoda doesn't want you here, you're mistaken. He probably does want you here. He likes people. I, on the other hand, hate people. And to think, I would probably agree with what you had to say if you had an argument that didn't rely so heavily on some screwed up logic dictacting that Chris is wrong just because he is.
"You are wrong. I rest my case." That isn't an argument. It is a waste of my time. Yes, my time.
Sir Toose
05-05-03, 10:02 AM
You guys crack me up.
I let this sh*t under my skin last week, now I'm laughing at myself.
P-Lite, to me, was a different situation. Personally, I find him to be witty and intelligent (perhaps a tad closed minded) and I don't liken his posts to Django's at all. I was upset when P-Lite left b/c to me he was funny and light-hearted. Django thinks he is a superior intellect and is not afraid to gas on and on until everyone is so sick of him they want to beat their heads into their desks.
Someone please list Yoda's 'posse' because I don't see anyone here acting that way. We all disagree with each other all the time and it's never such a huge dramatic thing as you guys and your drama queen productions make it out to be.
Earlier I listed out all the people who have differing political views than me and listed the reasons why I like them. I dislike Django for reasons that have nothing to do with politics.
If you're going to categorize me as part of some 'posse' you better back it up because I can quote many examples of why and how you are wrong.
I, on the other hand, hate people.
Silver, I love ya man, but this is sh*t.
The Silver Bullet
05-05-03, 10:44 AM
Silver, I love ya man, but this is sh*t.
I hate you.
Sir Toose
05-05-03, 11:04 AM
Aussie bastard.
Originally posted by r3port3r66
As far as editing your posts, I don't know. I have seen no proof of this, and I've even asked him about it. None of my posts have ever been censored. I mean if that were the case then a member named Sunfrog would never have posts that show up. I just think your accusations are unfounded.
Please give me an instance where you wrote something and someone came in and changed it. It doesn't have to be word-for-word, just give me the jist of what you wrote and what it turned out to actually say after the "editing". If you can give me an example of this, I might consider your accusations.
"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
That Chris/Yoda has been subtly and underhandedly manipulating the contents of my message-board posts to place me in unfavorable light is beyond question. And in order to demonstrate that fact, let me cite a few specific examples that come to mind immediately:
1) It all began when Chris/Yoda deleted a thread that I started entitled "Think Happy Thoughts on the Eve of War." He cited the flimsy grounds that it mentioned war in its title, and that he did not want too many war-related topics in the forum. I did not think much of it, but "Sexy Celebrity" brought it to my attention. He "resurrected" the thread and raised the issue with Chris concerning the justice of the thread's deletion--how, in fact the deletion of the thread was unwarranted because it had nothing to do with the war--it was about thinking happy thoughts.
2) Subsequently, right before Yoda posted his popularity poll about me, subsequent to the controversial play I posted about Christopher Columbus entitled "Is the World Flat?", I posted the thread explaining my side of the story--a thread which could well have swung the results of the poll in my favor. This thread was also conveniently deleted by the forum admin. As a result, my side of the story never got out and the results of Yoda's poll went against me. This is a really classic example of how Chris/Yoda's underhanded Stalinistic tactics seriously damaged my credibility on this forum.
3) Subsequent to that, when I posted threads questioning Chris' actions, posts in those threads were edited behind my back by the forum admin in an endeavor to ridicule me or harm my image.
These have all been subtle actions, chipping away at my credibility. I cannot document every instance of the same, but the fact that it happened on these occasions, at least, suggests to me that it might have happened many more times and escaped my notice. Like I said earlier, this is simply a movie forum and I don't have all the time in the world to spend inspecting every nook and cranny--I have my own life to lead. I simply cannot read every post and study every detail here, or go into lengthy discussions over nitpicky issues. But when the actions of the forum admin subtly chip away at my credibility, it becomes a personally vested issue that I feel compelled to raise in the interests of TRUTH and JUSTICE.
So the net effect of Chris Bowyer's manipulations, it seems to me, has been to alienate me from the affections of the forum members and to undermine my credibility--all behind my back. It may not seem like much to you, but it is personally very damaging to me--and a serious issue in my life. How trustworthy and legitimate is the forum admin when they get away with such underhanded tactics? I think that this is a serious enough issue to raise even in the trivial context of a movie forum--because it has repurcussions in real life. Maybe there needs to be greater accountability for personal actions in here. That's all I'm saying--my case, stated in clear, simple terms (I hope).
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Also Django, since you know this is a movie site, why don't you ever post in threads about movies? I mean if you were to post inside threads regarding movies you might not get such heated debate. But if you keep posting in threads about war and politics all the time, you're more likely to spar with the opposition.
I know that this is a move site, and I have posted many threads and messages about the movies! I've been posting a lot of stuff about politics only because it has become a personally vested issue for me due to current events being what they are. I feel compelled to raise and address them somewhere.
Sir Toose
05-07-03, 06:01 PM
I know that this is a move site, and I have posted many threads and messages about the movies! I've been posting a lot of stuff about politics only because it has become a personally vested issue for me due to current events being what they are. I feel compelled to raise and address them somewhere.
...and when you do it in this manner... politely and non condescendingly your comments are more than welcome.
One request Django: admit that you are jackfrost and Vlad.
r3port3r66
05-07-03, 06:33 PM
Hmm...Django.
I wasn't aware that a thread entitled "Think Happy Thoughts..." was deleted by the admin. Also, I wasn't aware that the thread "Is The World Flat" even existed.
Piddzilla
05-07-03, 06:45 PM
Hmmmmm.... Interesting...
Originally posted by Gracie
One request Django: admit that you are jackfrost and Vlad. :D Now why would I want to do that?
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Hmm...Django.
I wasn't aware that a thread entitled "Think Happy Thoughts..." was deleted by the admin. Also, I wasn't aware that the thread "Is The World Flat" even existed.
The play "Is the World Flat?" is posted under the "Drama Thread", which began as an attempt, on my part, to foster potential creativity on the forum, but ended with a sad, unwarranted conflict between me and Silver Bullet, with Yoda looking on. Regarding the other deletions and manipulations, it doesn't surprise me that you are unaware of them. Fact is that once a thread has been deleted or a post, edited, there is no way of knowing what went on before. The forum looks like it's solid ground, but it is, in reality, pretty unstable and shifty ground. The forum admin have the power to manipulate the contents of the forum as they please. Which is fine, if they are genuinely unbiased. However, I'm questioning their authority here--from my own experiences, I have encountered some disturbing trends, and I am attempting to bring them to light. There is a cover-up here, and how far it goes is anyone's guess!
This is too amusing not to keep goin'.
Originally posted by Django
1) It all began when Chris/Yoda deleted a thread that I started entitled "Think Happy Thoughts on the Eve of War." He cited the flimsy grounds that it mentioned war in its title, and that he did not want too many war-related topics in the forum. I did not think much of it, but "Sexy Celebrity" brought it to my attention. He "resurrected" the thread and raised the issue with Chris concerning the justice of the thread's deletion--how, in fact the deletion of the thread was unwarranted because it had nothing to do with the war--it was about thinking happy thoughts.
Actually, what I said was that it was ridiculous of you to mention the war ALL THE TIME -- you say the thread was about happy thoughts, yet you couldn't help but mention the war AGAIN in a seemingly unrelated thread. Furthermore, I told you were more than free to create the thread again. Pretty weak gripe.
Originally posted by Django
2) Subsequently, right before Yoda posted his popularity poll about me, subsequent to the controversial play I posted about Christopher Columbus entitled "Is the World Flat?", I posted the thread explaining my side of the story--a thread which could well have swung the results of the poll in my favor. This thread was also conveniently deleted by the forum admin. As a result, my side of the story never got out and the results of Yoda's poll went against me. This is a really classic example of how Chris/Yoda's underhanded Stalinistic tactics seriously damaged my credibility on this forum.
There was only one thread of yours on the matter that I can recall that was taken off the boards entirely, and it was not "explaining your side of the story," it was a ridiculous rant in which you threw out accusations of racism on a whim. Oh, and I'm not the one who removed it, either.
You really have no complaint. EVERYONE has heard your side of the story at LEAST once by now. There's at least a dozen posts of yours, and several threads, ranting against me and others. None of the mods have touched them with a ten foot pole, so this nonsense about not getting your side out is a lame excuse to try to reconcile your warped perspective with the cold, hard reality that is your complete and utter lack of support.
Originally posted by Django
3) Subsequent to that, when I posted threads questioning Chris' actions, posts in those threads were edited behind my back by the forum admin in an endeavor to ridicule me or harm my image.
As I've stated before, I never edited any of your posts. Silver, however, did. I told him I didn't like the idea, but ultimately left it up to him. What's more, you don't have any reason whatsoever to believe that you lost any support via Silver trying to make you look as if you referred to yourself as a "dork." His little trick was not only obvious, but had no effect whatsoever. What you don't realize is that you HAD NO SUPPORT TO LOSE. Even if you had, it wasn't me that edited it, and you've stated your case time and time again, and you still have none.
I guess you'll blame anyone but yourself for your unpopularity.
Originally posted by Django
Like I said earlier, this is simply a movie forum and I don't have all the time in the world to spend inspecting every nook and cranny--I have my own life to lead.
:laugh: Which is why you've devoted maybe 100 posts (and several usernames), many the length of a small essay, to your inane little cause. Yeah, right. This reeks of your past "I don't have time to back up my words" claims, which were also directly contradicted by your participation during that time.
Originally posted by Django
So the net effect of Chris Bowyer's manipulations, it seems to me, has been to alienate me from the affections of the forum members and to undermine my credibility
You don't need my help with that, bub.
Originally posted by Django
It may not seem like much to you, but it is personally very damaging to me--and a serious issue in my life.
No, it's not damaging to you. It's only damaging to your warped pysche, or perhaps your boundless pride.
Originally posted by Django
Fact is that once a thread has been deleted or a post, edited, there is no way of knowing what went on before.
Yes there is. Very few of the so-called "deleted" threads are actually deleted at all. They're just "hidden."
Originally posted by Django
There is a cover-up here, and how far it goes is anyone's guess!
Well, I did kill Kennedy...and there's a few aliens in my basement. But that's as far as it goes...honest.
Originally posted by Django
I know that this is a move site, and I have posted many threads and messages about the movies!
Uh, not really (http://www.movieforums.net/userstats.php?userid=1869).
Django, stop complaining about this. If you want to discuss politics, start a thread about it. I don't think any of your 'enemies' will even reply unless you post facts (not feelings.) And I don't think anyone will delete it unless you get way out of line and begin openly disrespecting people. So drop it. This is a stupid battle that needn't be fought, especially when there are much more important things you could be talking about. Grow up.
r3port3r66
05-07-03, 08:50 PM
I'm afraid Django, that Chris' credibility with me is still intact. Now, I know Silver Bullet can say some things that leave a sour taste in your mouth, but that's just Silver--his sense of humor is one that I find amusing, gritty at times, but funny none-the-less.
Just wanna say that if Django wants to gripe about not getting his story out, he need look no further than r66, one of the few people who has taken him seriously in spite of his childishness. He's been taking every accusation seriously and demanded explanation for all of them, which I've readily provided, and will continue to provide as long as any of the legitimate, mentally stable would like to hear them.
Originally posted by Yoda
Actually, what I said was that it was ridiculous of you to mention the war ALL THE TIME -- you say the thread was about happy thoughts, yet you couldn't help but mention the war AGAIN in a seemingly unrelated thread. Furthermore, I told you were more than free to create the thread again. Pretty weak gripe.
Give me a break! It happened to have actually BEEN the eve of war. I merely mentioned war in the subject of my thread for that reason. And that is grounds for deleting the thread?!! Pretty weak explanation!
Originally posted by Yoda
There was only one thread of yours on the matter that I can recall that was taken off the boards entirely, and it was not "explaining your side of the story," it was a ridiculous rant in which you threw out accusations of racism on a whim. Oh, and I'm not the one who removed it, either.
What gives you the right to make such subjective, qualitative assessments? As forum admin, your job is to regulate obscenity and profanity on the forum. You really have no business censoring content based on qualitative judgments--whether you happen to agree with it or like it or not! It just isn't your role. As it happens, that particular thread happened to be an explanation of my side of the story at the very moment when you posted a second popularity poll about me (to challenge the first one that had decidedly gone in my favor). And it's deletion at that crucial time resulted in the results of the poll going against me. That is so obviously crooked, that I'm at a loss to understand how you can defend that action in such a blase manner! And the fact that you personally didn't delete it simply tells me that you are unwilling to take the responsibility for the actions of the people to whom you have, apparently irresponsibly, delegated admin access levels to. Being the forum admin means that you have to accept RESPONSIBILITY for your actions and those of your gang, as well as wielding power. If you can't accept the responsibility, you have no business wielding the power. Your duty and responsibility as forum admin is to regulate profanity and obscenity on this forum, along with personal slurs and such--and you are doing a rotten job at that. People like Silver are having a field day with personal attacks, and you, rather than regulate them, are actually joining in! What is more, the sole action of regulation I have seen in here is to protect your friends (who all also happen to enjoy administrative powers, incidentally, and are really in no need of protection) from allegations of racial bias and mismanagement, which is so obvious that any fool can see it. The fact that you feel compelled to censor or discredit every allegation of racial or political bias made against the forum admin speaks for itself!
Originally posted by Yoda
You really have no complaint. EVERYONE has heard your side of the story at LEAST once by now. There's at least a dozen posts of yours, and several threads, ranting against me and others. None of the mods have touched them with a ten foot pole, so this nonsense about not getting your side out is a lame excuse to try to reconcile your warped perspective with the cold, hard reality that is your complete and utter lack of support.
What gives you the right to say I have no complaint? I DO have SEVERAL MAJOR COMPLAINTS to voice about your mismanagement of this forum. As far as I'm concerned, there are not enough threads addressing this issue, and a lot more needs to be said about it. Whatever support I lack has been entirely due to the underhanded Stalinistic manipulations of the forum admin. Whereas at one point, I enjoyed a healthy majority of support in here, thanks to your subversive tactics, my support has been undermined. That's one of the reasons I am voicing these complaints.
Originally posted by Yoda
As I've stated before, I never edited any of your posts. Silver, however, did. I told him I didn't like the idea, but ultimately left it up to him. What's more, you don't have any reason whatsoever to believe that you lost any support via Silver trying to make you look as if you referred to yourself as a "dork." His little trick was not only obvious, but had no effect whatsoever. What you don't realize is that you HAD NO SUPPORT TO LOSE. Even if you had, it wasn't me that edited it, and you've stated your case time and time again, and you still have none.
You are the forum admin--you gave Silver the access level to allow him to edit my posts and you did not prevent him from doing so either. Accept the responsibility for your actions as forum admin, for once! All this passing of the buck gets old after awhile. Again, what gives you the right to say that I had no support to lose? Based on an earlier poll, I hada healthy majority in my support, a majority that was consequently undermined thanks to the forum admin's underhanded censorship and distortion of my words, to say nothing of the antagonism that has been levelled against me.
Originally posted by Yoda
I guess you'll blame anyone but yourself for your unpopularity.
On the contrary, I have you and your friends entirely to blame.
Originally posted by Yoda
:laugh: Which is why you've devoted maybe 100 posts (and several usernames), many the length of a small essay, to your inane little cause. Yeah, right. This reeks of your past "I don't have time to back up my words" claims, which were also directly contradicted by your participation during that time.
Well, the frequency of my visits is hardly very high. I visit, maybe, a couple of times a week, that's about it. As I said, I don't have to prove the fact that I'm too busy! It's a fact! Like it or lump it!
Originally posted by Yoda
You don't need my help with that, bub.
Well, I didn't ask for it, that's for sure, but it has hardly stopped you from imposing it on me all the same.
Originally posted by Yoda
No, it's not damaging to you. It's only damaging to your warped pysche, or perhaps your boundless pride.
Yes, it is damaging to me in ways that you are obviously unaware of. And please, no more personal attacks. It doesn't become the forum admin to accuse members of having a warped psyche or boundless pride.
Originally posted by Yoda
Yes there is. Very few of the so-called "deleted" threads are actually deleted at all. They're just "hidden."
Well, you seem to forget that not everyone in here enjoys the privilege of an administrative access level. As such, most of us cannot tell whether a thread ever existed at all, once it has been deleted, nor can we discern that a post has been edited behind our back--not unless we had originally made the post.
Originally posted by Yoda
Well, I did kill Kennedy...and there's a few aliens in my basement. But that's as far as it goes...honest.
I'm sorry to say that your lame attempt at facetious humor does little to alleviate the seriousness of this issue--not, at least, in my mind.
Originally posted by Yoda
Uh, not really (http://www.movieforums.net/userstats.php?userid=1869).
Given the current circumstances in the nation and my personal vested interest in what's going on (being a minority), I think it's excusable. Anyway, I have every intention of posting more material in the other sections of the forum. Incidentally, the vast majority of my posts have been attempts at refuting your allegations levelled against me or replying to Silver Bullet's hostile words!
Since you're an emotional wasteland, I'll keep this short and sweet:
You really have no business censoring content based on qualitative judgments--whether you happen to agree with it or like it or not! It just isn't your role.
Yes it is. If someone's flooding the board with ridiculous, hostile crap, I take action. If you don't like it, leave.
Being the forum admin means that you have to accept RESPONSIBILITY for your actions and those of your gang
Name me one person whose support you have lost via Silver's actions.
Whatever support I lack has been entirely due to the underhanded Stalinistic manipulations of the forum admin. Whereas at one point, I enjoyed a healthy majority of support in here, thanks to your subversive tactics, my support has been undermined. That's one of the reasons I am voicing these complaints.
This claim of a "healthy majority of support" has been debunked several different ways several different times, O Dense One.
Well, the frequency of my visits is hardly very high. I visit, maybe, a couple of times a week, that's about it. As I said, I don't have to prove the fact that I'm too busy!
Yes you do, because you have a history of lying about these sorts of things.
You just wrote a post several thousand words in length, by the way. And something tells me it won't be the only one this week.
I'm sorry to say that your lame attempt at facetious humor does little to alleviate the seriousness of this issue--not, at least, in my mind.
You know, there's this place downtown. It isn't much to look at, but it'll get you off the streets.
Given the current circumstances in the nation and my personal vested interest in what's going on (being a minority)
And we all know the Insane Indian Immigrant vote holds a lot of political clout these days. Big swing demographic, that.
I think it's excusable.
"This is a movie forum."
"I post about movies!"
"No you don't."
"We're in a war! Who can talk about movies at a time like this?"
Revenge of Mr M
05-08-03, 06:49 AM
The reason no one likes Django is not because Chris told them not to, but because Django appears to be a self important pompus idiot
Originally posted by Revenge of Mr M
The reason no one likes Django is not because Chris told them not to, but because Django appears to be a self important pompus idiot
"Self important pompous idiot??!!" Are you sure you have the right guy in mind??!! :laugh:
Sorry, Yoda, ol' chum, but your responses just don't cut the mustard!
Originally posted by Yoda
Since you're an emotional wasteland, I'll keep this short and sweet:
No, I'm not an emotional wasteland. I am a passionate guy with strong emotions.
Originally posted by Yoda
Yes it is. If someone's flooding the board with ridiculous, hostile crap, I take action. If you don't like it, leave.
Sorry, Yoda, but the admin simply does not have the right to censor content based on his personal taste. That amounts to saying that if you disagree with the admin, he has the right to ban or censor you. That is totally subjective. That, in fact, is one of the major gripes I have against you. You are abusing your admin powers by using them to censor material that you subjectively disagree with. It is one thing to censor offensive, profane, personally derogatory comments--and you are doing a very poor job at that and, rather, contributing to such comments yourself--and another thing to censor material for the opinion expressed therein. Secondly, I am in no way "flooding the board with hostile crap"!!! Anyone with a reasonable frame of mind can see that. Rather, it has been Silver Bullet who has been targeting me with "hostile crap," with you supporting him and contributing to it yourself.
Originally posted by Yoda
Name me one person whose support you have lost via Silver's actions.
I would if I was psychic! However, I can only humbly present the evidence before you. Look at the before and after snapshots, if you will. Before: Popularity poll shows healthy majority in my support, with most of the threads started by me running into multi-page debates. After: Everyone turns against me. What more need I say?
Originally posted by Yoda
This claim of a "healthy majority of support" has been debunked several different ways several different times, O Dense One.
Now this is funny, I must admit! You calling me dense!!??
Originally posted by Yoda
Yes you do, because you have a history of lying about these sorts of things.
I won't even touch that one!
Originally posted by Yoda
You just wrote a post several thousand words in length, by the way. And something tells me it won't be the only one this week.
A post that I felt compelled to write in refutation to the points raised by you, kind of like this post. Catch 22: if I post, I get slammed for posting too much. If I don't, I get slammed for running away! :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Yoda
You know, there's this place downtown. It isn't much to look at, but it'll get you off the streets.
Come again? :confused:
Originally posted by Yoda
And we all know the Insane Indian Immigrant vote holds a lot of political clout these days. Big swing demographic, that.
"The Insane Indian Immigrant vote"!!! I rest my case!
If it was major demographic swing, the "Insane Indian Immigrant vote", as you call it, wouldn't be a minority at all, and we wouldn't be having this conversation, then, would we? :cool:
Originally posted by Yoda
"This is a movie forum."
"I post about movies!"
"No you don't."
"We're in a war! Who can talk about movies at a time like this?"
Is this another attempt on your part, o mighty Yoda, to use pseudo-logical arguments to divert attention from the important issues and focus on trivialities? Please be honest!
Well, that's it for me on this tired issue. I don't want to keep on banging a drum. I think I've made my point. I think we should call it quits on this issue at this point!
Take it easy, all! :cool:
Caitlyn
05-08-03, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by Django
Give me a break! It happened to have actually BEEN the eve of war. I merely mentioned war in the subject of my thread for that reason. And that is grounds for deleting the thread?!! Pretty weak explanation!
Django, You wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit you on the butt… I happen to remember the thread in question too… And yes, you titled it "Think Happy Thoughts on the Eve of War." … but then you ranted about the war and how stupid Bush was before we were subjected to your bragging about the 100 or so women who supposedly had your name tattooed on their butts…
And as many times as you have signed up on this forum under various user names I can’t believe you failed to read this little notice:
By clicking the Agree button, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
The owners of Movie Forums have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.
You did hit AGREE to join did you not…
What gives you the right to make such subjective, qualitative assessments?
Chris Bowyer - Owner
Yes, it is damaging to me in ways that you are obviously unaware of. And please, no more personal attacks. It doesn't become the forum admin to accuse members of having a warped psyche or boundless pride.
It doesn’t become any member of this forum to call the owner a bastard, blatant liar, malicious scoundrel, or a racist Republican either… but that didn’t stop you…
Given the current circumstances in the nation and my personal vested interest in what's going on (being a minority), I think it's excusable. Anyway, I have every intention of posting more material in the other sections of the forum. Incidentally, the vast majority of my posts have been attempts at refuting your allegations levelled against me or replying to Silver Bullet's hostile words!
Do you have a Social Security Card or TIN Django?
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Django, You wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit you on the butt… I happen to remember the thread in question too… And yes, you titled it "Think Happy Thoughts on the Eve of War." … but then you ranted about the war and how stupid Bush was before we were subjected to your bragging about the 100 or so women who supposedly had your name tattooed on their butts…
And as many times as you have signed up on this forum under various user names I can’t believe you failed to read this little notice:
By clicking the Agree button, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.
The owners of Movie Forums have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.
You did hit AGREE to join did you not…
I did not rant about the war or how stupid Bush was. I said that I wanted to think happy thoughts on the eve of war, and I mentioned, as one of the happy thoughts, the anatomical details of the women I had been sexually intimate with in recent times. And if you consider any of this obscene or vulgar, you either have the mentality of a grade-school infant, or you are simply biased against me, or both! Yes, I agreed to my posts being managed by the forum admin if it crossed the line with regard to obscenity. As a matter of fact, it didn't--certainly not from any reasonable point of view. Since then, however, I have been subjected to any amount of antagonistic crap from the likes of Silver Bullet, while Yoda looked on and did nothing. That's my gripe--bias, double standards. I have seen a ton of stuff on this forum that is a lot more obscene than anything I have posted go completely ignored. Why should my thread have been deleted simply because of a a single racy allusion, made in the most clinical terms imaginable so as to render it completely inoffensive? The forum admin may have the power to do what it likes, but does that mean the we, the forum members, have to sit and watch while the admin acts in a blatantly biased and even, I would venture to add, racist manner? Not me! I grew up in a democratic society in which we learned early to question authority and not sit back like a herd of dumb animals while those who rule over us do as they please. I don't know what sort of autocratic culture you grew up in, Caitlyn, but personally, I think you might be happier in Germany than in USA!
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Chris Bowyer - Owner
Owner of a forum in which people are invited to freely express their views, supposedly. Ownership does not give Chris Bowyer autocratic powers or the right to censor material because he happens to disagree with it.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
It doesn’t become any member of this forum to call the owner a bastard, blatant liar, malicious scoundrel, or a racist Republican either… but that didn’t stop you…
Mild, compared to the stuff I have been subjected to.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Do you have a Social Security Card or TIN Django?
Now what business is that of yours? As a matter of fact, I do, and I only answer this question as a matter of courtesy to the opposite sex, but, quite frankly, it is none of your goshdarned business! My immigrant status is my own concern, and not yours! As a matter of fact, it happens to be completely legitimate and on the level, but you have no business poking you nose into my personal matters.
Beale the Rippe
05-10-03, 05:27 PM
HOLY &%(&)__&^$#$!!!!
DJANGO IS BACK!!!!!
I should've posted that a long time ago.
I think Django is secretly in love with Yoda, and that all of his anger is just a failed attempt to express a wounded love.
Sorry, Yoda, but the admin simply does not have the right to censor content based on his personal taste. That amounts to saying that if you disagree with the admin, he has the right to ban or censor you. That is totally subjective.
Of course it's subjective. Every single act of moderation on this or any other board is inherently subjective. Deal with it.
I would if I was psychic! However, I can only humbly present the evidence before you. Look at the before and after snapshots, if you will. Before: Popularity poll shows healthy majority in my support, with most of the threads started by me running into multi-page debates. After: Everyone turns against me. What more need I say?
Healthy majority of support. :laugh: You mean the poll that you posted BEFORE you alienated everyone, asking the wrong question, and in which most of those who disliked you didn't bother to vote? And of course they turn into multi-page debates...you're trying to claim popularity for pissing everyone off and luring them into arguments?
I won't even touch that one!
You said you didn't have time to reply, then visited for several hours and posted half a dozen times during the next day. This is what is known as being dishonest.
Catch 22: if I post, I get slammed for posting too much. If I don't, I get slammed for running away! :rolleyes:
No one's slammed you for running away. Rather, we've encouraged it.
If it was major demographic swing, the "Insane Indian Immigrant vote", as you call it, wouldn't be a minority at all, and we wouldn't be having this conversation, then, would we? :cool:
Your sarcasm detector is broken.
Is this another attempt on your part, o mighty Yoda, to use pseudo-logical arguments to divert attention from the important issues and focus on trivialities? Please be honest!
You said you posted a lot about movies, and the fact is you didn't. When I pointed this out, instead of admitting you were wrong, you just said it didn't matter. Again: dishonesty. And if I were trying to divert attention from the "important issues," why would I constantly post in regards to them?
Say it with me. Log...ic. Log...ic. Logic.
The forum admin may have the power to do what it likes, but does that mean the we, the forum members, have to sit and watch while the admin acts in a blatantly biased and even, I would venture to add, racist manner?
Actually, I didn't even know you were foreign until well after you'd pissed everyone off. I'd also point that it's not "we, the forum members" because no one shares your complaints.
Ownership does not give Chris Bowyer autocratic powers or the right to censor material because he happens to disagree with it.
Actually, it does. I don't censor material because I disagree with it (which should be painfully obvious to anyone who can read), but technically it's well within my rights to censor anything for any reason. And it's well within the rights of my visitors to walk away if I do.
Originally posted by Beale the Rippe
HOLY &%(&)__&^$#$!!!!
DJANGO IS BACK!!!!!
I should've posted that a long time ago.
I think Django is secretly in love with Yoda, and that all of his anger is just a failed attempt to express a wounded love.
:rolleyes: :laugh: Pretty funny! Ever consider going into stand-up?
Originally posted by Yoda
Of course it's subjective. Every single act of moderation on this or any other board is inherently subjective. Deal with it.
Now you have just shot yourself in the foot, m' man! If an act of moderation is subjective, it is arbitrary, and if it is arbitrary, it is autocratic! You have just unwittingly admitted to being an autocratic despot! Moderation, in order to be valid, has to be consistent and fair. And, consequently, must be based on some objective standards. Log...ic! Log...ic! Log...ic! :D
Originally posted by Yoda
Healthy majority of support. :laugh: You mean the poll that you posted BEFORE you alienated everyone, asking the wrong question, and in which most of those who disliked you didn't bother to vote? And of course they turn into multi-page debates...you're trying to claim popularity for pissing everyone off and luring them into arguments?
Well, the results of that poll, regardless of the question, suggested that a healthy majority wanted to hear more from me. I call that "support"! And if everyone is pissed off at me, they would just ignore me, wouldn't they?
Originally posted by Yoda
You said you didn't have time to reply, then visited for several hours and posted half a dozen times during the next day. This is what is known as being dishonest.
I won't go into that one! I honestly don't keep track of every little thing I do!
Originally posted by Yoda
No one's slammed you for running away. Rather, we've encouraged it.
Well, you are one of the people who wants answers from me all the time. If you want me to post answers, and then complain when I do not, I call that slamming me for running away!
Originally posted by Yoda
Your sarcasm detector is broken.
This is not an issue about sarcasm . . . it's about logic! I claimed that the Indian vote is a minority, and you replied by saying, in effect, "Big deal, who cares! It's not like the Indian vote is a major demographic swing!" That's my point exactly--it's a minority, which is why it's not a major demographic swing!
Originally posted by Yoda
You said you posted a lot about movies, and the fact is you didn't. When I pointed this out, instead of admitting you were wrong, you just said it didn't matter. Again: dishonesty. And if I were trying to divert attention from the "important issues," why would I constantly post in regards to them?
Say it with me. Log...ic. Log...ic. Logic.
Whether or not I posted a lot about movies is not the issue here. The issue here is the question whether you, as forum admin, have acted in a biased manner or not! Logic cuts both ways, mon ami!
Originally posted by Yoda
Actually, I didn't even know you were foreign until well after you'd pissed everyone off. I'd also point that it's not "we, the forum members" because no one shares your complaints.
That's odd, because I pointed out that I was Indian in my very first post!
Originally posted by Yoda
Actually, it does. I don't censor material because I disagree with it (which should be painfully obvious to anyone who can read), but technically it's well within my rights to censor anything for any reason. And it's well within the rights of my visitors to walk away if I do.
Well, in that case, we have to go back to my first point! If this is a forum in which people are invited to freely express their opinions, and if the forum admin reserves the right to arbitrarily censor anyone for any reason, then what's the point of having a forum at all? When I signed on, I agreed to be moderated in accordance with a consistent set of guidelines that apply to everyone. I did not agree to be singled out and hounded arbitrarily solely because of my nationality or political views! If that's how you operate this forum, then obviously no one would dare to question your authority, because, in effect, you would be declaring yourself to be a dictator with the power to ban anyone who dared question your supreme authority! Kind of like Saddam Hussein!
Now you have just shot yourself in the foot, m' man! If an act of moderation is subjective, it is arbitrary, and if it is arbitrary, it is autocratic! You have just unwittingly admitted to being an autocratic despot! Moderation, in order to be valid, has to be consistent and fair. And, consequently, must be based on some objective standards.
Subjective and arbitrary are not synonyms, brainiac. But even if they were, any comparison of an event to an objective standard is still going to be pretty subjective, especially if we're talking about an online forum without a full-fledged constitution present. Or, in short: you're wrong. Kinda becoming habitual.
Well, the results of that poll, regardless of the question, suggested that a healthy majority wanted to hear more from me. I call that "support"!
I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that maybe the only person responsible for the loss of this so-called "support" is you? No? Okay, just asking.
And if everyone is pissed off at me, they would just ignore me, wouldn't they?
No, they wouldn't. You seem rather pissed at a number of us, but you don't ignore us.
I won't go into that one! I honestly don't keep track of every little thing I do!
Well I did. You lied to try to climb out of the argumentative hole you'd dug for yourself with claims you couldn't back.
Well, you are one of the people who wants answers from me all the time. If you want me to post answers, and then complain when I do not, I call that slamming me for running away!
I didn't slam you for leaving...I slammed you for staying but still babbling on with things that made no sense. If you're going to stay, get your act together. That's been the policy all along.
This is not an issue about sarcasm . . . it's about logic! I claimed that the Indian vote is a minority, and you replied by saying, in effect, "Big deal, who cares! It's not like the Indian vote is a major demographic swing!" That's my point exactly--it's a minority, which is why it's not a major demographic swing!
You read too much into it. I wasn't making a political statement. I was making fun of you.
Whether or not I posted a lot about movies is not the issue here.
There you go again. You made something up, were proven wrong, and won't admit it. It is most definitely part of the issue, as it demonstrates that you are routinely dishonest, and will say anything to avoid admitting defeat.
That's odd, because I pointed out that I was Indian in my very first post!
It's not odd at all. Your first post was roughly a page and a half. I read very little of it initially.
I did not agree to be singled out and hounded arbitrarily solely because of my nationality or political views!
I've already ripped this accusation to shreds a dozen times. There are a number of regulars with political views akin to your own, and they haven't been targetted the way you claim to be. This may be hard to swallow, but you receive all this special attention because you're partronizing, childish, and completely insufferable.
Sexy Celebrity
05-10-03, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Django, You wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit you on the butt…
I wonder if he'd know a male midget in the same situation.
r3port3r66
05-10-03, 09:42 PM
All right gentlemen, let's put this thing to rest:
Django, if you're so outraged by this website and its owner, then why do you continue to post here?
Yoda, knowing that the majority of members are on your side, and claiming that Django makes no sense, saying you think he's "patronizing, childish and insufferable", why do you constantly humor him with replies?
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Yoda, knowing that the majority of members are on your side, and claiming that Django makes no sense, saying you think he's "patronizing, childish and insufferable", why do you constantly humor him with replies?
I find nonsense intolerable. It's difficult for me to let it go unchallenged, even if everyone else around me recognizes for what it is. Your implication, however, that I should just ignore him, is right on the money. He's not going to start making sense anytime soon. I know ignoring his inanity is the sensible thing to do, but that's easier said than done.
Originally posted by Yoda
Subjective and arbitrary are not synonyms, brainiac. But even if they were, any comparison of an event to an objective standard is still going to be pretty subjective, especially if we're talking about an online forum without a full-fledged constitution present. Or, in short: you're wrong. Kinda becoming habitual.
Subjective is the opposite of objective, right? Objective implies consistency, right? Consistent is the opposite of arbitrary, right? Log...ic! Log...ic! Log...ic!
Originally posted by Yoda
I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that maybe the only person responsible for the loss of this so-called "support" is you? No? Okay, just asking.
Personally, I think I'm misunderstood. If people are pissed off at something I said, I think they misunderstood what I meant to say. It has never been my intention to appear stand-offish or overbearing, but I am being accused of the same. Obviously, I am being misunderstood.
Originally posted by Yoda
No, they wouldn't. You seem rather pissed at a number of us, but you don't ignore us.
No, actually, I'm not pissed off at you guys at all. If I was, I would certainly be ignoring you!
Originally posted by Yoda
Well I did. You lied to try to climb out of the argumentative hole you'd dug for yourself with claims you couldn't back.
No, I didn't lie! I may have exaggerated a bit, but I don't keep tabs on everything I do in here. Like I said, the main reason I have posted so many times in this section, is, invariably, in reply to cross-examinations like this one!
Originally posted by Yoda
I didn't slam you for leaving...I slammed you for staying but still babbling on with things that made no sense. If you're going to stay, get your act together. That's been the policy all along.
That's another one of my points. If you don't understand it, it doesn't mean that it makes no sense! That's why I'm saying that the forum admin should not censor material based on content. Stick to enforcing standards of decorum in here and stay away from judging the content, and you can't go wrong.
Originally posted by Yoda
You read too much into it. I wasn't making a political statement. I was making fun of you.
Well, I was making fun of you too! You're the one who makes a big deal about logic all the time, yet here, you made a most illogical statement! :D
Originally posted by Yoda
There you go again. You made something up, were proven wrong, and won't admit it. It is most definitely part of the issue, as it demonstrates that you are routinely dishonest, and will say anything to avoid admitting defeat.
Now you're making a major issue over trivialities! Why I should take that seriously is beyond me!
Originally posted by Yoda
It's not odd at all. Your first post was roughly a page and a half. I read very little of it initially.
Well, then, you should have.
Originally posted by Yoda
I've already ripped this accusation to shreds a dozen times. There are a number of regulars with political views akin to your own, and they haven't been targetted the way you claim to be. This may be hard to swallow, but you receive all this special attention because you're insufferable, schizophrenic, patronizing and childish.
Well, I'm the first Indian national to post on this board. Methinks you have something against Indian nationals, based on other comments you have made. Sorry, but I beg to differ about the "insufferable, schizophrenic, patronizing and childish" bit. Ask anyone who knows me personally.
Originally posted by Sexy Celebrity
I wonder if he'd know a male midget in the same situation.
:laugh: Funny!
Originally posted by r3port3r66
All right gentlemen, let's put this thing to rest:
Django, if you're so outraged by this website and its owner, then why do you continue to post here?
Yoda, knowing that the majority of members are on your side, and claiming that Django makes no sense, saying you think he's "patronizing, childish and insufferable", why do you constantly humor him with replies?
I'm posting here because I want my opinion to be heard. I'm questioning the actions of the authorities in here because I don't want that opinion to be arbitrarily censored or distorted. Why is that so difficult to understand?
Originally posted by Yoda
I find nonsense intolerable. It's difficult for me to let it go unchallenged, even if everyone else around me recognizes for what it is. Your implication, however, that I should just ignore him, is right on the money. He's not going to start making sense anytime soon. I know ignoring his inanity is the sensible thing to do, but that's easier said than done.
Hey, even the insane have the right to free self-expression without arbitrary censorship! And what gives you the right to claim that I am insane to begin with? Because I am an independent thinking mind with opinions differing from your own? Precisely my point--"agree with me or you're marginalized!"
:dizzy: Long live insanity! Who was the guy in here who said, "Don't feel threatened by insanity--enjoy it!" :laugh:
Sexy Celebrity
05-10-03, 09:54 PM
Originally posted by Django
Well, I'm the first Indian national to post on this board. Methinks you have something against Indian nationals, based on other comments you have made.
Well, when have you been acting like an Indian national? Where do you find the time when you're not acting like Schizo Dizzo Rizzo?
Originally posted by Sexy Celebrity
Well, when have you been acting like an Indian national? Where do you find the time when you're not acting like Schizo Dizzo Rizzo?
Well, I've been acting like a schizophrenic Indian national! Anything to make Yoda upset, angry and confused at me! :laugh:
Subjective is the opposite of objective, right? Objective implies consistency, right?
Subjectivity does not imply lack of consistency at all. My preference for vanilla over chocolate is subjective, but perfectly consistent. Buy a freaking dictionary, man.
Personally, I think I'm misunderstood. If people are pissed off at something I said, I think they misunderstood what I meant to say. It has never been my intention to appear stand-offish or overbearing, but I am being accused of the same. Obviously, I am being misunderstood.
Believe me, we understand you all too well. You patronized LordSlaytan, alluded to Caitlyn being similar a Nazi, and compared me to several dictators, and you claim you weren't trying to be stand-offish. When pretty much everyone takes what you say the wrong way, you're saying the wrong things.
No, I didn't lie! I may have exaggerated a bit, but I don't keep tabs on everything I do in here. Like I said, the main reason I have posted so many times in this section, is, invariably, in reply to cross-examinations like this one!
:laugh: "Exaggerated." Uh-huh. I'm thinking you "exaggerate" a lot.
As if we didn't have enough plenty of reasons to doubt your credibility before...
That's why I'm saying that the forum admin should not censor material based on content. Stick to enforcing standards of decorum in here and stay away from judging the content, and you can't go wrong.
The entire forum is content. There is no way to effectively moderate without examining content. You were misbehaving, and action was taken. If you don't like my definition of "misbehaving," then leave, because it ain't changing.
Well, I was making fun of you too! You're the one who makes a big deal about logic all the time, yet here, you made a most illogical statement! :D
No I didn't. I mocked you. I'll probably do so again. That's really all there is to it.
BTW: even though I was being sarcastic, you don't have to be in the majority, racially, to be part of a "major swing demographic." Ever hear Pennsylvania and New York referred to as "swing states"? Well, neither of them makes up the majority of electoral votes. When something is a "swing BLANK" in politics it means that it's usually divided fairly evenly between parties and therefore winning that particular battle is crucial to victory.
Now you're making a major issue over trivialities! Why I should take that seriously is beyond me!
Probably because it casts even further doubt as to your honesty. Ever hear of a "character witness"? It's kinda like that.
Well, then, you should have.
No, not really. But regardless, I didn't, and therefore didn't know your race until after realizing that you had the emotional maturity of a grade-schooler.
And what gives you the right to claim that I am insane to begin with? Because I am an independent thinking mind with opinions differing from your own? Precisely my point--"agree with me or you're marginalized!"
"There are a number of regulars with political views akin to your own, and they haven't been targetted the way you claim to be."
You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
r3port3r66
05-10-03, 10:10 PM
Your answers to my questions say alot about who you both are.
Django, loose that chip on your shoulder, it will only cause you problems in the future.
Originally posted by Yoda
Subjectivity does not imply lack of consistency at all. My preference for vanilla over chocolate is subjective, but perfectly consistent. Buy a freaking dictionary, man.
I use dictionary.com, thanks!
Simple logic, that you are so fond of invoking:
Objectivity is the opposite of subjectivity.
Objectivity implies consistency.
Therefore, subjectivity implies inconsistency or arbitrariness.
Your allusion to your taste for ice cream makes my point exactly. You are referring to your subjective taste for something. You are referring to a question of personal tastes as opposed to objective standards--the very essence of arbitrariness.
Originally posted by Yoda
Believe me, we understand you all too well. You patronized LordSlaytan, alluded to Caitlyn being similar a Nazi, and compared me to several dictators, and you claim you weren't trying to be stand-offish. When pretty much everyone takes what you say the wrong way, you're saying the wrong things.
Hey, if you can't take it, don't dish it out! Why should I be called to account for everything I say and then have to bear the brunt of what everyone else says about me? Nothing I have said is in any way obscene or profane. Since when is it a crime to be patronizing or stand-offish, even if I was, which I am not? Why should I have to modify my attitudes because they happen to be disagreeable to you? Again--I don't have to be a nice guy to enjoy the freedom of self-expression. Fact is, I happen to be a nice guy. But even if I was not, you don't have the right to call me to account for the attitudes I express, if I am not being obscene or profane. Maybe I'm in a bad mood one day and I say something angry--surely I have the right to be angry and express my anger, as long as I am not being obscene or profane? Why should I have to answer to that?
Originally posted by Yoda
As if we didn't have enough plenty of reasons to doubt your credibility before...
So you admit that all you are trying to do here is undermine my credibility by making a big issue about trivialities?
Originally posted by Yoda
The entire forum is content. There is no way to effectively moderate without examining content. You were misbehaving, and action was taken. If you don't like my definition of "misbehaving," then leave, because it ain't changing.
If your definition of "misbehaving" alludes to anything you don't understand or disagree with, then you are being autocratic. Simple as that. Again, apply some objective standards to your forum management, that's all I ask. As it is, you come across, to me at least, as being completely biased and inconsistent.
Originally posted by Yoda
No I didn't. I mocked you. I'll probably do so again. That's really all there is to it.
BTW: even though I was being sarcastic, you don't have to be in the majority, racially, to be part of a "major swing demographic." Ever hear Pennsylvania and New York referred to as "swing states"? Well, neither of them makes up the majority of electoral votes. When something is a "swing BLANK" in politics it means that it's usually divided fairly evenly between parties and therefore winning that particular battle is crucial to victory.
If you were mocking me, then I certainly did not feel mocked! I won't tell you why, because it would only upset you, but, frankly, your attempts at mocking me don't really upset me greatly. Go ahead and mock me all you like! Your point about to swing demographics, as you explain them, makes no sense at all, because it is totally out of context. A swing demographic is a completely circumstantial thing, and, by your definition, any minority can, under certain circumstances, be considered a swing demographic. In that case, it makes even less sense to suggest that the Indian vote can never be a swing demographic, because, under certain circumstances, it could. So your statement is completely ridiculous! :D
Originally posted by Yoda
Probably because it casts even further doubt as to your honesty. Ever hear of a "character witness"? It's kinda like that.
Wow! So because I don't keep track of every minor issue and sometimes make inaccurate statements about trivial issues because of oversight, that makes me dishonest? Again, this strikes me as a further attempt on your part to undermine my credibility by making a major issue over trivialities, thereby distracting attention from the substance of the allegations I have made against you. What difference does it make if I have posted many times in this section or not? Like I said, the main reason I have done so is in response to your elaborate cross-examinations which go on endlessly without making any real point!
Originally posted by Yoda
No, not really. But regardless, I didn't, and therefore didn't know your race until after realizing that you had the emotional maturity of a grade-schooler.
To that, all I can say is . . . "Silver Bullet"! :laugh:
Originally posted by Yoda
"There are a number of regulars with political views akin to your own, and they haven't been targetted the way you claim to be."
And why is that, I'd like to know? Obviously it has to do with personal dislike on your part. And for what reason? That's the essential mystery.
Originally posted by Yoda
You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.
And when have I dissembled any facts on important issues? Your argument is that because I made a few inaccurate remarks offhand about trivial issues, that makes me a chronic liar who can't be trusted! That argument is, in itself, completely fallacious and cannot be trusted!
Originally posted by r3port3r66
Your answers to my questions say alot about who you both are.
Django, loose that chip on your shoulder, it will only cause you problems in the future.
I won't pretend to understand what you're talking about! :D
LordSlaytan
05-10-03, 11:44 PM
I have an idea, why don't you guys just do this with the PM feature. :yup:
Good idea. Better yet, I'll take r66's wise advice and perhaps make use of the Ignore feature, as well.
Originally posted by Django
When I signed on, I agreed to be moderated in accordance with a consistent set of guidelines that apply to everyone. I did not agree to be singled out and hounded arbitrarily solely because of my nationality or political views! If that's how you operate this forum, then obviously no one would dare to question your authority, because, in effect, you would be declaring yourself to be a dictator with the power to ban anyone who dared question your supreme authority! Kind of like Saddam Hussein!
Weren't you arguing for the preservation of Saddam's regime awhile back? That don't make much sense, do it?
At the risk of sounding like everything I hate, you are totally playing the race card, because that's all you've got at this point. Yoda hasn't made your nationality an issue, so why did you? Make concessions & go about your business. Stop acting like a kid.
Originally posted by Steve
Weren't you arguing for the preservation of Saddam's regime awhile back? That don't make much sense, do it?
At the risk of sounding like everything I hate, you are totally playing the race card, because that's all you've got at this point. Yoda hasn't made your nationality an issue, so why did you? Make concessions & go about your business. Stop acting like a kid.
I was arguing against American involvement in an unnecessary war. I still think the Iraq war was unwarranted. The cost of the war is huge, both in human terms as well as in monetary terms, and I think the President should have, instead, focussed his attention on the domestic economy rather than concerned himself with the situation in Iraq. No, I am not playing the "race card," as you call it. Rather, I am voicing legitimate concerns regarding cultural and political bias on the part of the forum admin.
Yes! YES! Of couse he's bias! Who cares!? EVERYONE'S BIAS! Everyone has an opinion! And in case you didn't know, Chris can do whatever he damn well pleases! It's his site!
Since when is it wrong to give a much-oppressed nation justice and the freedom to vote for a leader? Did you know that Saddam kidnapped and ransomed helpless innocents in order to force men to join his regime? Did you know he also has men rape the wives, daughters and sisters of his advisors just to show them who's boss? Now go through those ordeals and tell me that Bush would do the same thing.
Originally posted by Gracie
Yes! YES! Of couse he's bias! Who cares!? EVERYONE'S BIAS! Everyone has an opinion! And in case you didn't know, Chris can do whatever he damn well pleases! It's his site!
Since when is it wrong to give a much-oppressed nation justice and the freedom to vote for a leader? Did you know that Saddam kidnapped and ransomed helpless innocents in order to force men to join his regime? Did you know he also has men rape the wives, daughters and sisters of his advisors just to show them who's boss? Now go through those ordeals and tell me that Bush would do the same thing.
It's fine to have an opinion. It's another thing to be a biased forum admin. If you want to hold any sort of administrative position, you do not allow your personal prejudices or biases enter into your administrative duties. If you do, that makes you incompetent. That is common knowledge. Regarding Saddam, since when did it become George W. Bush's business to interfere with what was going on in Iraq? For decades, the US did nothing about Iraq other than impose economic sanctions, which only made matters worse for the poor. And now, all of a sudden, this interest in liberating Iraq from a dictator whose regime was created by Reagan, Bush, Thatcher, et al? Strikes me as very suspicious. Anyway, I don't want to get into another pointless, politically charged discussion about what's been going on in Iraq. I have any number of reasons to question the authenticity of Bush's intentions in Iraq. And if the Bush administration begins a new war in some other part of the world--be it North Korea, Syria or Uzbekistan (yes, it's true! Uzbekistan!), then don't blame me for the consequences!
Originally posted by Django
The cost of the war is huge, both in human terms as well as in monetary terms
Monetary? Back that up. I happen to know for a fact that you're wrong.
$20 says you can't even guesstimate this war's cost without looking it up first.
It's fine to have an opinion. It's another thing to be a biased forum admin. If you want to hold any sort of administrative position, you do not allow your personal prejudices or biases enter into your administrative duties. If you do, that makes you incompetent. That is common knowledge. Regarding Saddam, since when did it become George W. Bush's business to interfere with what was going on in Iraq? For decades, the US did nothing about Iraq other than impose economic sanctions, which only made matters worse for the poor. And now, all of a sudden, this interest in liberating Iraq from a dictator whose regime was created by Reagan, Bush, Thatcher, et al? Strikes me as very suspicious. Anyway, I don't want to get into another pointless, politically charged discussion about what's been going on in Iraq. I have any number of reasons to question the authenticity of Bush's intentions in Iraq. And if the Bush administration begins a new war in some other part of the world--be it North Korea, Syria or Uzbekistan (yes, it's true! Uzbekistan!), then don't blame me for the consequences!
Did you even read what I wrote!?! It's his site! He can put up whatever he wants, and say whatever he wants!
I see you're falling back on the theory that any republican that have ever had power created Saddam's regime. Do you have proof? I didn't think so.
Is there anything wrong with bringing innocent lives to justice? Maybe Bush Jr. wanted to liberate Iraq, but Bush Sr. didn't. Did anyone even know how bad the conditions were in Iraq until we found out he was welcoming terrorists with open arms? It's not suspicious. It's called having morals and priorities, and Bush Jr.'s first priority is destroying terrorists and whoever harbor them. Why not save a nation while you're at it?
Originally posted by Yoda
Monetary? Back that up. I happen to know for a fact that you're wrong.
$20 says you can't even guesstimate this war's cost without looking it up first.
You can mail me a check for $20 at your convenience. I'd say around $500 billion. And I haven't looked it up.
Originally posted by Gracie
Did you even read what I wrote!?! It's his site! He can put up whatever he wants, and say whatever he wants!
I see you're falling back on the theory that any republican that have ever had power created Saddam's regime. Do you have proof? I didn't think so.
Is there anything wrong with bringing innocent lives to justice? Maybe Bush Jr. wanted to liberate Iraq, but Bush Sr. didn't. Did anyone even know how bad the conditions were in Iraq until we found out he was welcoming terrorists with open arms? It's not suspicious. It's called having morals and priorities, and Bush Jr.'s first priority is destroying terrorists and whoever harbor them. Why not save a nation while you're at it?
Sure he can say what he wants. But I don't think his credibility will amount to very much if he does. Also, there is TONS of photographic evidence to prove that Saddam's regime was set up by the previous Republican administration--photos such as those of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam by the hand, etc. Regarding Iraq's connections with terrorists--tenuous, to say the least. Regarding weapons of mass destruction--the Bush administration has yet to uncover this evidence, even after the war. Moral and priorities??!! Forgive me while I laugh! :laugh: What about domestic conditions and the fact that unemployment is going through the roof and the job market sucks? I guess liberating some obscure middle-eastern country from some tinhorn dictator takes priority over feeding your own countrymen! Not to mention slashing veteran's benefits and undoing social reforms while passing tax-cut legislature that inordinately benefits the wealthy minority! I guess all this is reflective of the impeccable conscience and high moralistic priorities of the Bush administration! And, lest we all forget, the people who benefitted the most from the Iraq war were the arms manufacturers who contributed so generously to Bush's campaign, and the oil industry, which boasts Dubya's first-hand involvement! More striking evidence of the Bush administration's remarkable moral standards and conscience, no doubt!
Originally posted by Django
You can mail me a check for $20 at your convenience. I'd say around $500 billion. And I haven't looked it up.
Not even close. High-end projections have it at a little more than one-tenth of that. Or, in other words, it's just about the cheapest war as a percentage of GDP in all of American history.
I accept money orders, by the way.
Originally posted by Django
What about domestic conditions and the fact that unemployment is going through the roof
No it's not. Last I checked we weren't even above the 30-year average. Seriously, do you just make this stuff up?
*closes can of whoopass*
Originally posted by Yoda
Not even close. High-end projections have it at a little more than one-tenth of that. Or, in other words, it's just about the cheapest war as a percentage of GDP in all of American history.
I accept money orders, by the way.
Oh, you mean to say that it was only 50 billion dollars as opposed to 500 billion dollars??!! You're kiddin' me! Only 50 billion? That's all? That's a bargain, man! That's so inexpensive! And there I was, like a fool, thinking it was $500 billion when it was only $50 billion! My word! I'm taken aback! :rolleyes:
Originally posted by Yoda
No it's not. Last I checked we weren't even above the 30-year average. Seriously, do you just make this stuff up?
*closes can of whoopass*
:rolleyes: Oh, wow! So the ongoing 2 year recession we've been having, with all those people being laid off and homelessness on the rise, all of this never even happened, eh? Because I made it all up? And because the almighty Yoda says it never happened? So all those poor people who lost their jobs--they never really lost their jobs, did they? Nor are all those poor homeless people on the street really there are they? I guess they don't even exist! And only a couple of years ago, things were so very different, from what I remember--but then, I'm your average schizophrenic psychopath who enjoys concocting absurd scenarios just for the heck of it to undermine the integrity of the oh-so morally virtuous Republican administration! Forgive me! I deserve to be publicly flogged for my impudence, o mighty Yoda, great know-it-all . . . I'm sorry, great all-knowing one!
Originally posted by Django
Oh, you mean to say that it was only 50 billion dollars as opposed to 500 billion dollars??!! You're kiddin' me! Only 50 billion? That's all? That's a bargain, man! That's so inexpensive! And there I was, like a fool, thinking it was $500 billion when it was only $50 billion! My word! I'm taken aback! :rolleyes:
This war was tiny by any applicable standard. The war has made up less than 1/2 of one percent of our yearly GDP. Therefore your claim was incorrect, and your estimate was abysmal. You made something up, and you've just been proven wrong. Deal with it.
Originally posted by Django
:rolleyes: Oh, wow! So the ongoing 2 year recession we've been having, with all those people being laid off and homelessness on the rise, all of this never even happened, eh? Because I made it all up? And because the almighty Yoda says it never happened? So all those poor people who lost their jobs--they never really lost their jobs, did they? Nor are all those poor homeless people on the street really there are they? I guess they don't even exist! And only a couple of years ago, things were so very different, from what I remember--but then, I'm your average schizophrenic psychopath who enjoys concocting absurd scenarios just for the heck of it to undermine the integrity of the oh-so morally virtuous Republican administration! Forgive me! I deserve to be publicly flogged for my impudence, o mighty Yoda, great know-it-all . . . I'm sorry, great all-knowing one!
Look it up, smartass. Don't get mad at me because the numbers directly contradict what you say.
By the way: I didn't claim even half the things above. You're pulling a bait and switch to cover your mistake. Instead of making things up and getting pissy when someone calls you out, why don't you just do your homework before mouthing off?
Originally posted by Yoda
This war was tiny by any applicable standard. The war has made up less than 1/2 of one percent of our yearly GDP. Therefore your claim was incorrect, and your estimate was abysmal. You made something up, and you've just been proven wrong. Deal with it.
If $50 billion dollars is loose change, I wouldn't mind pocketing some of that change. Also, I wouldn't mind it if the administration footed the bill for that "tiny little" war out of its own pocket instead of out of the hard-earned money I pay in taxes!
Originally posted by Yoda
Look it up, smartass. Don't get mad at me because the numbers directly contradict what you say.
Come on!!! I work in the software industry!!! I know first-hand just how bad it is! It isn't just bad, it's horrendous! I honestly have no idea where you dug up your statistics from, but they fly in the face of reality and make you look downright ignorant!
Originally posted by Yoda
By the way: I didn't claim even half the things above. You're pulling a bait and switch to cover your mistake. Instead of making things up and getting pissy when someone calls you out, why don't you just do your homework before mouthing off?
I haven't made anything up. You asked me to take a guess and I did. I happen to have read somewhere that the war cost somewhere around $500 billion. Perhaps I misread it and added an extra zero to the figure. Point is, it's no small amount, however you might figure it. The cost in human terms is no small cost either. Thing is, people like you seem to be expert in quoting statistics to cover up your own blunders and then sweeping the whole mess under the carpet. Like I said earlier, Bush justified his war on the grounds that Iraq harbors weapons of mass destruction, speculating that some day, it might hand over these weapons to terrorists. Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Where are the connections with terrorists? Doesn't this tell you that the whole premise for the war was a sham? Sure, it only cost the US $50 billion, which is small change, primarily because middle-class taxpayers will end up footing the bill. And the arms manufacturers and oil barons will end up getting a tiny bit richer, which probably amounts to several hundreds of billions of dollars. But, of course, in the end, it was all worth it, to liberate Iraq! :rolleyes: Sure it was!
Originally posted by Django
If $50 billion dollars is loose change, I wouldn't mind pocketing some of that change. Also, I wouldn't mind it if the administration footed the bill for that "tiny little" war out of its own pocket instead of out of the hard-earned money I pay in taxes!
You could say all that about $1 million, too. Just because it's a lot TO YOU doesn't mean it's a lot to the country. You said it was "huge," and it's not. You were talking out of your ass, as usual.
Originally posted by Django
Come on!!! I work in the software industry!!! I know first-hand just how bad it is! It isn't just bad, it's horrendous! I honestly have no idea where you dug up your statistics from, but they fly in the face of reality and make you look downright ignorant!
I repeat: look them up, smartass. I'm not surprised that you have "no idea" where I got the stats, because clearly you don't make a habit of verifying anything you say. You make something up, post it, and then play argumentative dodgeball when someone exposes your fabrication.
Originally posted by Django
I haven't made anything up.
"...unemployment is going through the roof."
Originally posted by Django
You asked me to take a guess and I did. I happen to have read somewhere that the war cost somewhere around $500 billion. Perhaps I misread it and added an extra zero to the figure. Point is, it's no small amount, however you might figure it. The cost in human terms is no small cost either. Thing is, people like you seem to be expert in quoting statistics to cover up your own blunders and then sweeping the whole mess under the carpet. Like I said earlier, Bush justified his war on the grounds that Iraq harbors weapons of mass destruction, speculating that some day, it might hand over these weapons to terrorists. Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Where are the connections with terrorists? Doesn't this tell you that the whole premise for the war was a sham? Sure, it only cost the US $50 billion, which is small change, primarily because middle-class taxpayers will end up footing the bill. And the arms manufacturers and oil barons will end up getting a tiny bit richer, which probably amounts to several hundreds of billions of dollars. But, of course, in the end, it was all worth it, to liberate Iraq! :rolleyes: Sure it was!
Standard practice: you make up some bullsh*t, Cait or I or someone else rips it to shreds, then you go off on some rant, never admitting your error. You want me to argue with you about subtle issues when you won't even admit your most blatant of errors. What the hell's the point? You don't even admit you're wrong when someone holds the error right in your face.
Originally posted by Django
And the only way to remove them was to remove Saddam Hussein. You can't complain about the sanctions and then argue against regime change. So shutup.
[b]
Sure he can say what he wants. But I don't think his credibility will amount to very much if he does. Also, there is TONS of photographic evidence to prove that Saddam's regime was set up by the previous Republican administration--photos such as those of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam by the hand, etc. Regarding Iraq's connections with terrorists--tenuous, to say the least. Regarding weapons of mass destruction--the Bush administration has yet to uncover this evidence, even after the war. Moral and priorities??!! Forgive me while I laugh!
It's obvious to anyone who's read anything that Saddam Hussein was largely aided by the US in the past. This gave the US even more of a responsibility, not only to the Iraqis and Kurds, but to the world as well, to remove him from power. It was a mistake that has been fixed.
And there is well-documented evidence of Tariq Aziz meeting with several senior al Qaeda officials in the mid-90s. Look it up.
Weapons? Maybe not. Mass graves and torture chambers? You better believe it. So, Django, in spite of this horrific criminal evidence, the fact that we didn't find any weapons makes the whole thing a bust? Check your pulse.
Originally posted by Yoda
You could say all that about $1 million, too. Just because it's a lot TO YOU doesn't mean it's a lot to the country. You said it was "huge," and it's not. You were talking out of your ass, as usual.
Like I said, if $50 billion is not a big deal for the wealthy minority in power in the current Republican administration, let them foot the bill out of their own pockets instead of making middle-class taxpayers bear the brunt of the expense--most of whom opposed the war to begin with.
Originally posted by Yoda
I repeat: look them up, smartass. I'm not surprised that you have "no idea" where I got the stats, because clearly you don't make a habit of verifying anything you say. You make something up, post it, and then play argumentative dodgeball when someone exposes your fabrication.
Your statistics fly in the face of the reality of my personal experience. A wise man once said, "There are three kinds of lies--lies, damned lies and statistics." I'm not the one playing "argumentative dodgeball". I think I'm making a clear case.
Originally posted by Yoda
"...unemployment is going through the roof."
Oh, you mean to say that that's untrue? If so, then why have so many people lost their jobs in the last couple of years? Why is it so difficult for honest, hardworking people to find any kind of job these days? Something tells me that you are shut up in an ivory tower of wealth and privilege and completely cut off from the realities of everyday life for the the vast majority of the population of the country.
Originally posted by Yoda
Standard practice: you make up some bullsh*t, Cait or I or someone else rips it to shreds, then you go off on some rant, never admitting your error. You want me to argue with you about subtle issues when you won't even admit your most blatant of errors. What the hell's the point? You don't even admit you're wrong when someone holds the error right in your face.
I haven't made up any bull**** and you haven't ripped any of my arguments to shreds. I have stated facts from personal experience and you have refuted them with some obscure statistics that you have unearthed from some obscure source. Which is the more credible? That remains to be seen.
Originally posted by Steve
And the only way to remove them was to remove Saddam Hussein. You can't complain about the sanctions and then argue against regime change. So shutup.
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, I'm afraid.
Originally posted by Steve
It's obvious to anyone who's read anything that Saddam Hussein was largely aided by the US in the past. This gave the US even more of a responsibility, not only to the Iraqis and Kurds, but to the world as well, to remove him from power. It was a mistake that has been fixed.
A solution that resulted in the utter devastation of Iraq and the deaths of thousands of Iraqis, not to mention US casualties and the paltry sum of $50 billion that it will cost the US taxpayers to remedy this oversight of the past generation of Republican leaders, and also the fact that the domestic economy is in a severe state of neglect.
Originally posted by Steve
And there is well-documented evidence of Tariq Aziz meeting with several senior al Qaeda officials in the mid-90s. Look it up.
No comment.
Originally posted by Steve
Weapons? Maybe not. Mass graves and torture chambers? You better believe it. So, Django, in spite of this horrific criminal evidence, the fact that we didn't find any weapons makes the whole thing a bust? Check your pulse.
What gives the US the legitimacy to go around policing the internal affairs of sovereign nations? The Bush administration claimed that Iraq harbored weapons of mass destruction which posed a potential threat to US national interests. That was the grounds for the invasion of Iraq. The facts have proven this allegation to be absurd. How, then, can you possibly legitimize US military action against Iraq claiming that it served the greater good regardless? There are any number of petty despots the world over who resort to similar tactics--does that mean that the US has the right to arbitrarily invade any such nation it deems necessary, using some flimsy excuse to justify its actions? Not to mention the severe damage caused to Iraq as a nation as a result of this invasion--civilian casualties, the utter decimation of Baghdad, etc. Question is, was it all worth it in the end? It seems to me to have been a terrible waste, that could have been more effectively dealt without without resorting to a full-scale armed invasion.
The Silver Bullet
05-13-03, 08:41 PM
If so, then why have so many people lost their jobs in the last couple of years?
If it's your friends you're talking about, probably because they're incompetent buffoons.
Originally posted by The Silver Bullet
If it's your friends you're talking about, probably because they're incompetent buffoons.
And I suppose you are remarkably competent yourself! :rolleyes: No, I'm not referring to my friends--I'm referring to the vast majority of the workforce. If you are unaware of what has been going on, you are either an ignoramus caught up in a fantasy world of self-delusion, or, alternatively, you are blind.
The Silver Bullet
05-13-03, 08:52 PM
Or I live in Australia and spend my time worrying about my own country. Idiot.
Caitlyn
05-13-03, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by Django
It seems to me to have been a terrible waste, that could have been more effectively dealt without without resorting to a full-scale armed invasion.
Okay Mr. Genius, You’ve said basically the same thing since you started all the anti-war threads... If the problem could have been more effectively dealt with, lets hear your master plan… what else do you think would have worked…
The Silver Bullet
05-13-03, 09:28 PM
He thinks that having sex with boys can save the world.
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Okay Mr. Genius, You’ve said basically the same thing since you started all the anti-war threads... If the problem could have been more effectively dealt with, lets hear your master plan… what else do you think would have worked…
Well, short of full-scale war, there was the option of coercive inspections, which would have fulfilled the UN requirements without the necessity of bombing the nation to oblivion. Some form of coercive diplomacy backed by the threat of force could have been sufficient to depose Saddam as well, in my opinion. In any case, I am not convinced that the diplomatic solutions to this problem were fully explored before the declaration of war.
Originally posted by The Silver Bullet
He thinks that having sex with boys can save the world.
It gets even more confusing when you refer to yourself in the third person, SB! :D
The Silver Bullet
05-13-03, 09:33 PM
It gets even funnier when you try to be witty, Zorro.
Zorro should be in the Glossary! :laugh:
Zorro is not meant to be funny!
Caitlyn
05-13-03, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Django
Well, short of full-scale war, there was the option of coercive inspections, which would have fulfilled the UN requirements without the necessity of bombing the nation to oblivion. Some form of coercive diplomacy backed by the threat of force could have been sufficient to depose Saddam as well, in my opinion. In any case, I am not convinced that the diplomatic solutions to this problem were fully explored before the declaration of war.
Just as I figured… no plan what so ever. All of that was tried and none of it worked… There comes a time when enough is enough and somehow I think you would be singing an entirely different tune had you been one of the ones dragged into the torture chambers and had electric wires wrapped around your penis…
Originally posted by Caitlyn
Just as I figured… no plan what so ever. All of that was tried and none of it worked… There comes a time when enough is enough and somehow I think you would be singing an entirely different tune had you been one of the ones dragged into the torture chambers and had electric wires wrapped around your penis…
Perhaps. But I am still not convinced that all the diplomatic channels were fully explored. No, coercive inspections were an option that was ignored. The US had already deployed their armed forces in the vicinity of Iraq. Hence, it wouldn't have been a big deal for them to implement coercive inspections. But they didn't. Instead, they resorted to full-scale invasion. I think it was unnecessary and unwarranted.
Originally posted by Django
That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, I'm afraid.
It makes perfect sense, because the only way the UN sanctions would ever be lifted was if Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled. If you're against the only option that guarantees the removal of the sanctions, you therefore cannot complain about them in the first place without sounding like a total git.
A solution that resulted in the utter devastation of Iraq and the deaths of thousands of Iraqis, not to mention US casualties and the paltry sum of $50 billion that it will cost the US taxpayers to remedy this oversight of the past generation of Republican leaders, and also the fact that the domestic economy is in a severe state of neglect.
I'm willing to bet that over 90% of all Iraqi casualties were soldiers - Saddam's troops. More civilians probably died in the world trade attacks than in the entire Iraq war. One of the great beauties of modern technology - weapons that can, and do, discriminate - made the war much easier to swallow for many people here.
You say 'utter devastation', as though the country under Saddam was some perfect holy land until the US came in and mucked it all up.
What gives the US the legitimacy to go around policing the internal affairs of sovereign nations? The Bush administration claimed that Iraq harbored weapons of mass destruction which posed a potential threat to US national interests. That was the grounds for the invasion of Iraq. The facts have proven this allegation to be absurd.How, then, can you possibly legitimize US military action against Iraq claiming that it served the greater good regardless? There are any number of petty despots the world over who resort to similar tactics--does that mean that the US has the right to arbitrarily invade any such nation it deems necessary, using some flimsy excuse to justify its actions? Not to mention the severe damage caused to Iraq as a nation as a result of this invasion--civilian casualties, the utter decimation of Baghdad, etc. Question is, was it all worth it in the end? It seems to me to have been a terrible waste, that could have been more effectively dealt without without resorting to a full-scale armed invasion.
What gave the US the legitimacy to endorse the Pinochet regime in Chile? Nothing. The US was behind the assassination of a Chilean general & can be held directly responsible for removing a democratically elected leader in favor of an extreme right-wing dictator. Idealistically speaking, the US shouldn't have been there at all. Instead, we intervened and thousands died as a result.
My point is that the US has been policing countries for decades, & capitalism has become so entrenched in today's world that just ignoring these 'sovereign' dictatorships is impossible. So, as the most powerful nation in the world, the US has a responsibility to people everywhere to take action. When it's the wrong action, (ie, without regard to humanity) as in Chile, we are outraged. When, for once, the US does the right thing, the left is in an uproar.
Did you shout 'no blood for oil!' in 1987 when Saddam butchered the Kurds? No, it's different if the United States is behind something. Then it just can't be right. Did you not cheer when the first statue fell? Were you unmoved by the celebrations of the exiles in streets across the world?
I'll still argue that even though the Iraqi weapons have either been moved or buried, it was still in US and Iraqi peoples' interests to remove the dictatorship. The mass graves and torture chambers are evidence enough. I don't particularly care what the administration's reasons were. I care that Iraqi children will get the medical care they need, that the Kurds no longer have to live in fear of torture or kidnapping, that the Shiite Muslims are no longer arrested for their social identity.
What's sad is that you claim yourself a poet. Why can't you realize that regimes like the one in Iraq make every attempt to murder and destroy human expression? And yet you still argue for their preservation?
Originally posted by Django
Like I said, if $50 billion is not a big deal for the wealthy minority in power in the current Republican administration, let them foot the bill out of their own pockets instead of making middle-class taxpayers bear the brunt of the expense--most of whom opposed the war to begin with.
You're changing the subject. You said it was "huge." It's not. If you want to say the wealthy should pay for it, that's a seperate argument.
Originally posted by Django
Your statistics fly in the face of the reality of my personal experience.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that your personal experience is a tad less reliable than the U.S. Department of Labor on this particular matter.
Originally posted by Django
Oh, you mean to say that that's untrue? If so, then why have so many people lost their jobs in the last couple of years?
I never said no one has lost their jobs. I said it's not going through the roof. Unemployment was incredibly low in the mid 90s, and it's raised slightly, but is still below average, historically. Believe it or not, you can't reliably gauge major economic barometers by glancing around your office.
Originally posted by Django
Something tells me that you are shut up in an ivory tower of wealth and privilege and completely cut off from the realities of everyday life for the the vast majority of the population of the country.
My family is middle class. I've also lived in poverty. You're resorting to this argument because you have nothing of substance to say.
Originally posted by Django
I haven't made up any bull**** and you haven't ripped any of my arguments to shreds. I have stated facts from personal experience and you have refuted them with some obscure statistics that you have unearthed from some obscure source.
Actually, you stated anecdotal opinions and I have refuted them with public, verifiable data. There's nothing "obscure" about federal statistics.
The Silver Bullet
05-14-03, 02:28 AM
Zorro laughs in the face of statistics 96.4% of the time.
"I walk on the wild side. I laugh in the face of DANGER! Hahahaha!"
Caitlyn
05-14-03, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by Django
Perhaps. But I am still not convinced that all the diplomatic channels were fully explored. No, coercive inspections were an option that was ignored. The US had already deployed their armed forces in the vicinity of Iraq. Hence, it wouldn't have been a big deal for them to implement coercive inspections. But they didn't. Instead, they resorted to full-scale invasion. I think it was unnecessary and unwarranted.
Coercive inspections would involve the use of threats or force… threats were used and given Saddam’s track record, I fail to see how forced inspections could have taken place with Saddam still in power…
Sir Toose
05-14-03, 03:24 PM
It's academia my dear Cait... the argument is reduced to 'what-ifs'.
Invasion/coercion ... two words for the same thing. Support one or support the other, it's academic.
What you have just witnessed, ladies and gentlemen (and Django) is what is commonly referred to as an ideological ass-kicking. This is most succintly and aptly demonstrated in my opponent's assertion that his personal observations rival the U.S. Department of Labor's ability to gauge economic indicators.
You've also been privy to a demonstration in basic human nature: most people'll do anything to avoid admitting that they're wrong about anything. Like, say, resorting to sarcasm or changing the subject when forced to face their own tendency to throw out haphazard, speculative claims. See Case 462: Sunfrog for more information.
No, what you have witnessed is me throwing up my hands in disgust at the closed-minded stubbornness and detachment from reality I have witnessed. :rolleyes:
Detachment from reality? You mean kind of like denying the validity of federal statistics because they don't line up with your arguments, or more like overestimating the cost of war by a factor of 10 and changing the subject when confronted with your mischaracterization of it?
The Silver Bullet
05-16-03, 10:49 PM
Uday, your reality and what has happened to you is the reality of one person in a population of roughly 288,000,000. That does not make you an authority on anything other than your own personal life and experience.
Which is great, don't get me wrong, but it does not make yot the definitive authority on the state of affairs in America. The moment you can let go of the belief that your life is the life of everyone else in the country, the sooner you will find that people won't be calling you irrational.
Because thinking that you are the prime example of American life, that is indeed irrational.
LordSlaytan
05-17-03, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by Sir Toose
...the argument is reduced to 'what-ifs'...
So true it hurts.
I think this is just about the worst I've ever made anyone look while arguing on the Internet.
The Silver Bullet
05-18-03, 06:37 AM
How badly do you love yourself, man?
"I rock. This is me being clever. Heh heh heh."
;D
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.