You have all said this before. I took it, I thought about it, then I observed. These posters who derail my threads because of "reputation" do not have any better "Reputation" than I.
Indeed, many of them don't. That doesn't change the fact.
You're the one that said a LOT of your posts lately had been tongue in cheek.
What I have been saying is that while I post on a topic regarding a current topic, I am well aware of the likley hypocritical stance some will take on the issue now that the shoe is on the other foot. I make light of it by trying to mention it in the 1st post so as not to be accused of as I often am of "baiting" or "Trolling" or other some such nonsense for daring to post a thread critical of Obama.
Yes, you do make light of this possible hypocracy. The problem is you come into the post assuming the hypocracy and essentially attacking on the hypocracy before anything happens. You're stating something or acting as if something is some kind of fact before anything even happens to establish this. It is condenscending and rather juvenile when you do it over, and over, and over agian. Its not about "pre-empting" it, its about steering the conversation and pushing forward a premise. One of Rush's favorite thing is to point out this is a typical Media tactic; to enter into a conversation or article predicated on a premise that they act is true but isn't actually very factual.
Its one thing to do that once in a while, but you have been doing it in a LOT of Obama threads.
It also ignores the possibility that people could equally assume hypocracy on your part in potentially complaining about things you didn't complain about when it was done by Republicans. Now you say "Prove it, show me!"...but that's my point. You start off with making assumptions without proof as well right off the bat.
Tell me zyph, what threads of mine latley are childish and why?
Sorry, not wasting the time to search and find every post of yours in the past few weeks with "dear leader" or "messiah" or other such childish terms. And in my opinion, repeated constant use of tongue in cheek assumptions at the start of threads or within posts is a rather childish means of debating.
I am trying to step cautiously here as this is truly a gift watching some of this hypocricy I see and don't want to spoil it
The hypocricy IS fun. I love it, and I've pointed it out for some time, on both sides. Here's a bit of hypocricy though Reverend. Where was your huge care about hypocricy when republicans were hypocrites. Isn't it a bit hypocritical to only be concerned about hypocricy when it is liberal hypocrites?
I'm not saying don't stop pointing out hypocricy. Its fun to do and go at it. I'm saying starting out your threads with generalized tongue-in-cheek sarcastic comments about hypocricy that hasn't actually happened yet is a way to do it and basically get a bad reaction from people. If you actually want to debate, find someone actually seeming to say something hypocritical, quote it, and explain WHY you think its hypocritical. That may actually spawn some interesting debate, where you may be able to adequettely prove your point of they may be able to present why they think the two situations are different.
You just making a blanket sarcastic statement about it at the start, thus instantly interjecting the premise that anyone that doesn't view the situation like you is being hypocritical, is not going to spur the same.
Condescending? Maybe, but if you saw the shennagigans I was put through in the other thread, I submit it was warranted.
Perhaps, but some of the things you seemed to take offense to I thought was perfectly acceptable and you acted a bit babyish. In other ways I think they over reacted to you. That said, I didn't say that their reactions to your more childish portions of posts was a GOOD thing...I just explained my belief of part of why it happens. Its not a good thing, it doesn't add anything to debate, but then generally neither does the stuff I was pointing out either. Both are unfortunante.
My position was simple. I stated that "white man's greed" is a racist statment, and his calling his grandmothers racism "typical of white people" also racist. I spent half a thread with the usual suspects claiming I took him out of context. I simply asked what said context was, I was assaulted with nonsense. So I started a thread asking what that context was..... I applaud the 2 out of 20 posters (or so) who attempted to explain it..... Look at the rest.
Yes, I ignored the thread completley. Your initial post made me roll my eyes, and just about every response to it made me equally roll them again.
I also submit I put forth more on topic non condescending threads than condescending ones. I am open to being proven wrong.
I'm not going to take the time to go through every one of your threads Reverend, espicially since my primary areas that I come and go are BN, and the US politics sections. I was going off your own statement about a "Lot" of your Obama posts being tongue in cheek, and the impressions I've got from your posts. I know you may find this absolutely astounding, but I don't read every thread. I don't go in every forum. I will often skip over things. I don't read everything you post. Actually, I skip a great bit of it because I've rarely read anything amazingly earth shattering in its thought process or that I couldn't imagine the general gist of what it said in it. If the subject or the little revealed text looks interesting, I'll likely go into it. If its posted by a poster I respect as one whose threads almost every time deliver, I'm more apt to read. So I'm not speaking to all of yours based on actual experience, I went based on the things I've read and your own statement about Tongue in Cheek being "lots" of what you've posted on Obama. (And personally I find constant tongue and cheek attitude when mixed with an agenda to be extremely condenscending often). Add to this your dismissive "Dear Leader" mentality that just instantly makes me reach for the "page down" key.
Hmm, I don't start into the "Dear leader" stuff until the obama supporter starts in on me. Look at what you called of my posts "childish" and then look a few posts up to see where it began. Two wrongs do not make a right indeed, however, after months of it, it's hard not to fall into it...
Thanks, you said it for me.
Look at IT's Hatueys', adk's, iriemons, and a plethora of others behaivor, why no singling out of them?
Sorry if it seemed singling out. I came to make a comment in your thread that seemed interesting. I saw your comment about CC, and decided to comment on it. You responded, and we started talking back and forth a bit so while I had some time to post it just kind of came out.
It wasn't too long ago IT and I had a big duke it out in a thread, so don't know what you're talking about there. It was a long go round, with him even PMing me asking if everything was alright. We severely disagreed with something, and went at it.
Hatuey is an interesting one, who yes often times is just very aggressive and flippant in his posts. However, other times he will make extremely well thought out, backed up, and original posts as well. Those kind of posts make me rethink a person and generally give them more credance when I read there things and able to go past it. Its one thing to regurgitate talking points or just post up a lot of news articles or prattle on with the typical attacking insults on both sides. Its another thing to actually have a semi-original thought, and make a good post filled with actual personal opinion backed up with facts and presented in a humble way that also gives hooks for people to debate or possibly sway him. For example with him see his post about deciding not to vote or his post about liberals acting wrongly in regards to islamist extremists.
Maybe I am missing something. but Obama is the new president. Me starting ANY thread on him is topical on a debate forum. Thier baiting and hijacking is the CHILDISH behavior.
Yes, yes it is. And I said there are good threads, I said this was a good thread. I said the constant injection of "tongue and cheek" or your immediete dismissal at times of anyone disagreeing with him as "dear leader" and other such bull**** is childish.
Go ahead post my childish threads. I will show you 10 more that weren't.
I'm sure you could. You post a **** ton. I'm sure most of the time that TO is probably a great teammate, but the impression is other wise. Impression shapes reputation, reputation shapes how one responds to something.
Reputation is a two way street.
Yes, yes it is. And the problem goes when both people are wanting to be in the same lane and both refuse to admit they're in the wrong lane.
I give big props to MC.No.Spin and even TD slowly but surely as of late. No spin especially, who toned down a lot of his more childish additions in posts and started trying to actually post real thoughts and opinions instead of quick talking points and stereotyped attacks while still being a strong conservative voice.
My reputation being the issue for others poor behaivor is a cop out.
It'd be a cop out if it was an excuse for it. It isn't. They're crappy responses to your crappy tongue-in-cheek things or your "dear leader" stuff is well, crappy.
That is cool. See there is a kabal of a group of 5-10 posters this is a big issue for, most it is not. This is why I get along with most everyone here. You see me as a big bad wolf when I am not.
I don't see you as a big bad wolf at all. As I said, feel free to post how you want. You, contrary to what you may think I believe, are not a problem poster here. You don't rack up a ton of points, your actions don't demand a huge amount of mod attention. If you want to post the way you do, more power to you and I've go no qualms with it.
But it does seem like you have a rather interesting thought process at times, and a slightly different conservative mindset. I think you could be someone that could put up intriguing posts that actually ADD something to the forum and debate beyond simply going "new story, [typical party talking point], [tongue in cheek shot at hypocricy I think is to come], discuss". Thus why I said something at first and now its became a lot longer then I was ever thinking. Indeed, I didn't even think it'd launch into a long discussion when I simply told you not to go sarcastic about whether a mod Did or didn't do anything...its not because I thought you had venom to it, it was because it was unneeded and sets a bad example and precident on what's allowed on the forum. And it snowballed from there.
You want to know why I brought it up with you. Because generally with other people if I say something they say cool, or don't say anything. If they have a severe issue with it, perhaps they'll PM me. Generally they don't act all offended and continue on the conversation. You have a large tendancy to do, at which point we end up in thread talking directly to each other, and then further conversation spawns. No saying ones bad, or ones not, but that's really the difference. Its impossible to say anything to you without you having to respond in some way, shape, or form, often sarcastically or questioningly and it leads to conversation.