Nearly 500,000 pro-Syrian protesters...protest

[Gorth]

General outline for political/religious threads:

 

Poster A will offer statement Z that concept X is detrimental to the welfare of humanity.

 

Poster B (who favours concept X) will tell that poster A that he is wrong and possibly just too dense to "get it". Concept Z is just soo way out there.

 

Poster A will then re-iterate statement Z with a few more sentences and a few expletitives (Sp?) and in no unmistakale way offer insults to B's pedigree.

 

Poster B will tell poster A to stop trolling and that statement Z is sheer idiocy and A is an idiot for believing in Z.

 

Poster A will then generally insult B, B's beliefs, B's pedigree, B's nationality etc.

 

Posters of no consequence will chime in every now and then with well meant comments why both Z and X are viable options and that the world is big enought for both if just A and B could see the light.

 

Poster A will ignore inconsequential posters.

 

Poster B will tell inconsequential posters to **** off and start their own thread.

 

Inconsequential posters will report thread and moderator C will lock thread and generally be disappointed in humanity.

 

Did I miss something ?

[Oerwinde]

General outline for political/religious threads:

 

Poster A will offer statement Z that concept X is detrimental to the welfare of humanity.

 

Poster B (who favours concept X) will tell that poster A that he is wrong and possibly just too dense to "get it". Concept Z is just soo way out there.

 

Poster A will then re-iterate statement Z with a few more sentences and a few expletitives (Sp?) and in no unmistakale way offer insults to B's pedigree.

 

Poster B will tell poster A to stop trolling and that statement Z is sheer idiocy and A is an idiot for believing in Z.

 

Poster A will then generally insult B, B's beliefs, B's pedigree, B's nationality etc.

 

Posters of no consequence will chime in every now and then with well meant comments why both Z and X are viable options and that the world is big enought for both if just A and B could see the light.

 

Poster A will ignore inconsequential posters.

 

Poster B will tell inconsequential posters to **** off and start their own thread.

 

Inconsequential posters will report thread and moderator C will lock thread and generally be disappointed in humanity.

 

Did I miss something ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Usually its teams instead of just two individuals. Depending on the general bias of the board, it could be that Team A is two or three times the size of Team B or vice versa, resulting in a one-sided flame war of Team A or B. (I post on the CHUD forums where everyone is pretty much all left leaning and whenever the one or two conservatives chime in about how just because 7 white guys beat and hung the black guy then painted racist remarks on the guy, doesn't mean its race related - I made that situation up, but thats generally what happens..)

[B5C]

From my opinion of the bias of the boards here. That I will have less support, because it looks like most people are anti-Republicans.

[kumquatq3]

From my opinion of the bias of the boards here. That I will have less support, because it looks like most people are anti-Republicans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well I tell you this, the Bush "hippy" sig ain't helping you out

 

besides, we're not anti-republican, were pro-truth

 

(but yea, you are fighting an steep uphill battle, I think largely due to the large non-American population in these forums)

[Ace]

I think we just found the person "B" of this thread (oops, this got posted one post too late for full effect, oh well )

 

In all seriousness though, politics threads in the end just lead to the realization by calmer heads that politics in reality are:

poly as in many

ticks as in bloodsucking

[kumquatq3]

In all seriousness though, politics threads in the end just lead to the realization by calmer heads that politics in reality are:

poly as in many

ticks as in bloodsucking

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

awwwww, come on, howabout some new material huh? :cool:

[Darque]

It may be old, but it's still funny.

[Ivan the Terrible]

From my opinion of the bias of the boards here. That I will have less support, because it looks like most people are anti-Republicans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Let's be honest: virtually the entire world outside of a little more than half of the United States is anti-Republican, at least in the GOP's present form.

[213374U]

Let's be honest: virtually the entire world outside of a little more than half of the United States is anti-Republican, at least in the GOP's present form.

What gives? Am I the only non-US citizen in the whole world that would have actually voted for Bush? I mean, it's not like the poor guy is great with words (at least with those he doesn't make up himself), but the alternatives aren't any better.

 

All of this anti-Republican stuff is, in great measure, a matter of hype.

[kumquatq3]

All of this anti-Republican stuff is, in great measure, a matter of hype.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

yes, alot of it is just good ole' fashioned Anti-American stuff

[Ivan the Terrible]

What gives? Am I the only non-US citizen in the whole world that would have actually voted for Bush? I mean, it's not like the poor guy is great with words (at least with those he doesn't make up himself), but the alternatives aren't any better.

 

I've met others....but you're really outnumbered.

 

The reason for this is because, frankly, the Bush administration is amongst the most diplomatically incompetent in the history of the United States, ostracizing decades-old allies to little gain while indulging in childish temper tantrums when countries don't go their way.

 

Given the ideology of the Project for the New American Century and the general aura of ignorance and contempt for world opinion the administration gives off, I find it little surprise Bush is so unpopular outside the U.S.; why support a group that takes the position that you're a complete irrelevancy?

[Phosphor]

I understand, but as mods I'd hope you guys take things in context.

 

As my bright yellow smiley with a halo indicates, I am clearly kidding about B5C being a terrorist for voting for bush.

 

Nor, IMO, did I think Laozi was serious for declaring all Americans are terrorists. At least, not in the direct way the post would indicate. He might have gotten around to "The people you see as terrorists consider you terrorists" kinda of thing.

 

We have had several heated but mostly controlled political debates on this forum. None of them I can remember were locked till they evolved from heated debate to basically fart jokes. Most of us know each other and get along here. No one is trying to make anyone else cry or anything. We have even tackled religious topics in, again heated, but responsible ways (the ten commandments topics).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We do take things in context, and that context is much larger than it may seem to those posting sarcastically in a thread. While you and a smattering of regulars may realise you're not being serious, other people do not and genuinely take offense.

The context we have to look at things in extends to the perspective of everybody, we must look at things as a complete stranger to the forums might look at a thread. Too often I let things go because the people involved do know each other and are accustomed to posting styles and personalities.

To that end, I have recieved complaints on this thread, and I can see where they come from. And reading over this thread, there's really not any serious discussion going on, so that combined with what is here being found upsetting, I'm locking the thread.