Who are the mysterious "point awarders" here?

[Joz]

If you weren't married to a great woman, I'd propose! You rock!

Better get in line.

 

[Gabriella84]

Merlin has a wife? :shocked:

 

[no1tovote4]

Merlin has a wife? :shocked:

Your Very Conservative, self-described, boyfriend has a girlfriend so why would it surprise you that Merlin has a wife? Not only has he a wife, but we all know her...

This is exactly what they are talking about, while the post was likely meant to be joking in nature you end up with arrogant and condescending, all without the time spent to actually get to know the person you decided to jab at without compunction. This is a "flame" and there is no reason for it. Use smilies for better advantage, some j/k wouldn't hurt either when you are kidding. Remember nobody can hear sarcasm or the joking tone you meant to post in, they only read the words you have posted.

 

[Gabriella84]

The smilie WAS a joking reference. I already knew Merlin had a wife. And I am sure she is a very nice person. Twas not a "jab" of any kind.

All difficult people (including myself) need a person with the ultimate amount of patience, compassion and understanding to put up with their BS. I am most fortunate to have found mine.
I am sure we will have a wonderful marriage, if he doesn't kill me at some point.

 

[pegwinn]

The smilie WAS a joking reference. I already knew Merlin had a wife. And I am sure she is a very nice person. Twas not a "jab" of any kind.

All difficult people (including myself) need a person with the ultimate amount of patience, compassion and understanding to put up with their BS. I am most fortunate to have found mine.
I am sure we will have a wonderful marriage, if he doesn't kill me at some point.

Gabby, generally speaking, your posts are about as enjoyable as jacking off with a handfull of thumbtacks. But the above actually came off as human sounding. Keep it up.

 

[no1tovote4]

The smilie WAS a joking reference. I already knew Merlin had a wife. And I am sure she is a very nice person. Twas not a "jab" of any kind.

All difficult people (including myself) need a person with the ultimate amount of patience, compassion and understanding to put up with their BS. I am most fortunate to have found mine.
I am sure we will have a wonderful marriage, if he doesn't kill me at some point.

My point wasn't that it wasn't a joke, but that it would likely be taken as a jab without extra explanation... Especially when you use the same language often when directing such comments at other posters when they are actually meant to be jabs. Do what it takes to make people understand that you are joking and likely your negrep problem will vanish like the zits from a teen when they reach about 22.

I read almost all of your posts with a sardonic humor that I find enjoyable. Others seem to take them as direct attacks.

A little bit of backup links from a mainstream newsource will help with the whole "no substantiation" argument. (Not likely that moveon.org would be accepted as a valid source of anything other than talking points, CNN would get you some jibes.)

You can peer into a few liberal posters with actual substantial rep points, Bullypulpit, Nakedemperor, and others and see it isn't the opinion that takes you there it is the "voice" you project in your posts. A little extra j/k's and 's until people get to know the voice would help substantially.

 

[Gabriella84]

A little bit of backup links from a mainstream newsource will help with the whole "no substantiation" argument. (Not likely that moveon.org would be accepted as a valid source of anything other than talking points, CNN would get you some jibes.)

So why should I even bother? You are not going to accept any source left of Fox and the NY Post as "credible." Your idea of "mainstream" is Rush Limbaugh.
I see no reason to regurgitate what has already been stated in the major media. Outside of the U.S., the New York Times is ranked along side The London Observer as one of the most conservative newspapers in the world. Unfortunately, conservatives place the "liberal" tag on any source that prints or broadcasts criticism of the Bush Administration.
Sean Hannity has said so himself -- the media's "job" is to report administration policy without comment or criticism. Since any criticism of an American president during "war time" is seen as a sign of division and weakness and thus offers aid and comfort to our enemies.

 

[no1tovote4]

So why should I even bother? You are not going to accept any source left of Fox and the NY Post as "credible." Your idea of "mainstream" is Rush Limbaugh.
I see no reason to regurgitate what has already been stated in the major media. Outside of the U.S., the New York Times is ranked along side The London Observer as one of the most conservative newspapers in the world. Unfortunately, conservatives place the "liberal" tag on any source that prints or broadcasts criticism of the Bush Administration.
Sean Hannity has said so himself -- the media's "job" is to report administration policy without comment or criticism. Since any criticism of an American president during "war time" is seen as a sign of division and weakness and thus offers aid and comfort to our enemies.

It gives you a "place" on which to hang your opinion, a context from where your thought is coming.

If all I ever gave was from a right-wing nut site, exactly why would people think that I have any thought process? You won't see me post from them, and if I do it is preceded by an explanation of why I posted something from such a site. This assumption that it takes only Fox or NY POST or some other publication which you think is right wing to make us believe something is simply an attempt at a left-handed jab, an insult without being direct about it, and is part of the very arrogance that others are complaining about. There is no reason why you should expect people to take your opinion as fact or to assume that it is even based in fact at all when you are unwilling to back it up with a source of fact that began the process in which you formed such an opinion.

Post stories from a mainstream source that show the context of where the opinion came. Op Ed pieces are just that, opinions and not news or evidence, etc. and you should expect people to point that out, but at least it will still give the context in which a debate can be formed. Without the backup sources, it is nearly impossible to actually hold a debate on an online forum. It doesn't take much to give a source that we can look into for your statistics. We would expect you to give sources that support your opinion and you should expect us to give sources that will support ours. That they be mainstream is helpful in substantiating facts without bias as much as possible.

 

[dmp]

My point wasn't that it wasn't a joke, but that it would likely be taken as a jab without extra explanation... Especially when you use the same language often when directing such comments at other posters when they are actually meant to be jabs. Do what it takes to make people understand that you are joking and likely your negrep problem will vanish like the zits from a teen when they reach about 22.

I read almost all of your posts with a sardonic humor that I find enjoyable. Others seem to take them as direct attacks.

A little bit of backup links from a mainstream newsource will help with the whole "no substantiation" argument. (Not likely that moveon.org would be accepted as a valid source of anything other than talking points, CNN would get you some jibes.)

You can peer into a few liberal posters with actual substantial rep points, Bullypulpit, Nakedemperor, and others and see it isn't the opinion that takes you there it is the "voice" you project in your posts. A little extra j/k's and 's until people get to know the voice would help substantially.

Children often fall back on the excuse "I was JOKING" when confronted with their bad behaviour. It's an easy excuse, and pretty defendable in their minds. The mature among us see through the lame cop out; but like a captain and his ship, they'll stand by their excuse until they sink.

It's caused by two issues:

1) They don't know what a joke is
2) they hope WE don't know, either.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

So why should I even bother? You are not going to accept any source left of Fox and the NY Post as "credible." Your idea of "mainstream" is Rush Limbaugh.
I see no reason to regurgitate what has already been stated in the major media. Outside of the U.S., the New York Times is ranked along side The London Observer as one of the most conservative newspapers in the world. Unfortunately, conservatives place the "liberal" tag on any source that prints or broadcasts criticism of the Bush Administration.
Sean Hannity has said so himself -- the media's "job" is to report administration policy without comment or criticism. Since any criticism of an American president during "war time" is seen as a sign of division and weakness and thus offers aid and comfort to our enemies.

You're not willing to engage in any real analysis or discussion of ideas. You want to post your poorly thought out propaganda, and then dismiss our every criticism with your broad brush of "you guys never agree with me anyway, why should I try?"-type rantings.

 

[Annie]

So why should I even bother? You are not going to accept any source left of Fox and the NY Post as "credible." Your idea of "mainstream" is Rush Limbaugh.
I see no reason to regurgitate what has already been stated in the major media. Outside of the U.S., the New York Times is ranked along side The London Observer as one of the most conservative newspapers in the world. Unfortunately, conservatives place the "liberal" tag on any source that prints or broadcasts criticism of the Bush Administration.
Sean Hannity has said so himself -- the media's "job" is to report administration policy without comment or criticism. Since any criticism of an American president during "war time" is seen as a sign of division and weakness and thus offers aid and comfort to our enemies.

Gabby, I'm pretty sure I explained to you how to address this problem before. Often I can find a 'back up source', i.e., NY Times, CNN, AP, whatever; to add 'credence' to a more conservative, analytical piece from say Townhall, etc.

That's how one gets around that problem. Sometimes it can't be done, which means in all likelihood, that the piece you are posting, can be ripped.

 

[Shattered]

Gabby, I'm pretty sure I explained to you how to address this problem before. Often I can find a 'back up source', i.e., NY Times, CNN, AP, whatever; to add 'credence' to a more conservative, analytical piece from say Townhall, etc.

That's how one gets around that problem. Sometimes it can't be done, which means in all likelihood, that the piece you are posting, can be ripped.

...but you get more kudos for actually *trying*...

 

[Annie]

...but you get more kudos for actually *trying*...

Exactly!

 

[Shattered]

Exactly!

I've had MY coffee this morning.

 

[dilloduck]

...but you get more kudos for actually *trying*...

Cmon---kudos are spread around for all sorts of reasons ( some quite trite) and not necessarily well documented posts.

 

[Shattered]

Cmon---kudos are spread around for all sorts of reasons ( some quite trite) and not necessarily well documented posts.

I said kudos. I didn't say rep points. You're either gonna get those, or you're not. Period.

 

[dilloduck]

I said kudos. I didn't say rep points. You're either gonna get those, or you're not. Period.

Did I say anything about rep points ??? Read it again and ease up on the coffee.

 

[Shattered]

Cripes. You'll argue about *anything*, wontcha? Go back to bed.

 

[Annie]

Everyone has their own methods of giving kudos or displaying their displeasure, with posts/posters/etc.

It probably behooves all of us to just get on with it. Some people just have issues when they don't agree, but that can't be helped. None of us can please all of the people all of the time.

 

[CSM]

Did I say anything about rep points ??? Read it again and ease up on the coffee.

Dillo is getting cranky in his old age, aint he?