A question I have to ask...

[koshergrl]

You are too new to remember the Nigerian poster who ran a Nigerian news magazine here for a month or so. Just kept opening threads including nothing but a copied Nigerian news article and maybe a five word sentence. Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis. Like with any magazine, if you aren't interested, don't open it.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis.

Yes...as if we can't merely click on that site and read it too, for it's not as though Mindwars shares much, if anything, that isn't found in the source article.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Decide for yourself: http://www.usmessageboard.com/search/12094120/. I'm sure I have, but I don't make a habit of parroting a news story and posting no analysis of my own that goes beyond the story a news organization published and I yet manage to broach a variety of topics.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the news catalyzing one's interest in discussing a matter. I think that one's having little of analytical substance to present besides the news story itself adds nothing that the original writer of the published story didn't address.

Nonsense. What you are saying is you are only interested in your opinions and are too intellectually lazy to research it support them.

you are an example of the failure of our nationalized school system. You think your feelings are more valid than facts, information, and structured idea building.

Kgirl, Xelor extensively researches his posts and the facts upon which he bases his arguments.

Thank you.

Here's just one example of my doing so: CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance. In that post, I open with my two key assertions and proceed to illustrate empirically and with supporting linked content precisely why I have made them. In contrast, readers of that thread will find the following completely unsubstantiated assertions:

• 80% of Americans are paying exponentially more to subsidize 20% of the population. -- In addition to the member making that assertion without posting the first bit of credible evidence that it is true, I show that it's not even mathematically possible that it is true.

Obviously the claim Koshergirl posted asserting that I'm "too intellectually lazy to research" and support my assertions is yet another assertion presented without evidence which shouldn't be hard, assuming it were so, to obtain seeing as I've shared a link that identifies every thread I've started.

Cross posting when you're unable to make your point. Also a symptom of the intellectually lazy.

BTW the above post also illustrates my statement that the only thing you're interested in is your own opinions lol.

The way it works among those of us who can write and who understand how to bat around things in the idea arena...

You state your opinion or concern, then you provide material that provides some background or evidence, to give you and your fellow commentators a jumping off point, and you build on that.
When somebody challenges something they also post corroborating evidence, from a source OTHER than themselves, and OTHER than other posts they have written which are just copies of the same non-supported comments.

Idiot. You people have been taught that your bloviation has a lot more content and relevance than it really does. How embarassing for you, if only you knew how it makes you come across.

 

[usmbguest5318]

You are too new to remember the Nigerian poster who ran a Nigerian news magazine here for a month or so. Just kept opening threads including nothing but a copied Nigerian news article and maybe a five word sentence. Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis. Like with any magazine, if you aren't interested, don't open it.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis.

Yes...as if we can't merely click on that site and read it too, for it's not as though Mindwars shares much, if anything, that isn't found in the source article.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Decide for yourself: http://www.usmessageboard.com/search/12094120/. I'm sure I have, but I don't make a habit of parroting a news story and posting no analysis of my own that goes beyond the story a news organization published and I yet manage to broach a variety of topics.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the news catalyzing one's interest in discussing a matter. I think that one's having little of analytical substance to present besides the news story itself adds nothing that the original writer of the published story didn't address.

Nonsense. What you are saying is you are only interested in your opinions and are too intellectually lazy to research it support them.

you are an example of the failure of our nationalized school system. You think your feelings are more valid than facts, information, and structured idea building.

Kgirl, Xelor extensively researches his posts and the facts upon which he bases his arguments.

Thank you.

Here's just one example of my doing so: CDZ - Understanding how the ACA's discounting provisions help people afford health insurance. In that post, I open with my two key assertions and proceed to illustrate empirically and with supporting linked content precisely why I have made them. In contrast, readers of that thread will find the following completely unsubstantiated assertions:

• 80% of Americans are paying exponentially more to subsidize 20% of the population. -- In addition to the member making that assertion without posting the first bit of credible evidence that it is true, I show that it's not even mathematically possible that it is true.

Obviously the claim Koshergirl posted asserting that I'm "too intellectually lazy to research" and support my assertions is yet another assertion presented without evidence which shouldn't be hard, assuming it were so, to obtain seeing as I've shared a link that identifies every thread I've started.

Cross posting when you're unable to make your point. Also a symptom of the intellectually lazy.

BTW the above post also illustrates my statement that the only thing you're interested in is your own opinions lol.

The way it works among those of us who can write and who understand how to bat around things in the idea arena...

You state your opinion or concern, then you provide material that provides some background or evidence, to give you and your fellow commentators a jumping off point, and you build on that.
When somebody challenges something they also post corroborating evidence, from a source OTHER than themselves, and OTHER than other posts they have written which are just copies of the same non-supported comments.

Idiot. You people have been taught that your bloviation has a lot more content and relevance than it really does. How embarassing for you, if only you knew how it makes you come across.

You can try to spin it that way; I can't stop you from doing so. Anyone who actually clicks on the links I provided and reads the content there and at the related links will find that "spinning it" is all you're doing. Do I look like the Census Bureau and Tax Policy Center to you? That's from where the information I used to debunk the member's assertion came.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Since most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news, maybe.

most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news

Actually that's what news commentators (editorialists) and analysts do. News reporters still just deliver the "who, what, when, where, how and why" of a story. It's the audience's job to discern when they are consuming an editorial and when they are consuming a news report.

That's the way it's supposed to be. Obviously, you didn't read my response. That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

That's the way it's supposed to be.

That's the way it is at reputable news organizations. Go take a look. Identify for me the editorials there.

Obviously, you didn't read my response.

It was a one-sentence post. I had to read it to respond to it.

That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

Show us the second instance of my asking the question posed in this thread's OP.

 

[OldLady]

You are too new to remember the Nigerian poster who ran a Nigerian news magazine here for a month or so. Just kept opening threads including nothing but a copied Nigerian news article and maybe a five word sentence. Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis. Like with any magazine, if you aren't interested, don't open it.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Then there's MindWars, who shares with us a good deal of InfoWars' offerings on a daily basis.

Yes...as if we can't merely click on that site and read it too, for it's not as though Mindwars shares much, if anything, that isn't found in the source article.

Don't you ever remark on a news article from the paper and just want to talk it over?

Decide for yourself: http://www.usmessageboard.com/search/12094120/. I'm sure I have, but I don't make a habit of parroting a news story and posting no analysis of my own that goes beyond the story a news organization published and I yet manage to broach a variety of topics.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the news catalyzing one's interest in discussing a matter. I think that one's having little of analytical substance to present besides the news story itself adds nothing that the original writer of the published story didn't address.

Granted. It's great when a poster wants to use an article as a springboard for different ideas, but I still don't see anything wrong with just sharing an article and inviting discussion about the topic as is. In the CDZ, I believe more content is required, but not in the other forums. At least that's my understanding.
If we want to just read an article, we grab the paper, read it and leave. Here, we can post the article and invite other posters to comment. I still don't see anything wrong with that.

I still don't see anything wrong with that.

"Wrong" isn't the adjective I'd used to describe that practice. In fact, I don't believe I describe anywhere what I think normatively of that practice. I did, however, ask whether people see themselves as reporters, seeing as reporting information is what reporters do.

I would say your question certainly sounds as if you're finding fault with it, Xelor. Why else would you ask that question? Obviously no one here feels they are a reporter. Don't be getting all tricky on us and saying "Oh I didn't say that." You implied it; own it.
I don't start many threads because (1) I feel I should babysit them, try to keep it at least mildly on topic, and (2) I don't get that worked up very often. When I do, I can't think of any that relied on an article, except a couple times when I shared a column that made me laugh hard.
Actually, when there is breaking news, it's nice to have someone announce it, like when the polling was over yesterday in France and someone floated a thread on Macron's win as soon as it was announced. Don't you think that's helpful?

Don't you think that's helpful?

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

Why else would you ask that question?

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yes...as if we can't merely click on that site and read it too, for it's not as though Mindwars shares much, if anything, that isn't found in the source article.

Decide for yourself: http://www.usmessageboard.com/search/12094120/. I'm sure I have, but I don't make a habit of parroting a news story and posting no analysis of my own that goes beyond the story a news organization published and I yet manage to broach a variety of topics.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the news catalyzing one's interest in discussing a matter. I think that one's having little of analytical substance to present besides the news story itself adds nothing that the original writer of the published story didn't address.

Granted. It's great when a poster wants to use an article as a springboard for different ideas, but I still don't see anything wrong with just sharing an article and inviting discussion about the topic as is. In the CDZ, I believe more content is required, but not in the other forums. At least that's my understanding.
If we want to just read an article, we grab the paper, read it and leave. Here, we can post the article and invite other posters to comment. I still don't see anything wrong with that.

I still don't see anything wrong with that.

"Wrong" isn't the adjective I'd used to describe that practice. In fact, I don't believe I describe anywhere what I think normatively of that practice. I did, however, ask whether people see themselves as reporters, seeing as reporting information is what reporters do.

I would say your question certainly sounds as if you're finding fault with it, Xelor. Why else would you ask that question? Obviously no one here feels they are a reporter. Don't be getting all tricky on us and saying "Oh I didn't say that." You implied it; own it.
I don't start many threads because (1) I feel I should babysit them, try to keep it at least mildly on topic, and (2) I don't get that worked up very often. When I do, I can't think of any that relied on an article, except a couple times when I shared a column that made me laugh hard.
Actually, when there is breaking news, it's nice to have someone announce it, like when the polling was over yesterday in France and someone floated a thread on Macron's win as soon as it was announced. Don't you think that's helpful?

Don't you think that's helpful?

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

Why else would you ask that question?

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

But the question I've asked people to answer is this, "Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?" No matter what I wrote to in sharing the observations that inspired the question, the fact remains that I haven't asked a loaded question. I've given potential responders a neutrally posed question to answer.

What are you of a mind to do? Assert that my observations are inaccurately described? Are you really going to assert that those terms inaptly describe a great number of OPs in the noted subforums? Surely you aren't going to conflate an observation with an opinion about that which is observed.

• GOP rep: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to healthcare’
  
• Alaska lawmaker: Women try to get pregnant to get a “free trip to the city” for abortion
  
• New Orleans City Council Gives Confederate Monuments The Boot
  
• Macron 65% +
  
• 15 year old points BB gun at San Diego police officer, gets shot & killed after refusing to drop it
  
• Emory University to pay ‘100 percent’ of the financial need of illegal students
  
• Religion of Peace™ Update
  
• Man Sue's for getting stuck next to two fat slobs..
  
• Lee Stranahan Reports on EB-5
  
• ObamaCare cost spike is Trump’s fault, ACA architect says
  
• Disagree With the Liberal Media, Lose Your Job
  
• Jared Kushner's family criticised for touting cash-for-visas scheme in China

That's just from clicking my way down the listed Current Events topics. Does anything you see there strike you as not being "little more," "thinly presented," or content that can't be obtained from merely reading the article that's linked.or picking it up from a competing news outlet? My use of those phrases does not constitute my opinion; those phrases accurately describe the content one observes in those posts. There's nothing "loaded" about describing extant facts.

 

[OldLady]

Granted. It's great when a poster wants to use an article as a springboard for different ideas, but I still don't see anything wrong with just sharing an article and inviting discussion about the topic as is. In the CDZ, I believe more content is required, but not in the other forums. At least that's my understanding.
If we want to just read an article, we grab the paper, read it and leave. Here, we can post the article and invite other posters to comment. I still don't see anything wrong with that.

I still don't see anything wrong with that.

"Wrong" isn't the adjective I'd used to describe that practice. In fact, I don't believe I describe anywhere what I think normatively of that practice. I did, however, ask whether people see themselves as reporters, seeing as reporting information is what reporters do.

I would say your question certainly sounds as if you're finding fault with it, Xelor. Why else would you ask that question? Obviously no one here feels they are a reporter. Don't be getting all tricky on us and saying "Oh I didn't say that." You implied it; own it.
I don't start many threads because (1) I feel I should babysit them, try to keep it at least mildly on topic, and (2) I don't get that worked up very often. When I do, I can't think of any that relied on an article, except a couple times when I shared a column that made me laugh hard.
Actually, when there is breaking news, it's nice to have someone announce it, like when the polling was over yesterday in France and someone floated a thread on Macron's win as soon as it was announced. Don't you think that's helpful?

Don't you think that's helpful?

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

Why else would you ask that question?

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

But the question I've asked people to answer is this, "Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?" No matter what I wrote to in sharing the observations that inspired the question, the fact remains that I haven't asked a loaded question. I've given potential responders a neutrally posed question to answer.

What are you of a mind to do? Assert that my observations are inaccurately described? Are you really going to assert that those terms inaptly describe a great number of OPs in the noted subforums? Surely you aren't going to conflate an observation with an opinion about that which is observed.

• GOP rep: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to healthcare’
  
• Alaska lawmaker: Women try to get pregnant to get a “free trip to the city” for abortion
  
• New Orleans City Council Gives Confederate Monuments The Boot
  
• Macron 65% +
  
• 15 year old points BB gun at San Diego police officer, gets shot & killed after refusing to drop it
  
• Emory University to pay ‘100 percent’ of the financial need of illegal students
  
• Religion of Peace™ Update
  
• Man Sue's for getting stuck next to two fat slobs..
  
• Lee Stranahan Reports on EB-5
  
• ObamaCare cost spike is Trump’s fault, ACA architect says
  
• Disagree With the Liberal Media, Lose Your Job
  
• Jared Kushner's family criticised for touting cash-for-visas scheme in China

That's just from clicking my way down the listed Current Events topics. Does anything you see there strike you as not being "little more," "thinly presented," or content that can't be obtained from merely reading the article that's linked.or picking it up from a competing news outlet? My use of those phrases does not constitute my opinion; those phrases accurately describe the content one observes in those posts. There's nothing "loaded" about describing extant facts.

You ain't foolin' me Xelor. I hear the ole tsk tsk tsk because everyone here doesn't use dialectical whoosits or whatever you call them in their "arguments." I like your comments and your threads, although we don't always agree, but you have a very formal style that not all people either know how or care to use.

 

[Compost]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Since most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news, maybe.

most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news

Actually that's what news commentators (editorialists) and analysts do. News reporters still just deliver the "who, what, when, where, how and why" of a story. It's the audience's job to discern when they are consuming an editorial and when they are consuming a news report.

That's the way it's supposed to be. Obviously, you didn't read my response. That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

That's the way it's supposed to be.

That's the way it is at reputable news organizations. Go take a look. Identify for me the editorials there.

Obviously, you didn't read my response.

It was a one-sentence post. I had to read it to respond to it.

That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

Show us the second instance of my asking the question posed in this thread's OP.

You've been complaining about the low level of discussion here since you've joined. I'm not going to hunt up your posts to prove it, nor am I going to put up with your self important junior high school teacher act.

 

[usmbguest5318]

"Wrong" isn't the adjective I'd used to describe that practice. In fact, I don't believe I describe anywhere what I think normatively of that practice. I did, however, ask whether people see themselves as reporters, seeing as reporting information is what reporters do.

I would say your question certainly sounds as if you're finding fault with it, Xelor. Why else would you ask that question? Obviously no one here feels they are a reporter. Don't be getting all tricky on us and saying "Oh I didn't say that." You implied it; own it.
I don't start many threads because (1) I feel I should babysit them, try to keep it at least mildly on topic, and (2) I don't get that worked up very often. When I do, I can't think of any that relied on an article, except a couple times when I shared a column that made me laugh hard.
Actually, when there is breaking news, it's nice to have someone announce it, like when the polling was over yesterday in France and someone floated a thread on Macron's win as soon as it was announced. Don't you think that's helpful?

Don't you think that's helpful?

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

Why else would you ask that question?

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

But the question I've asked people to answer is this, "Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?" No matter what I wrote to in sharing the observations that inspired the question, the fact remains that I haven't asked a loaded question. I've given potential responders a neutrally posed question to answer.

What are you of a mind to do? Assert that my observations are inaccurately described? Are you really going to assert that those terms inaptly describe a great number of OPs in the noted subforums? Surely you aren't going to conflate an observation with an opinion about that which is observed.

• GOP rep: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to healthcare’
  
• Alaska lawmaker: Women try to get pregnant to get a “free trip to the city” for abortion
  
• New Orleans City Council Gives Confederate Monuments The Boot
  
• Macron 65% +
  
• 15 year old points BB gun at San Diego police officer, gets shot & killed after refusing to drop it
  
• Emory University to pay ‘100 percent’ of the financial need of illegal students
  
• Religion of Peace™ Update
  
• Man Sue's for getting stuck next to two fat slobs..
  
• Lee Stranahan Reports on EB-5
  
• ObamaCare cost spike is Trump’s fault, ACA architect says
  
• Disagree With the Liberal Media, Lose Your Job
  
• Jared Kushner's family criticised for touting cash-for-visas scheme in China

That's just from clicking my way down the listed Current Events topics. Does anything you see there strike you as not being "little more," "thinly presented," or content that can't be obtained from merely reading the article that's linked.or picking it up from a competing news outlet? My use of those phrases does not constitute my opinion; those phrases accurately describe the content one observes in those posts. There's nothing "loaded" about describing extant facts.

You ain't foolin' me Xelor. I hear the ole tsk tsk tsk because everyone here doesn't use dialectical whoosits or whatever you call them in their "arguments." I like your comments and your threads, although we don't always agree, but you have a very formal style that not all people either know how or care to use.

in their "arguments."

Did you click on those links? In how many of them was there something, formal or not, one can call an argument that the OP-er made?

I like your comments and your threads

TY

a very formal style

My question is about content, not style.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Since most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news, maybe.

most "news reporters" these days appear to be offering their opinions rather than news

Actually that's what news commentators (editorialists) and analysts do. News reporters still just deliver the "who, what, when, where, how and why" of a story. It's the audience's job to discern when they are consuming an editorial and when they are consuming a news report.

That's the way it's supposed to be. Obviously, you didn't read my response. That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

That's the way it's supposed to be.

That's the way it is at reputable news organizations. Go take a look. Identify for me the editorials there.

Obviously, you didn't read my response.

It was a one-sentence post. I had to read it to respond to it.

That's a pattern with you and probably why you keep asking the same question.

Show us the second instance of my asking the question posed in this thread's OP.

You've been complaining about the low level of discussion here since you've joined. I'm not going to hunt up your posts to prove it, nor am I going to put up with your self important junior high school teacher act.

You've been complaining about the low level of discussion here since you've joined.

That I have. Asking the same question, however, is not what I've done.

 

[yiostheoy]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

I write therefore I am.

 

[OldLady]

I would say your question certainly sounds as if you're finding fault with it, Xelor. Why else would you ask that question? Obviously no one here feels they are a reporter. Don't be getting all tricky on us and saying "Oh I didn't say that." You implied it; own it.
I don't start many threads because (1) I feel I should babysit them, try to keep it at least mildly on topic, and (2) I don't get that worked up very often. When I do, I can't think of any that relied on an article, except a couple times when I shared a column that made me laugh hard.
Actually, when there is breaking news, it's nice to have someone announce it, like when the polling was over yesterday in France and someone floated a thread on Macron's win as soon as it was announced. Don't you think that's helpful?

Don't you think that's helpful?

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

Why else would you ask that question?

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

But the question I've asked people to answer is this, "Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?" No matter what I wrote to in sharing the observations that inspired the question, the fact remains that I haven't asked a loaded question. I've given potential responders a neutrally posed question to answer.

What are you of a mind to do? Assert that my observations are inaccurately described? Are you really going to assert that those terms inaptly describe a great number of OPs in the noted subforums? Surely you aren't going to conflate an observation with an opinion about that which is observed.

• GOP rep: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to healthcare’
  
• Alaska lawmaker: Women try to get pregnant to get a “free trip to the city” for abortion
  
• New Orleans City Council Gives Confederate Monuments The Boot
  
• Macron 65% +
  
• 15 year old points BB gun at San Diego police officer, gets shot & killed after refusing to drop it
  
• Emory University to pay ‘100 percent’ of the financial need of illegal students
  
• Religion of Peace™ Update
  
• Man Sue's for getting stuck next to two fat slobs..
  
• Lee Stranahan Reports on EB-5
  
• ObamaCare cost spike is Trump’s fault, ACA architect says
  
• Disagree With the Liberal Media, Lose Your Job
  
• Jared Kushner's family criticised for touting cash-for-visas scheme in China

That's just from clicking my way down the listed Current Events topics. Does anything you see there strike you as not being "little more," "thinly presented," or content that can't be obtained from merely reading the article that's linked.or picking it up from a competing news outlet? My use of those phrases does not constitute my opinion; those phrases accurately describe the content one observes in those posts. There's nothing "loaded" about describing extant facts.

You ain't foolin' me Xelor. I hear the ole tsk tsk tsk because everyone here doesn't use dialectical whoosits or whatever you call them in their "arguments." I like your comments and your threads, although we don't always agree, but you have a very formal style that not all people either know how or care to use.

in their "arguments."

Did you click on those links? In how many of them was there something, formal or not, one can call an argument that the OP-er made?

I like your comments and your threads

TY

a very formal style

My question is about content, not style.

I never said all articles have strong commentary by the OP poster. No one I've heard here is attempting to deny that. What I'm saying is that you are certainly being critical of that fact and I can't imagine why you are even trying to say you're not.
Sometimes you find the most damnable stuff to argue about.

 

[yiostheoy]

My question is about content, not style.

(1) Content, (2) Organization, and (3) Grammar/Syntax are the 3 criteria that we graded papers for college Juniors on.

The content must have support and be logical.

The organization must introduce, provide, and summarize the content.

The grammar/syntax must be correct within modern style manual dictates. If you vary from the style manuals you had to justify it verbally in front of the man (moi).

Each paper got 3 grades this way.

It absolutely drives me nuts at times how illiterate many if not most of the posters here on USMB are.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

What kind of question is that? What are we going to talk about? Jesus most people today cherry pick their news.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

I write therefore I am.

Okay, but that's you, and, insofar as writing is an expression of thought, it was Descartes. Whether that's so, however, is, as Husserl showed, likely irrelevant. The key though is that Descartes didn't offer "Cogito" as a proposition. Did you offer your variant thus? If so, perhaps you might consider expounding on it in your own analogue to Discourse, but without asserting a correlate similar to this statement in Discourse:

When someone says 'I am thinking, therefore I am, or I exist', he does not deduce existence from thought by means of a syllogism, but recognizes it as something self-evident by a simple intuition of the mind.
-- René Descartes, Discourse on Method​

 

[Wyatt earp]

My question is about content, not style.

(1) Content, (2) Organization, and (3) Grammar/Syntax are the 3 criteria that we graded papers for college Juniors on.

The content must have support and be logical.

The organization must introduce, provide, and summarize the content.

The grammar/syntax must be correct within modern style manual dictates. If you vary from the style manuals you had to justify it verbally in front of the man (moi).

Each paper got 3 grades this way.

It absolutely drives me nuts at times how illiterate many if not most of the posters here on USMB are.

This is not good damn school , people are sharing ideas not writing a fucking thesis

 

[koshergrl]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

What kind of question is that? What are we going to talk about? Jesus most people today cherry pick their news.

He just wants to talk about how glorious his feelings and opinions are. Do not bring in outside content, or information.

 

[koshergrl]

My question is about content, not style.

(1) Content, (2) Organization, and (3) Grammar/Syntax are the 3 criteria that we graded papers for college Juniors on.

The content must have support and be logical.

The organization must introduce, provide, and summarize the content.

The grammar/syntax must be correct within modern style manual dictates. If you vary from the style manuals you had to justify it verbally in front of the man (moi).

Each paper got 3 grades this way.

It absolutely drives me nuts at times how illiterate many if not most of the posters here on USMB are.

This is not good damn school , people are sharing ideas not writing a fucking thesis

A thesis is an idea. ...a statement or theory that is put forward as a premise to be maintained or proved.

 

[usmbguest5318]

No. That information was "all over" the news. What I'd find helpful is cogent analysis about something having to do with the election, France, how it may change as a result of the election, or even the contenders for the office of POF.

To gather information prior to forming a normative conclusion about the matter. As you noted, I research things before I form/air views about them. I don't know a soul here, so the best way to find out how people perceive themselves is to ask a specific question to find out.

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

What are the loaded terms in my question that imply I have an opinion one way or the other about whether doing so is right or wrong?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

^That.

But the question I've asked people to answer is this, "Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?" No matter what I wrote to in sharing the observations that inspired the question, the fact remains that I haven't asked a loaded question. I've given potential responders a neutrally posed question to answer.

What are you of a mind to do? Assert that my observations are inaccurately described? Are you really going to assert that those terms inaptly describe a great number of OPs in the noted subforums? Surely you aren't going to conflate an observation with an opinion about that which is observed.

• GOP rep: ‘Nobody dies because they don’t have access to healthcare’
  
• Alaska lawmaker: Women try to get pregnant to get a “free trip to the city” for abortion
  
• New Orleans City Council Gives Confederate Monuments The Boot
  
• Macron 65% +
  
• 15 year old points BB gun at San Diego police officer, gets shot & killed after refusing to drop it
  
• Emory University to pay ‘100 percent’ of the financial need of illegal students
  
• Religion of Peace™ Update
  
• Man Sue's for getting stuck next to two fat slobs..
  
• Lee Stranahan Reports on EB-5
  
• ObamaCare cost spike is Trump’s fault, ACA architect says
  
• Disagree With the Liberal Media, Lose Your Job
  
• Jared Kushner's family criticised for touting cash-for-visas scheme in China

That's just from clicking my way down the listed Current Events topics. Does anything you see there strike you as not being "little more," "thinly presented," or content that can't be obtained from merely reading the article that's linked.or picking it up from a competing news outlet? My use of those phrases does not constitute my opinion; those phrases accurately describe the content one observes in those posts. There's nothing "loaded" about describing extant facts.

You ain't foolin' me Xelor. I hear the ole tsk tsk tsk because everyone here doesn't use dialectical whoosits or whatever you call them in their "arguments." I like your comments and your threads, although we don't always agree, but you have a very formal style that not all people either know how or care to use.

in their "arguments."

Did you click on those links? In how many of them was there something, formal or not, one can call an argument that the OP-er made?

I like your comments and your threads

TY

a very formal style

My question is about content, not style.

I never said all articles have strong commentary by the OP poster. No one I've heard here is attempting to deny that. What I'm saying is that you are certainly being critical of that fact and I can't imagine why you are even trying to say you're not.
Sometimes you find the most damnable stuff to argue about.

Sometimes you find the most damnable stuff to argue about.

Frankly, I wasn't looking for an argument. I've been drawn into one by you forcing me to defend the nature and intent of the question I posed. I just wanted folks to answer the question, "yes" or "no," and include a bit of exposition regarding their answer.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

Do many, perhaps most, members who create threads in the Politics, CDZ and Current Events subforums yearn to be news reporters?

I have to ask because so often OP content and titles contains little more than a lifted headline and perhaps the OP-er's thinly presented opinion on the "headline." Often enough, the "headline" and OP says nothing that can't be obtained from consuming the content of any news outlet. Thus, I've often found myself wondering whether folks genuinely see USMB as a "practice pen" for budding cub reporters?

What kind of question is that? What are we going to talk about? Jesus most people today cherry pick their news.

What kind of question is that?

It's a neutrally posed question that asks respondents to answer positively or negatively about their own yearning.

 

[usmbguest5318]

My question is about content, not style.

(1) Content, (2) Organization, and (3) Grammar/Syntax are the 3 criteria that we graded papers for college Juniors on.

The content must have support and be logical.

The organization must introduce, provide, and summarize the content.

The grammar/syntax must be correct within modern style manual dictates. If you vary from the style manuals you had to justify it verbally in front of the man (moi).

Each paper got 3 grades this way.

It absolutely drives me nuts at times how illiterate many if not most of the posters here on USMB are.

This is not good damn school , people are sharing ideas not writing a fucking thesis

"(1) Content, (2) Organization, and (3) Grammar/Syntax" are as applicable to sentences and paragraphs as they are to theses, papers, books and dissertations.