320 Years of History
Gold Member
Let's take a look at the kind of thread that has caused me to decide that this forum is a lost cause.I made a point of not peppering the noted OP with abstruse words and complex features of sentence structure or literary and grammatical devices/constructions.Yes, sometimes I get my butt kicked, but you get used to it after awhile.
I think Elvis Obama's point is that it isn't your butt that should feel "kicked," as it were. It's one thing to attack someone's ideas with strong counterarguments. It's wholly another to lambaste them personally. But rather than assail folks ideas with cognitively solid rebuttals, folks just attack the person. Moreover, folks aim to find (be it real or imagined) any little crack they can find in another's case and use it as the basis for discarding and discrediting the entirety of a writer's ideas.
Why? I don't know, but I have to suspect that it's because they lack any substantive basis for taking on the central argument. Now if one wants to chip away at the edges, so to speak, fine, but in doing so, at least have the integrity to state that while one can find flaws in some minor points, one must accept the central theme presented. It seems, however, even that is too much for many folks here.
What is even more frustrating, chafing even, for me at least, is when folks refute some bit of irrelevant minutia offered in a post, and whether that data point is right or wrong isn't going alter the substance of the remark in which the item was noted. The most recent illustration of that is found in this Politics sub-forum thread. (the first post in that thread that pertains to this paragraph's comments is #247 -- my second one in the thread -- and the relevant comment is in the "sidebar" comment at the very end of the post.)
I made one remark, an ancillary/parenthetical one at that, about one gun evolving into another. That's it. One ill informed member attempted to assert my statement was inaccurate, and sought therefore to discredit everything else I wrote in post #247. Never mind that nothing I wrote in that post hinged on the relationship between the two guns mentioned in that sidebar paragraph. Even today, another member persists in trying to poke holes in the veracity of that claim and is trying to twist the remark into something it is not and was never meant to be. Personally, I think it generous to consider the remarks made by that member and the one who even today continues on that line to be illustrative of anti-intellectualism; as far as I'm concerned, it's indicative of utter stupidity.
Look in another new thread. You'll find one members who think in my OP I've:
Now I can't say where, how or why they came up with those conclusions. I can only observe that they did and that I neither wrote nor intimated either of those things. And to your comment about my vernacular, I made a point of not peppering the noted OP with abstruse words and complex features of sentence structure or literary and grammatical devices/constructions.
- Asserted "conservatives are idiots, the government never lies, and Liberals know everything."
- Called for "doctorates and such to truly be the ONLY qualified posters worthy to comment or even be here."
Lastly, I'm sure you have ample illustrations of your own whereby folks have done nothing other than make empty claims about the insufficiency of your remarks. I don't even understand what is to be gained from doing that. Sure, it makes sense if one is delivering a stand up comedy act. In a discussion about public policy, economics, religion, science, etc., what is that to achieve? And to to Elvis Obama's point, what is the point of remaining active in a forum, God forfend actually engaging writers who make such remarks, where that sort of commentary prevails? None that I can identify.
I noticed. Nice job.
I made one remark, an ancillary/parenthetical one at that, about one gun evolving into another. That's it. One ill informed member attempted to assert my statement was inaccurate, and sought therefore to discredit everything else I wrote in post #247.
That's a common tactic, and an even more common one in gun arguments is to reject articles and studies as "lies" or "liberal propagada." Some days that is more frustrating than others. With those posters, you can't possibly "win."
what is the point of remaining active in a forum, God forfend actually engaging writers who make such remarks, where that sort of commentary prevails? None that I can identify.
So I don't know what you would call it when I can't help myself from opening my big mouth and continuing to state my objections or my point of view (stupid, opinionated old geezer, I guess). I realize some posters won't accept whatever evidence I provide, but a thread is a mixed audience. Not everyone is arguing sheer garbage. If that is all that shows up, I move on.
The subject is CDZ - Gun Control
First there are ten useless posts. Then C_Clayton_Jones posts the truth here. This is not a legitimate attempt to foster debate.
Now, the subject of gun control is much in the news, for obvious reasons. A legitimate debate would be most welcome. It is impossible to have such a debate here. Why? Because here legitimate debate is routinely subverted in preference to catering to idiots. By the time we get to here, we've descended into insult. After that it's "butt hole buddies". I've watched college debating societies compete, and I have never heard anyone make reference to "butt hole buddies". Not even the Republicans have fallen that far. So I think we have a legitimate claim on being the worst excuse for debate that this planet has ever seen. There are then a few really nasty posts by 2aguy and his psycho squad. They too have NOTHING to do with debate. Debate is IMPOSSIBLE with psychos and children in the room.
This is in no way the fault of the members who are infantile or psychotic. They can't help themselves. What's the excuse of the mods? This is entirely their fault. They create a forum, ostensibly for the purpose of encouraging clean debate, then do NOTHING to make that happen. Why not ask c_clayton_jones to mod? He seems to be able to distinguish between legitimate debate topics and garbage. Move the illegitimate topics out. Culling out a couple of really nasty posts, but leaving the thread, with a warning to comply with CDZ rules, is an absurd response. That's like removing part of a tumor and hoping the cancer won't grow back. BAN people. IMO the only sensible thing to do is ban them from the forum entirely, but at least ban them from the CDZ. Legitimate debate is not natural. It requires rules and the guts to enforce those rules.
Yep....you really should try the "ignore" feature. It definitely helps, in particular with the insults. It also is quite good for ensuring one sees only comments from folks who actually bother to think about what they have to say before typing it. Might it be that one ignores someone, say 2aguy, who once in a blue moon has something of merit to say and one misses that remark? Sure, but on balance, one is overall better off just not being aware of what that person has written...because it's so damn rare that they do say something intelligent and relevant.