Debate Now Is "Structured Debate" another Euphemism for Censorship?

[Sun Devil 92]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

Sorry but saying this entire thread as proof of your argument won't cut it. You either can give me a specific post of mine that justifies your criticism or you've got nothing and you owe me a huge apology.

Not only did I tell you what posts it was in, I quoted the posts. Not only did I quote every single one of the posts that I was talking about, I even explained to you what parts I'm talking about. Yet, here you are again with your fingers in your ears saying I see nothing.

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

BTW: There are no guidelines for this forum. Just what is the rule regarding removing posts. Do the mods agree to take them out just because the OP wants to ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Sorry but saying this entire thread as proof of your argument won't cut it. You either can give me a specific post of mine that justifies your criticism or you've got nothing and you owe me a huge apology.

Not only did I tell you what posts it was in, I quoted the posts. Not only did I quote every single one of the posts that I was talking about, I even explained to you what parts I'm talking about. Yet, here you are again with your fingers in your ears saying I see nothing.

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

Really, the litmus test.

Can anyone point to a thread that was damaged because the OP got bent out of shape over a good argument against them ?

 

[RKMBrown]

Not only did I tell you what posts it was in, I quoted the posts. Not only did I quote every single one of the posts that I was talking about, I even explained to you what parts I'm talking about. Yet, here you are again with your fingers in your ears saying I see nothing.

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

The posts you have quoted do not in any way address what your posts have accused me. I have asked you to provide specific posts of mine that prove your accusations. You haven't done that. And even though I have been at USMB a long time now and have made many many posts, most of which I don't remember, I suspect you will not be able to find a single example to post for what you have accused me. To continue to say that you have is dishonest.

Incorrect. My posts most certainly did address the point, and cited examples of the point. You chose to ignore the cited examples and claim, repeatedly, that I'm not providing them. Hello!! You provided the examples, all I did was quote them. If you have a question about my statements and how they applied to something you said, feel free to go back up to an earlier post and ask for a further explanation.

Now my posts have to prove your meaning and intent? Heh, that's funny.

Saying my posts did not provide examples is a lie, perhaps not intentional. Perhaps you are having a mental block. Or perhaps my statements were not clear.

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

 

[Foxfyre]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

Not only did I tell you what posts it was in, I quoted the posts. Not only did I quote every single one of the posts that I was talking about, I even explained to you what parts I'm talking about. Yet, here you are again with your fingers in your ears saying I see nothing.

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

 

[Foxfyre]

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

The posts you have quoted do not in any way address what your posts have accused me. I have asked you to provide specific posts of mine that prove your accusations. You haven't done that. And even though I have been at USMB a long time now and have made many many posts, most of which I don't remember, I suspect you will not be able to find a single example to post for what you have accused me. To continue to say that you have is dishonest.

Incorrect. My posts most certainly did address the point, and cited examples of the point. You chose to ignore the cited examples and claim, repeatedly, that I'm not providing them. Hello!! You provided the examples, all I did was quote them. If you have a question about my statements and how they applied to something you said, feel free to go back up to an earlier post and ask for a further explanation.

Now my posts have to prove your meaning and intent? Heh, that's funny.

Saying my posts did not provide examples is a lie, perhaps not intentional. Perhaps you are having a mental block. Or perhaps my statements were not clear.

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

 

[RKMBrown]

Not only did I tell you what posts it was in, I quoted the posts. Not only did I quote every single one of the posts that I was talking about, I even explained to you what parts I'm talking about. Yet, here you are again with your fingers in your ears saying I see nothing.

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

Really, the litmus test.

Can anyone point to a thread that was damaged because the OP got bent out of shape over a good argument against them ?

Debate Now - Social Contract and Validity of Law and Government Page 11 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Foxfyre]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

The OP has several times violated his own rules for this thread as has RKM. But since neither complained about it and it is D_T's thread I won't interfere with how he wants to run his own thread.

I have seen at least one thread in the SDZ closed because the OP was breaking his own rules though. That doesn't seem to be the complaint about me though. The complain usually leveled against me is that I do enforce my own rules.

 

[Foxfyre]

Then give me the post numbers in which you did that because I can't find them. And unless you can quote the specific phrases you are accusing me of in context, you've got nothing and you have falsely accused and mischaracterized me. I expect that of some. I didn't expect that of you, but oh well. Now we know you will do it.

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

Really, the litmus test.

Can anyone point to a thread that was damaged because the OP got bent out of shape over a good argument against them ?

Debate Now - Social Contract and Validity of Law and Government Page 11 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But I betcha a good cup of coffee that he can't point to a single post of mine in which I got bent out of shape because somebody disagreed with me unless it was somebody who was demanding that his rules be followed instead of those stated in the OP.

 

[RKMBrown]

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

The posts you have quoted do not in any way address what your posts have accused me. I have asked you to provide specific posts of mine that prove your accusations. You haven't done that. And even though I have been at USMB a long time now and have made many many posts, most of which I don't remember, I suspect you will not be able to find a single example to post for what you have accused me. To continue to say that you have is dishonest.

Incorrect. My posts most certainly did address the point, and cited examples of the point. You chose to ignore the cited examples and claim, repeatedly, that I'm not providing them. Hello!! You provided the examples, all I did was quote them. If you have a question about my statements and how they applied to something you said, feel free to go back up to an earlier post and ask for a further explanation.

Now my posts have to prove your meaning and intent? Heh, that's funny.

Saying my posts did not provide examples is a lie, perhaps not intentional. Perhaps you are having a mental block. Or perhaps my statements were not clear.

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

326 is my post, that is correct. I'm asking you to address what I wrote instead of asking me to rewrite what I already wrote. These posts that I made, include quotes that you made and text in which I explain my statements in a clear and concise manner. You do know that you can "expand" quotes in a post, correct?

You appear to not be able to respond to my posts with anything other than deflections. Again I'm not making a personal attack. In fact quite the opposite. See the post that I wrote with the blue text that explains my position with more detail. Again, I'm not gonna respond to these deflection posts with anything other than pointers to the posts I made in which you started deflecting.

 

[RKMBrown]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

The OP has several times violated his own rules for this thread as has RKM. But since neither complained about it and it is D_T's thread I won't interfere with how he wants to run his own thread.

I have seen at least one thread in the SDZ closed because the OP was breaking his own rules though. That doesn't seem to be the complaint about me though. The complain usually leveled against me is that I do enforce my own rules.

I'm doing my best to address the point of the OP, by attempting to draw you back from your deflections to the point of the OP.

 

[Foxfyre]

The posts you have quoted do not in any way address what your posts have accused me. I have asked you to provide specific posts of mine that prove your accusations. You haven't done that. And even though I have been at USMB a long time now and have made many many posts, most of which I don't remember, I suspect you will not be able to find a single example to post for what you have accused me. To continue to say that you have is dishonest.

Incorrect. My posts most certainly did address the point, and cited examples of the point. You chose to ignore the cited examples and claim, repeatedly, that I'm not providing them. Hello!! You provided the examples, all I did was quote them. If you have a question about my statements and how they applied to something you said, feel free to go back up to an earlier post and ask for a further explanation.

Now my posts have to prove your meaning and intent? Heh, that's funny.

Saying my posts did not provide examples is a lie, perhaps not intentional. Perhaps you are having a mental block. Or perhaps my statements were not clear.

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

326 is my post, that is correct. I'm asking you to address what I wrote instead of asking me to rewrite what I already wrote. These posts that I made, include quotes that you made and text in which I explain my statements in a clear and concise manner. You do know that you can "expand" quotes in a post, correct?

You appear to not be able to respond to my posts with anything other than deflections. Again I'm not making a personal attack. In fact quite the opposite. See the post that I wrote with the blue text that explains my position with more detail. Again, I'm not gonna respond to these deflection posts with anything other than pointers to the posts I made in which you started deflecting.

You made specific statements about my character, my posting style, and complaints about what I do to people that I asked you to provide any evidence that what you accused me had any validity. So far you have refused to do that. You point to vague blocks of text and say there it is. Well show me. Show me the specific statement or circumstance that backs up your personal evaluation of me. You have yet to provide a single post number, much less quoted statement to back up your accusations.

 

[RKMBrown]

You seriously can't see what I wrote in the posts that you quoted above? Again, I quoted the posts I was talking about when I talked about them. Just as you subsequently quoted my posts and said that my posts don't include examples... Yet, clearly my posts included quotes of your posts above and addressed your text. Yet, each time you repeatedly said provide an example. Here's how this sequence of quoting works, and I'm not sure why it's confusing you.

You make a statement (post 1).
I quote your statement making remarks about your statement (post 2 (this post includes post 1 as a quote)).
You quote my statement ask for me to provide you an example (post 3 (this post includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))
I quote your response in which you state that I did not provide you an example by pointing out that I quoted the example in the posts above (post 4 (this post includes post 3 as a quote (which in turn includes post 2 as a quote (which in turn includes post 1 as a quote)))).

Apparently she's just like PoliticalChic in this regard- she's never, EVER wrong The mark of an adult is when they can admit a mistake. Even I've been known to admit a mistake or two on this board in the past.

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

Really, the litmus test.

Can anyone point to a thread that was damaged because the OP got bent out of shape over a good argument against them ?

Debate Now - Social Contract and Validity of Law and Government Page 11 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But I betcha a good cup of coffee that he can't point to a single post of mine in which I got bent out of shape because somebody disagreed with me unless it was somebody who was demanding that his rules be followed instead of those stated in the OP.

Fox, you'd loose that bet if it was being arbitrated. But I'm sure you would just deflect Stubborn people are like that

 

[RKMBrown]

Incorrect. My posts most certainly did address the point, and cited examples of the point. You chose to ignore the cited examples and claim, repeatedly, that I'm not providing them. Hello!! You provided the examples, all I did was quote them. If you have a question about my statements and how they applied to something you said, feel free to go back up to an earlier post and ask for a further explanation.

Now my posts have to prove your meaning and intent? Heh, that's funny.

Saying my posts did not provide examples is a lie, perhaps not intentional. Perhaps you are having a mental block. Or perhaps my statements were not clear.

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

326 is my post, that is correct. I'm asking you to address what I wrote instead of asking me to rewrite what I already wrote. These posts that I made, include quotes that you made and text in which I explain my statements in a clear and concise manner. You do know that you can "expand" quotes in a post, correct?

You appear to not be able to respond to my posts with anything other than deflections. Again I'm not making a personal attack. In fact quite the opposite. See the post that I wrote with the blue text that explains my position with more detail. Again, I'm not gonna respond to these deflection posts with anything other than pointers to the posts I made in which you started deflecting.

You made specific statements about my character, my posting style, and complaints about what I do to people that I asked you to provide any evidence that what you accused me had any validity. So far you have refused to do that. You point to vague blocks of text and say there it is. Well show me. Show me the specific statement or circumstance that backs up your personal evaluation of me. You have yet to provide a single post number, much less quoted statement to back up your accusations.

You also made specific statements about your own character. I just agreed with you. My statements in those posts were clear and concise. They were not vague at all. If you'd like to address one of my earlier posts go ahead. No only did I provide a list around a dozen times, I've explicitly given you post numbers, and now even a link to another thread, given your apparent confusion regarding what this thread is about.

 

[Foxfyre]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the

I have admitted plenty of mistakes. He is not accusing me of mistakes. He is accusing me of specific things that I do not believe I have done. If I have, then he should be able to show it with specific statement from specific posts. He hasn't done that. Nor have you. You both throw a lot of ugly, hateful shit, but you don't seem to be able to back it up. I've called him on it and so far he has been unable to back it up.

I don't enjoy being nasty and hateful to people, I do not respect nasty and hateful people, and I become very frustrated by those who deliberately try to derail discussions. I appreciated a forum that allowed some control to shut people like that down. But the nasty and hateful folks can't have that can they. It might gain enough legs to spoil their fun.

So far not one person has said how or why the SDZ has harmed or hurt them in any way--how it has diminished their ability to enjoy USMB as they did before. So the only reason for a thread like this one is for those who don't want to participate in a SDZ to make sure nobody else has that ability either.

And that is just wrong.

This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

The OP has several times violated his own rules for this thread as has RKM. But since neither complained about it and it is D_T's thread I won't interfere with how he wants to run his own thread.

I have seen at least one thread in the SDZ closed because the OP was breaking his own rules though. That doesn't seem to be the complaint about me though. The complain usually leveled against me is that I do enforce my own rules.

I'm doing my best to address the point of the OP, by attempting to draw you back from your deflections to the point of the OP.

So show me the post where you did that and were shut down as you have accused me. Show me the post where I promoted hurting people as you have accused me. Let's see if you can support anything you are saying with other than vague waving of your hands at something nonspecific.

 

[Foxfyre]

Give me the post numbers then. And show me HOW the posts you quoted addressed the specific accusations that I say you have not proved. Give me the specific statements in context that show that you have a leg to stand on.

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

326 is my post, that is correct. I'm asking you to address what I wrote instead of asking me to rewrite what I already wrote. These posts that I made, include quotes that you made and text in which I explain my statements in a clear and concise manner. You do know that you can "expand" quotes in a post, correct?

You appear to not be able to respond to my posts with anything other than deflections. Again I'm not making a personal attack. In fact quite the opposite. See the post that I wrote with the blue text that explains my position with more detail. Again, I'm not gonna respond to these deflection posts with anything other than pointers to the posts I made in which you started deflecting.

You made specific statements about my character, my posting style, and complaints about what I do to people that I asked you to provide any evidence that what you accused me had any validity. So far you have refused to do that. You point to vague blocks of text and say there it is. Well show me. Show me the specific statement or circumstance that backs up your personal evaluation of me. You have yet to provide a single post number, much less quoted statement to back up your accusations.

You also made specific statements about your own character. I just agreed with you. My statements in those posts were clear and concise. They were not vague at all. If you'd like to address one of my earlier posts go ahead. No only did I provide a list around a dozen times, I've explicitly given you post numbers, and now even a link to another thread, given your apparent confusion regarding what this thread is about.

No, you have not named my posts (unless one of three I didn't look at were mine.). You named yours. You have not pointed to a single statement I have made. Waving your hands at vague blocks of texts isn't going to cut it. Your character assassination was quite specific. I want specifics to justify it.

 

[RKMBrown]

The bottom line is that the answer to the question posed in the
This exchange is a perfect example of what is being discussed here.

On other boards, the useless posts would bury the meaningful ones.

In this case, Dot Com is contributing nothing to the discussion, is attacking you, and taking up band-width.

RKMBrown is opposing you with some well composed posts.

DT's complaint is that you could, in theory, shut down both of them. I don't know if that is true or not. But even if it were, you'd only do it a few times before people would pretty much leave your threads alone.

In this case, DC should be shut down.....as I said wasting bandwidth. Unless he or she can point to one post that has contributed in a meaningful way.

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

The OP has several times violated his own rules for this thread as has RKM. But since neither complained about it and it is D_T's thread I won't interfere with how he wants to run his own thread.

I have seen at least one thread in the SDZ closed because the OP was breaking his own rules though. That doesn't seem to be the complaint about me though. The complain usually leveled against me is that I do enforce my own rules.

I'm doing my best to address the point of the OP, by attempting to draw you back from your deflections to the point of the OP.

So show me the post where you did that and were shut down as you have accused me. Show me the post where I promoted hurting people as you have accused me. Let's see if you can support anything you are saying with other than vague waving of your hands at something nonspecific.

I already did, stop deflecting.

 

[Dot Com]

This sub-forum seems PERFECTLY SUITED for "control freaks", not naming any names

Needless to say, I won't be spending much time down here. Its a way for OP's to "have their cake and eat it too". Not interested in walking down your carefully constructed garden paths, in lieu of a better name.

 

[Foxfyre]

I have not complained about the composition of RKMBrown and I never complain when somebody provides a good opposing argument.

I have complained that he attacked my character and accused me of doing things that I am pretty darn sure I would not do. I have challenged him to provide the specific evidence to support his accusations and he has dodged, weaved, and ducked all over the place pretending he has done that, but he has not done that.

I never said you did.

I said I thought the two of you were engaged in a rather good disagreement.

What I said was that posts like DC's should be removed (and I am asking if you the mods have agreed to do let you, in effect, moderate the thread, and thus follow any directives you give regarding removing posts).

Otherwise, I am not sure I understand the nature of the OP's complaint.

The OP has several times violated his own rules for this thread as has RKM. But since neither complained about it and it is D_T's thread I won't interfere with how he wants to run his own thread.

I have seen at least one thread in the SDZ closed because the OP was breaking his own rules though. That doesn't seem to be the complaint about me though. The complain usually leveled against me is that I do enforce my own rules.

I'm doing my best to address the point of the OP, by attempting to draw you back from your deflections to the point of the OP.

So show me the post where you did that and were shut down as you have accused me. Show me the post where I promoted hurting people as you have accused me. Let's see if you can support anything you are saying with other than vague waving of your hands at something nonspecific.

I already did, stop deflecting.

And I say that is a lie.

 

[RKMBrown]

Posts 326, 328, 330, and 333 all included examples and quotes. I believe my comments were short, concise, and to the point. Your responses to my points appeared then and still appear to me to be a deflection. If you have a question about the statements, just ask.

I didn't check them all but #326 is not my post. It is your post. Either you name the post number of my post and the specific statement or phrase that supports your accusations of me or you have nothing and continue to accuse me of something I never said or suggested. And it is exactly that sort of thing that makes a SDZ attractive to those who despise that kind of personal attack.

326 is my post, that is correct. I'm asking you to address what I wrote instead of asking me to rewrite what I already wrote. These posts that I made, include quotes that you made and text in which I explain my statements in a clear and concise manner. You do know that you can "expand" quotes in a post, correct?

You appear to not be able to respond to my posts with anything other than deflections. Again I'm not making a personal attack. In fact quite the opposite. See the post that I wrote with the blue text that explains my position with more detail. Again, I'm not gonna respond to these deflection posts with anything other than pointers to the posts I made in which you started deflecting.

You made specific statements about my character, my posting style, and complaints about what I do to people that I asked you to provide any evidence that what you accused me had any validity. So far you have refused to do that. You point to vague blocks of text and say there it is. Well show me. Show me the specific statement or circumstance that backs up your personal evaluation of me. You have yet to provide a single post number, much less quoted statement to back up your accusations.

You also made specific statements about your own character. I just agreed with you. My statements in those posts were clear and concise. They were not vague at all. If you'd like to address one of my earlier posts go ahead. No only did I provide a list around a dozen times, I've explicitly given you post numbers, and now even a link to another thread, given your apparent confusion regarding what this thread is about.

No, you have not named my posts (unless one of three I didn't look at were mine.). You named yours. You have not pointed to a single statement I have made. Waving your hands at vague blocks of texts isn't going to cut it. Your character assassination was quite specific. I want specifics to justify it.

Again.... I already made my statements. If you want to discuss one of the earlier posts, go back and ask your question. Putting your fingers in your ears an saying I hear nothing is not gonna work.