Don’t recall ever interacting with you in the past, but on this issue we seem to agree.
Pariah no more!
No, not at all. You are an asshole independently of your bukake-tilt.
I’m not willing to take the word of someone named after the single most annoying character in my television memories.
Alternate answer: you’d think he’d have less of his ego tied up in being the PIT COP.
It’s a unix joke. ^W is how you deleted a whole word in the days of text terminals. I’m eternally frustrated by board software that doesn’t properly have a “strikethrough” text option (or at least, one I can’t be arsed to find)
Really? Because when you think about it, it’s a seriously fucking stupid proposed rule.
Yeah, I think the technical term for that is ‘feedback loop’
I can only imagine volunteer moderators trying to parse every specious cite.
As everyone knows you are either a Native American or an European homo.
Funny how that works.
The word I have in mind is “trolling;” no new rules required. The Straight Dope message board, even in the Pit, should have some goal for fact-finding at the basis of any discussion where people are arguing facts.
But that’s an ideal which I would like, not something I expect to ever be a reality, so folks can stop hyperventilating or composing creative insults towards me. Add to this the fact I have less than zero influence over anything that happens on this message board, and it’s me just letting off steam.
I ain’t no homo injun!
The persecution complex is thick with this one.
Regardless, I think it’s for the forum itself to fight the ignorance, the mod’s jobs are to keep it civil.
The last thing the rule would do is fight ignorance, since anyone who tried to post a cite for their assertions would be exposed to sanctions if it’s determined that they did so for “trolling” (read: unpopular) reasons. A chilling regulation that would ensure only that every thread would become a war of attrition fought with naked assertions and flat denials.
LOL, unlike how it is now? I agree that it would be stupid for the same reasons you do.
You mean like the time you claimed that only women who had been molested would be interested in a polymorous relationship? After all, that’s what you told a poster who confessed to engaging in polymory. (Or whatever the tone was)
When in that thread did I say polyamory was immoral? This is a complete non-sequitur. I didn’t say it was immoral, nor do I care that it’s “outside the norm.” The context of that post happened to be about women who were willing to be one of multiple wives to one husband, by the way. It was a comment on women who were willing to be submissive to a single male authority and treated like property. It also did not involve any moral judgement of the women.
I hate rules/rulers/authority. My somewhat sarcastic reponse was to the “pariah” aspect of the post as pertains this topic. But upon reflection to your perfectly logical understanding of my reply I don’t see how a “deceptive citation” (as long as it can be factually rebutted) should be above the “rules.”
Doesn’t matter anyway, as I find the only rules applicable to this place is/are moderator caprice – as per the so-called Big Bossman’s latest edict.
In any event, I am really not interested in how this place is run on a meta level – like Dubya, I m a Big Picture dude (yeah, I know, the few that have actually interacted with me beyond the superficial might blow a gasket.) But even so I can see how this topic is totally irrelevant to this thread. Obviously either/or one of you can start a thread about this particular issue.
So I don’t give a shit either way on my cynical side. Not on me that in the past eight or nine years it has gone from a vibrant cyber-community to a stale one. For Ogs sake! It’s happened vs the most elementary topics taught in BA 101. Seriously, too silly for words, never mind common sense & business savvy. OTOH that does not mean I am trying to belittle those that do – try to right the ship that is. Quite the contrary, argue/fight/work/persuade in order to keep insignificant posters such as myself involved with this place. If you’re convincing enough, no worries, I’ll not only be on your side but jump in to offer help in whichever ways I can.
Quite sure I’m hardly alone in my line of thought. Then again, that and $02 will buy you absolutely nothing,
</caring, off topic mood off>
Well, that’s certainly an accurate summation of your posts in that thread.
:rolleyes:
You obviously don’t have much of an idea about the social sciences, either. It is not as if group dynamics between people who are fucking and people who are not fucking are two completely independent disciplines and that no information can be gleaned one way or another. I suppose that the Navy used that study solely for the purpose of locking sailors in rooms. They certainly wouldn’t be so brash as to apply the results to other, similar situations. Idiot.
However, it was also the first study I had sitting around about small group dynamics. If you actually read it, which it sounds like you just skimmed, you would see that it has plenty of relevance. But that would be too hard to do. You could also find some other works that contradict mine. Of course, that would also take effort that you don’t want to spend.
There are two other issues here:
One, I don’t give enough of a shit to dig up a study that talks specifically about poly relationships in order to “win” on a message board.
Two: it’s obvious to anyone who isn’t a tard that groups of three are less stable because they almost always resolve to 2 vs 1 when there is conflict. And in case you do read it, there are some situations where triads did better, so don’t pull out that “ZOMG IT TOTALLY DISAGREES WITH YOU” black and white bullshit that I wouldn’t put past you.
But hey, why let actually knowing about a fucking discipline get in the way of calling me a troll? I don’t know about the pariah part, but you are embarrassing… yourself.
Well, if you can take a quad and are willing to move, my husband and I joke about how we need some more spouses to go out and make money for me to spoil rotten when they get home. The upside is that we live in a lovely 17th century farmhouse in the Netherlands, where we could even do a poly registered partnership and do it all on the up and up. Plenty o’room so we wouldn’t be stepping all over each other. The bad news of course is that, well, it is Holland. In December. And there is the mandatory Dutch lessons thingie and the 9 hour testing marathon required of foreigners which sort of sucks.
Then you[del]'re an idiot[/del] should try just a scintilla harder. 
You are looking for the del and /del tags, enclosed by square brackets. Like so: [del]strikethrough[/del].
No, you just completely dismissed their ability to make decisions for themselves and said they must have been traumatized to desire such a thing.
You really are quite the sexist douchebag.