How many strikes does Collounsbury get?

[Sam_Stone]

Collounsbury:

It would have been better if I had generalized the point more, rather than pointing a finger at you. Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up:

[ul]
[li]It is damned hard to maintain civil discussions on the internet. The anonymous nature of message board conversations makes it far too easy to behave in a way that you would never consider in person.[/li][li]One of the great strengths of the SDMB is that, by and large, this place is an oasis of reason and civility in a sea of obnoxious net behaviour.[/li][li]Another great strength of the SDMB is that it brings in some truly high quality people - including yourself. Bigwigs in industry, experts in their field, etc.[/li][li]The last point is directly because of the previous point.[/li][li]It’s very easy to piss away that hard-won quality, simply by letting a few people rampage around abusing others. [/li][li]The net result of a ‘usenetification’ of the SDMB is that we’re going to start collecting the 'net kiddies, and losing the quality people we’re trying to attract.[/li][li]In time, this place will look like every other script-kiddie infested, flame-filled, idiotic message board.[/li][li]Therefore, it’s up to all of us to do our best to try to maintain a high standard. Damn it, the mods shouldn’t have to fight this fight all the time. We’re all adults, and we know why we come here. We know what acceptable behaviour is, and we shouldn’t need to parse the rules with a microscope to fine-tune our behaviour to something not-quite-bannable.[/li][li]This applies to everyone. We all lose our cool sometimes, and we all step near the line on occasion. It’s important to remember that when we do, we’re out of line. Maybe not bannable out-of-line, but still beyond what is expected of us here. [/li][/ul]

Now everyone hold hands and sing Kumbyah.

[system]

Well, the summary is very fair and I only disagree to the point that I believe you vastly exagerate a supposed decline in discourse or your overdone prediction of doom. Moderation prevents that.

However, I shall not niggle about that, perceptions differ. Fair points and ones I found more or less compelling, with the above caveats.

And now we have 8 pages. A lovely number eight, double four, my favorite number and so I feel complete.

[wring]

*Originally posted by Collounsbury *
**And now we have 8 pages. A lovely number eight, double four, my favorite number and so I feel complete. **

I may have located the problem. there seems to be a cognative disconnect in the spacial area. (IOW - I see 6 pages, not 8)

[Liberal]

Col

And now we have 8 pages. A lovely number eight, double four, my favorite number and so I feel complete.

Since users can set their preferencse to show anywhere from 5 to 40 posts per page, I wouldn’t stop fanning those flies yet if I were you.

[iampunha]

*Originally posted by Libertarian *
I think that sums it up rather well. From your point of view, Great Debates is your personal playground. You go there to impress the girls (and the girlie boys), to ruffle some feathers, and to expose everyone to a charm and wit that you have deemed will benefit us all. It’s a place for you to flash.

I think, Lib, that you might possibly be attributing more apathy and a general sense of “I do not give a fuck who I piss off/flame” to Col than is applicable. Purely MO, though. Just thought it might be of interest to you.

You also enjoy showing off your extensive, though myopic, knowledge of anything and everything to do with brown people although you yourself are not brown.

I must say it has been a while since you said something I found offensive, which given your usually-calm nature is unsurprising. Given your nature, this comment is equally surprising. I wonder if you are incapable of typing the phrase “MENA situation/people” and opted instead to label them by a color that neither encapsulates them nor does it “keep out”, so to speak, those who are not a member of the group in question.

Other than that I have to wonder why in the world you bother typing anything at Col, because your manner of typing at him does not seem one conducive to him generally giving a fuck what you have to say, so you must realize you are wasting your time. That is your privilege, of course, but I would imagine there are better things to do. Prayer, for one:)

It’s the hallmark of a poor debator that he finds that the argument is about him and his opponent rather than about the issue.

Funny, that strikes me as being true of a number of gay activist debators on this board, including yourself (“gay activist” here meaning one who is an activist for gay rights, not someone who is gay and happens to be an activist). Shall I make a list of those people, many your friends, who are poor debators based on that criterion alone?

You seek to establish your authority by bullying. You fear that your argument is so weak that you must impress others with your knowledge of the Arabic language or Middle East geography, as though the synthetic knowledge of these means you have an analytic knowledge of how Middle Eastern people think.

To put forth the argument that Col is not familiar with the thoughts of MENA people (thank [deity] you didn’t say ‘brown people’ again) is … well, incorrect, from what I have read. Perhaps you believe he is lying or grossly exaggerating his knowledge.

Not everything you say is bullshit, but often there is so little real content in your posts that overall they end up looking like flaming rather than debating — a whole lot of filler and only a little meat. You know, if you spray a really stinky toilet with a cedar fragrance air freshener, it just ends up smelling like a shitty Christmas tree.

If you’re going to complain about total content in every single post, let me just throw myself up against this wall with a gun so you can shoot me now. I was unaware, as I bet a few others were, that every post in GD was required to be rife with content. I’ll just let them know they’re scheduled for execution per Libertarian’s Rules of Order.

[E-Sabbath]

I’d just like to take the moment to point out that COBOL is not dead… it is, in fact, while not something I admit I can program in, still in wide use in many larger facilities. And yes, there is a load of things that a good COBOL programmer can teach a new C# programmer. Priorities, good structure, how, despite what the theoreticians and instructions say, programs are limited by the tendencies of the computer and how it behaves…

I can’t really program at all anymore, but I know how computers work. Thus, I was able to analyze a programming issue a friend had in PHP, a situation I don’t know, from his description of how it failed, and resolve it in under five minutes.

It’s all in learning how to think.

Frankly, Col always reminds me of a Englishman of the British Raj, sweating and swearing and blustering but the soul of the land.

Plus, his information is always directly relevant and accurate. He’s got a brutal style, but hey, I can accept that…

[iampunha]

*Originally posted by Libertarian *
Since users can set their preferencse to show anywhere from 5 to 40 posts per page, I wouldn’t stop fanning those flies yet if I were you.

I get even more bang for my buck than that. I see 50 per page:) Basically I take as a tradeoff the longer page-loading time because it’s worth it not to have to deal with 19 friggin’ pages when I’m trying to hunt down what someone said 95 posts ago. I also prefer the discussion/continuity feel of it rather than the choppy aspect of less than 50. Hell, I’d set it to have the entire thread load as one page if I could. I’m just that weird (but then you knew that:D).

[Truth_Seeker]

Sam
While I take your point, I think you’re engaging in a bit of slippery-slopeism. I could easily make the argument that tightly-argued posts with a low tolerance for willful ignorance are the best antidote to “usenetification.”

“Net kiddies” are a potential problem because they reduce the signal-to-noise ratio. But so are people who are impervious to reasoned discourse and for the same reason. “Truly high quality people” are annoyed by contentless abuse but they are also annoyed by contentless opinions that inevitably derail discusions just when they are getting interesting and complex.

There are certain posters who I look forward to seeing because I know that they will offer new information, thoughtful analysis or a novel perspective. There are certain posters I dread seeing because I know they are going to raise the same discredited arguments that have been beaten to death a dozen times before. I also know that this addressing these arguments will, at least temporarily, derail the thread and probably prevent us from exploring whatever it is we are discussing in greater depth.

So what’s your solution for this problem?

[Liberal]

Pun

As always, your criticisms are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[Lemur866]

*Originally posted by Collounsbury *
**My answer is, it sometimes proves to be a barrier, having an irrational aversion to odd numbers, but I learned not to jigger the results solely on that basis.
**

Funny, I’ve got an odd aversion to irrational numbers. Some of my best friends are irrational numbers but would you want your integers marrying one of them?

[Boyo_Jim]

How many strikes does Collounsbury get?

This is one of those cosmic questions!

42

[iampunha]

*Originally posted by Libertarian *
As always, your criticisms are greatly appreciated. Thanks.

And I, in turn, appreciate your consideration of them. Thank you:)

[Thylacine]

*Originally posted by leechbabe *
**
I’ve loved using that smiley ever since Thylacine told me its a lesbian kiss
**

You know I love ya Leechy but please, it is a lesbian erection.

Now I have reclaimed my silly joke you may all return to your bun fight.

[Zoe]

Col: As to the assertion, by the way, that I would have failed a debate class, my dear as always I had top marks in my class. Top marks, but the GD is not a classroom and I rather like fencing.

You would have failed my debate class if you had used the approach that you do in GD.

I always thought of fencing as a rather disciplined sport. What a funny little man you are. Name-calling is fencing? It requires some amount of grace and agility – literally and figuratively.

[/Collounsbury} for now, for me

[leechbabe]

*Originally posted by Thylacine *
**You know I love ya Leechy but please, it is a lesbian erection.

Now I have reclaimed my silly joke you may all return to your bun fight. **

See I knew something wasn’t quite right about how I remembered it, but I’m going to blame TheLoadedDog for my error because he archived the section of G’Dope that thread was in (and hid the archive).

There is ALWAYS a way to make it the man’s fault even better if that man is an admin/mod

We now return you to your Col bashing.

• :: must remember lesian erection :: *

[leechbabe]

d’oh I give up!

lesbian

Sheesh that’ll teach me to be doping at work while the auditors here.

[iampunha]

I do not think I am alone in wondering what in the holy, sweet and chocolaty name of sweaty and righteous fuck a lesion erection is:D

[Xploder]

Perhaps a clit hardon???

Preview is your friend

[dantheman]

That would be a lesbian erection, Xploder. What punha is wondering about is a lesion erection. It’s like a hard thingy that goes in instead of out.

[Thylacine]

*Originally posted by dantheman *
** It’s like a hard thingy that goes in instead of out. **

which (to recycle a Leechy joke from above, turn about being fair play and all that) is best represented with this :o smilie