Oh, dear.
Someone seems to have lost sight of “advancing debate” and resorted to “calling the other side poopy-heads”.
Is the first rule of hypocrisy-hunting that you don’t talk about hypocrisy-hunting?
The second rule is that you do.
Remember, FP is the arbiter of honesty, motives, and feelings. He knows how you feel, and what motivates you. And he knows when you’re being honest with yourself or not. So we should all listen to him.
Works for me. 
At the point where you’re sanctimoniously telling me what I’d do if I were honest, debate has ended, dumbshit, so continuing with you at that point is as effective as engaging with Shodan. Your decision.
On the upside, Bricker has agreed to stop lying about one issue. So there is that.
I’m frankly fine either way, but I’m not going to censor myself for the privilege of debating with you. Your call.
I would note though that I’ve not noticed in your posts to this MB any reticence WRT any sort of criticism of, or snark directed at, other posters, so I find your whining when on the receiving end somewhat pathetic.
By the way, I have some criticisms of FP’s earlier megapost that are entirely nonpersonal, but I’m not on the best machine for extended typing, so I’ll get to them a little later.
Oh, dear, is he keeping a list? How often does he check it?
No worries. Occasionally you say something interesting, but you’re under the misapprehension that insulting people with fifty-dollar words is acceptable debating, and I have to remind myself that you’re a miserable little turd under the big words. Don’t censor yourself; I’ll just continue mocking you and your sanctimonious dumbassery :).
Yeah, so did I, but he found it far more interesting to focus on the joke I made in my post than on everything else, doubtless because he can’t actually refute the rest of it. Last time, he obsessed over the word “dude”; years ago, he obsessed over my misspelling his username. It’s kind of his go-to move.
Good luck with your correspondence with him!
Some of what you’re saying makes sense in a theoretical sense… sure, if there’s a thread in which Republicans did X, and it’s in some sense debatable how bad X is, and specific liberals are saying “X is VERY VERY bad”, and you can then find a situation in which Democrats did X, and those very same specific liberals are saying “gee, X isn’t all that bad”, then that undercuts their claim to believe that X is very very bad. But again, that’s a nearly comically contrived exaggeration of what actually happens.
Vastly more common is “well, you guys sure didn’t have a problem when some democrats did Y”, where Y is NOT necessarily similar to X and it’s unclear whether the actual people posting in the thread did or did not have a problem when democrats did Y. And what basically inevitably happens then is that it trainwrecks the original thread, because now everyone is distracted with arguing about how similar X and Y are, what everyone really though about Y, and of course all the meta-issues about hypocrisy-accusing that we’re discussing right now.
All joking about hyper-partisanship aside, there certainly are times when an SDMB debate thread contains meaningful communication of information and positions between the sides, which is at least the first step towards people possibly changing their minds or at least learning something. If you view that kind of communication as “good”, as being the goal towards which SDMB debates should aspire, then it’s pretty much universal that hypocrisy-hunting makes threads worse, because it overwhelms and distracts from the “good” debate that might have existed. Maybe that’s not how it seems like it should be, maybe there are plenty of reasons to think that hypocrisy-hunting OUGHT to make threads all the richer and the more informative, but that’s just not how it works.
See, now THAT is a good post!
Yes. Even in the Pit it is dishonest (and hypocritical) to say “one shouldn’t do such-and-such” and then immediately do such-and-such.
You mean like calling someone dumbo and dumbass right after insisting that you are stalwart against calling names instead of engaging in the meat of an argument?
So we shouldn’t call names except when you do it, we should engage the meat of an argument except when you don’t, we should not hunt for hypocrisy except when you do, and you won’t argue with me except when you do.
Gotcha. You are a pathetic, pious hypocrite and engage in the behaviors you condemn in others. Fortunately, when you do so it is a signal that you know how badly you have lost an argument, so it serves a purpose after all.
Regards,
Shodan +
Your comprehension is as nonexistent as ever. If you ever engaged in an argument in the first place instead of your desperate “Usual suspects” attempts at relevance, I’d respond in kind. As it is, you don’t deserve the thoughtful consideration I give to Bricker, so I make fun of you instead.
Is this more “I am not arguing with you” or “I don’t name-call”?
Do you recognize how pathetic you look, and is the approbation of the mindless enough to make up for it?
It may help to point something out - not to you, you two-faced little weasel - but to the board in general. Part of the advantage of hypocrisy-hunting is that, when it is found, as has been in the mildly distasteful but ultimately entertaining case of Left Hand of “I’m Not Calling You Names, Dumbass”, it makes it clear who is arguing on principle, and can be taken at face value, and who is merely pretending to do so. LHoDumbass is one of the latter, clearly. He has no real principles, and what is more, has whored himself out intellectually so much that he either cannot, or does not, recognize what he is doing. This is bad for his argument, since it makes it difficult to take him seriously whether he is being hypocritical or the other 10% of the time, but it does afford the rest of us amusement.
Not that I am calling him names - **Left Hand of Dorkness ** is too stupid to be called names, so I would never do it.
Regards,
Shodan
Let it be noted that Lefty has not yet received the true mark of excellence, which is being included on Shodan’s “ignore” list. Only the very best…the most intelligent, thoughtful and perceptive make it to the Elite.
I call them… the Regardless.
If he takes them off ignore, they become Irregardless.
I’m not there, yet, and I live with that shame every day. 
Heh!
How pathetic I look to you? I know that, and I care about it SOOOOO much.
Out of curiosity, though, it might help to see if anyone else is so bad at reading that they also got “I don’t name call” from what I posted in this thread. It’s possible, but highly unlikely, that anyone else is your level of dumb.
LHoD and Shodan are really two peas in a pod, aren’t they? They’re so perfect for each other. If I didn’t know better, I’d think they were an old married couple.
