I am also a conservative on a liberal dominated board, adaher. And I agree with the general observation that on this particular liberal-dominated board, the same standards are not applied – that is, a liberal who is wrong is often not subject to any particular social consequence, and a conservative is pilloried.
But as frustrating as that is, it’s even more frustrating – if such a thing were possible – to read this paean to being wrong that you have offered up here. You apparently seek to solve the dilemma of unequal treatment by appealing to the liberal Teeming Millions to cut you the same break they enjoy – let it slide when you’re wrong, since “everyone makes mistakes.”
Absolutely not. Perhaps IMHO and MPSIMS are fertile ground for this request; GQ and GD are not. I agree everyone should be held to the same standard; I absolutely reject the notion that the standard should be forgiving of error.
You don’t like that feeling when you screw up a factual claim and people maul you for it? Then be twice as careful making factual claims. Don’t say that water is wet unless you’re absolutely certain you can back it up.
The gravamen of useful debate is vigorous advocacy on each side – out of which strong ideas, resilient to challenge, are the ones that emerge. That’s the raison d’etre for GD, and GQ to a lesser extent.
Let me not miss a chance to note that I agree with Bricker, in this matter.
And that you will likely never see me disagreeing cavalierly with him on matters of legal fact.
I agree, the few times I do take on him in legal matters is when it is clear that other experts disagree with him and I understand the reason why.
And also when he steps out of the law office. Then I set an off tracking horse betting operation to get him too distracted to continue with the subject.
you shouldn’t be. When discussing a topic I know something about, finance, physics, home repairs, I am not wrong a lot. In fact, I would say I’m almost never wrong, at least in respect to the facts and concepts I’m discussing.
Because I actually know what the fuck I’m talking about. If I don’t, I keep quiet and let others who DO know what they’re talking about have the floor.
Every time I’ve made falsifiable claims that have turned out false, it’s because I commented on a topic I didn’t fully understand.
If you’re wrong a lot, it’s because you do a lot of commenting about topics you don’t know jack shit about. You should keep quiet and learn something.
This doesn’t mean you can crap out any dimwitted idea and give it equal status with a well researched and thoughtful argument.
Lawyers spend a lot of time disagreeing over points of law. The justices on the Supreme Cout often disagree on a ruling. There is often not one correct answer that all trained lawyers agree on. That doesn’t mean Free Men on the Land aren’t completely full of shit.
I grade my students down a little when they screw up. But if they don’t realize it, or don’t understand why it’s a problem, they get graded way down.
If they won’t admit they made a mistake? (Well, they just don’t understand why the rest of the class loses all respect in them.)
Those are the self-deluded who end up dropping out of school.
I just realized something:
A lot of times I have an opinion or a "fact" that sounds catchy and it's something i really wish was true.
You know what I do? I shut up and wait, and read what others post. And usually, someone smarter than I am comes in and posts a position supported by logic and facts. And I think "Whew, glad I didn't post that witty-yet-dubious comment!"
Listen and learn.
Many people here believe they are rarely, if ever, wrong, because they are careful. I say those people are full of shit.
It’s okay to personally attack posters for being wrong outside of the pit. The rules say those people are full of shit, as do I.
Going by the standards articulated here about what makes a poster credible or not, most of you have proved yourselves to lack credibility, because of points 1) and 2). If you can’t be trusted to understand the basic rules of civility and the fact of your own fallibility, then you can’t be trusted to have any idea of what you’re talking about.
Nooooo, thinking you are so careful that you don’t still screw up pretty frequently makes one full of shit. Every page of every thread on this board features some mindnumbingly dumb statements that were assumed to be true but which the poster thought was too good to check.
I don’t mind if you pit me. It’s the people who get personal in other forums who are full of shit. And those in this thread that think that’s just fine and normal. Which proves how much of a bubble this place is becoming.
This is stupid, all cites can be checked, your world is a place were useless information has the same value as the ones coming from experts, authorities or scientists.
The whole point of this is that sometimes I do. And I will try to do better. Hopefully others will try to obey the forum rules a little better as well.
