Perhaps you should take a careful count of those who have posted in this thread in support of your position, vs those who are not. When *everybody *tells you it’s you, it’s you. An intelligent person would then reassess.
Got a completely different response in a more ideologically balanced forum that I’ve been on a long time. No, I think it’s you.
I respect the higher standards of Straight Dope as opposed to the average message board. The manners have deterioriated significantly though as it’s become a more lefty-dominated board over the years. It wasn’t like this when I first joined.
Is that why you joined and then pretty much disappeared for years?
Oh, didn’t you know we could check your posting history?
I joined and disappeared because I didn’t feel I was measuring up to the high standards and didn’t want to pollute the board.
I came back because I thought I was a little better, and anyway I was seeing a lot looser posting here than in the past. However, I learned pretty quickly that these new looser rules were only for liberals’ benefit. Liberals could spout whatever they wanted, conservatives must show proof for even the most uncontroversial statements.
That being said, I still would have left, but I suspect over the years most conservatives have left due to the utter stupidity and lack of self awareness of the lefties on this board. I remember there being a lot more here before. I’m not going to let you morons win. I will actually get better at supporting my arguments, and I’ll rub your ugly faces in it when I best you, just as you do to me. However, the difference will be that I’ll actually wait until I’ve proved something before doing the victory dance. Something you all could learn.
That’s all very nice, but Bricker doesn’t exactly lean left.
Just out of curiosity, what is this other board, which tells you you’re fine, even though you haven’t won a argument here yet?
His mom.
Here, adaher is on firmer ground.
Right now in GD, Evil Captor has a thread titled: GOP Platform Officially Endorses Banning All Porn.
In short order, it’s been demonstrated that he mistook a 2012 analysis for something current, and that far from banning all porn, the actual item in the old 2012 platform merely says that the GOP seeks to enforce existing laws.
There has been very little scorn or vitriol directed his way.
Bricker and many others here gave good advice, which I intend to follow. Bricker’s advice was especially apt given that he’s apparently observed the same double standard I have.
And I wasn’t told I was fine. Just a completely different tone. Being wrong is wrong, it’s not right. 
But as a famous man once said, “hate the sin, not the sinner.” I just don’t react angrily when I see someone say something stupid, or half true, or even outright misleading. I have a keyboard just like the other guy, I simply post a response with a different view. So I have to wonder what kind of mental illness causes such harsh responses in a forum that presumably does not affect anyone’s life one way or the other.
It’s like this forum has the brains of a Mensa forum, yet the maturity of your average youtube video discussion.
You still don’t get it.
It’s not about posting a different view. It’s about wasting the time of posters trying to engage in fact-based discussions (whether factual or opinions supported by facts) because you can’t be arsed to care about making sure you know what you’re talking about.
An ‘old 2012 platform’ really isn’t “old”, is it? And I remember that when it was said last year. Kinda gives the lie to the whole “Libertarian” claims of many on the Right and reinforces the moral police aspects.
As far as the thread on it? Yeah, I read it, saw that it was old news, and wandered off. Yes, EvilCaptor is off-base on his claims. My apologies for not heaping scorn on someone who posted old news, but if I spent my time doing that, it would be a full time job. Not entirely sure where the ‘show proof’ is on something like that or how it would be even remotely considered something under the banner of “See, Liberals have it so easy on this board!”.
There have been times when I’ve yanked a dumb argument out of my ass, but I assure you at the time it sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Yes, I need to be more careful, this board has high standards. However, it would be nice if people waited until I actually posted something dumb and unsupported before getting nasty. Sometimes my posts aren’t wasting time at all, they just don’t like the implications of the argument, or the cite used to support it, because it challenges their cherished views. And the way this board has been lately, it appears that people’s cherished views aren’t being challenged very much. It’s becoming an echo chamber, at least on politics(the science discussions are still A+).
It’s not the kind of thing you’ll easily notice if you’re liberal.
Liberal A posts an unsupported statement that seems obvious to other board liberals because in their circles, it’s common knowledge.
Conservative B posts a rebuttal that is also unsupported, because in his circles, it’s also common knowledge.
Guess who gets the cries for “Cite!”?
Okay, so Conservative B posts the cite. At this point, there’s a good chance the cite is from somewhere that’s not considered a reliable source by liberals. Obviously, Mr. Conservative was an idiot for not knowing the source was unreliable. Or, the cite is legit, but the conservative has misinterpreted the source, or missed a significant point that liberals think is more important than he did. Then he’s an idiot and furthermore lacks reading comprehension skills.
To go back to our little disagreement, I did actually cite my argument, it was from a reliable source, and you rejected it out of hand, angrily, because you had other figures that you liked better, but which were not the same. You jumped the gun. In the end, you might have had the better argument, but we don’t know because you decided you’d had enough after one exchange of cites on the subject. Ignorance not fought.
Don’t think so, **adaher **still has to do something like this:
**adaher **doing that would disrupt the time continuum it seems. Not much to scorn Evil Captor after that, except that no, there is not much of an scenario there Evil Captor.
True enough – but note also that while EC admits the date error, he has (the last time I looked, anyway) doubled down on the “ban all,” aspect.
It would be great if he copped to that error as well, and then it would be crystal clear to adaher that the key is not failing to make mistakes, but reasonable admission of those mistakes.
I think one of the issues I have is that I get told to admit I’m wrong long before I think I’ve been proven wrong. A simple factual error is easy to demonstrate. Disputing my analysis of something that isn’t so black and white is not the same thing, and that’s what most of our arguments consist of.
I suspect it’s the same one where he made all his completely accurate pre-2012 election predictions. It’s also where his girlfriend from Canada posts.
Again, **adaher **has to still get to first base on that one.
I think you need to address the plank in your own eye. Your arguments tend to be sloppier than most and often don’t even respond to what was actually said.
Don’t tell me, the Pot that advised the Kettle told you to say that.
Listen, I do expect also to get a reply showing that I get it wrong, but you often do not come with cites to counteract what I link to.
And just as I noted in the other thread, you only avoid acknowledging if an specific source of yours is a racist one, and then doubling down on continue to use them. Then you know how dumb most tea partiers are for denying AGW, but then you report that you will continue with the charade that they are great leaders.
That is not only sloppy, it is as consistent as baby poop.