Manhattan: wake up call or whiny bitch?

[Excalibre]

@Miller

I don’t agree that you lose anything by entering into debates with the likes of scott_plaid. I find those conversations interesting to watch in much the same way it is interesting to watch the Washington Generals play the Harlem Globetrotters. You know from the start who’s going to win, the fun part is the skill with which they do so.

On the other hand, I don’t think you need to feel compelled to argue with them. Anyone dumb enough to not see their bullshit for what it is, isn’t smart enough to follow your counter-arguments. Use people like that as a Socratic-style sounding board to get your own points across, but don’t worry that more than a very small minority is going to take them seriously if their posts go unanswered. Plus, if you don’t say anything, someone else will be along shortly to take up the slack. I suspect a lot of people don’t post to those sorts of arguments because one poster has already adequatly covered everything that needs to be said.

The question is, if Scott Plaid read this post, do you think he’d understand just how devastatingly you’ve ripped him apart?

[treis]

@Miller

I don’t agree that you lose anything by entering into debates with the likes of scott_plaid. I find those conversations interesting to watch in much the same way it is interesting to watch the Washington Generals play the Harlem Globetrotters. You know from the start who’s going to win, the fun part is the skill with which they do so.

I don’t like it when people engage the idiots. To use your analogy its like the Globetrotters playing the Generals while the NBA all-star team is just shooting around. I would rather see two eloquent, intelligent and knowledgeable Dopers debate than watch one eloquent, intelligent and knowledgeable smack around a moron.

[Bryan_Ekers]

The board’s biased? Wow. Since I’m so comfortable that must mean I’m the middle ground! Woo-hoo!
And we’ll have none of this “we must come together and make this board a gentler happier place and sing kumbaya” bullshit, if you please. The worst board in the world isn’t the one with the most arguing and hurt feelings, it’s the one that’s so fucking boring because everybody agrees! The very thought makes me want to vomit in terror.

[Una_Persson]

@dropzone

LOL!* The surplus of conservative posters there is one reason I don’t hang out at a board that belongs to, well, I won’t say except that it rhymes with the 21st letter of the alphabet. Since I like all the people there I don’t want to lose respect for them by listening to heartfelt beliefs which I would normally associate with, well, morons.

Am I being whooshed? I don’t understand what you’re talking about.

[Random]

@Bricker

I’d welcome more voices on this.

Is it better to respond to an incoherent poster, and pick apart his incoherence, or just let it slide, trusting that the audience isn’t lost?

Very valid criticism. I never returned to the thread, and I should have. I do appreciate when it happens, and maybe I should work on saying that more.

I’m on record, recently, as saying that the amount of time you are able to devote to serious SDMB threads impresses and amazes me. You are under no obligation to reply to every post that seeks your input, whether explicitly or implicitly.

I appreciate the issue you raise, though. In the rare policy threads that I get involved in, I tend to ignore the idiots and respond only to the thoughtful posters. On the other hand, in GQ-type threads, I feel compelled to respond when I see misinformation, especially when it relates to a topic of which I have particular knowledge. Occasionally, that means I’m responding to an idiot. Better that, though, than have someone believe the misinformation.

But back to the policy threads. Maybe the answer is some sort of board shorthand that means “In my opinion, your reply is nonsense and not deserving of a reply. If anyone sensible disagrees, let me know, and I may change my mind.”

That way, if Bricker thinks that rjung is talking nonsense, he says “N-IASDLMK”, and moves on. If ScottPlaid then agrees with rjung, Bricker need not do anything. But if Hamlet then replies, saying “Rick, I know that rjung usually doesn’t make much sense, but I kinda see his point here”, then Bricker might resconsider, realize that the rjung post maybe wasn’t so readily seen as idiotic, and reply.

I know, probably unworkable and (outside of the Pit) in violation of board rules. But I wish that such an option existed.

[John_Mace]

@Random

I know, probably unworkable and (outside of the Pit) in violation of board rules. But I wish that such an option existed.

It’s not against the rules at all. As long as you don’t call the poster an idiot, or somehting else, there is nothing wrong with saying “that post is nonsense” or even “that post is idiotic”.

[Reeder]

@John Mace

It’s not against the rules at all. As long as you don’t call the poster an idiot, or somehting else, there is nothing wrong with saying “that post is nonsense” or even “that post is idiotic”.

The post can be insulted to a degree…but the poster can’t be insulted period.

[Mangetout]

@continuity eror

Only for Americans. If you take world politics into consideration this board is way right of center. But then, no American takes world politics into consideration.

I was going to say this; from where I’m standing (which is not {i]all that far to the left of centre*, locally) there does actually seem to be a right-wing bias here. Funny really. I think we also tend to think there happens to be too much of [whatever it is we happen to disagree with].

[Contrapuntal]

As to the OP, I gotta say “not a whiny bitch” if for no other reason than as far as we know he only stated his reasons to Ed. It’s not like he was trying to make a big deal out of it.

[beagledave]

@ElvisL1ves

The next time you point out anything of the sort would be the first time.

“So many people”? Who? Cite? Or another invented “fact” of the type this board is devoted to fighting?
.

So…by my count we have

Hamlet
Miller
wring
Excalibre
Left Hand of Dorkness

all on board of the “We’re might generally agree with his political positions, but find ElvisL1ves to be an annoying dipshit”

And that’s just in THIS thread (and doesn’t include people who have expressed general annoyance at those kinds of behaviors that you exhibit, but only ones who mentioned a specific annoyance with you).

Bricker suggested that you have never admitted to being wrong on the boards. Will you prove him right or wrong here?

[eleanorigby]

I haven’t been here long enough to sort out the conservatives all that well yet.

But I think it was manhattan who jumped all over me (on like my 10th post) for insulting conservatives. I can’t even remember the topic in question, but I hadn’t insulted anyone! I pointed that out to him and the reply was, “yeah, but alot of folks do, make sure you don’t” or words to that effect.

It did not endear him to me. Pre-emptive strikes, indeed.

I don’t understand why people leave like they do. Certainly it is a personal decision and everyone has their reasons, but politics? I liked gobear --heck, even roland was interesting.

I like the feisty threads. I can’t talk about this stuff in RL. My side of the family all agrees with me, and my husband’s side would shoot me out of hand if my views were better known–they have no sense of humor and are righteous as hell. <sigh>

So, leave if you must, I suppose. Posting eats up alot of time and can be addictive, I’ve found. Maybe everyone gets to the point where a break is needed.

As to the liberal “bias” present. I would say that there is a larger number of liberals/progressives/Dems here. I would not say that there is a bias, per se. I think there may well be a perception of bias, due to the smaller number of conservatives and the number of drive bys and pile ons.

One gripe I do have re: the political threads is the picayune sniping of petty points. It is distracting as hell and pointless. Pointing out that someone is incorrect in a minor point does not disprove their premise-in part or as a whole. Both sides do this and sometimes it really derails a thread. Can’t think of a specific example, but I think we all know what I mean.

Cons-I hope you stick around. I need someone to shed light on what appears to me to be inexplicable actions. I doubt highly that you will ever convert me, but maybe we’ll both learn something.

[roger_thornhill]

Nice post. Two snips from Christopher Lasch’s book The Revolt of the Elites seem appropriate.

On the legacy of Plato:

@Lasch RoE p. 10

Democracy requires a vigorous exchange of ideas and opinions. Ideas, like property, need to be distributed as widely as possible.

On the benefits and risks of critical discussion:

@Lasch RoE pp. 170-1

The attempt to bring others around to our own point of view carries the risk, of course, that we may adopt their point of view instead. We have to enter imaginatively into our opponents’ arguments, if only for the purpose of refuting them, and we may end up being persuaded by those we sought to persuade. Argument is risky and unpredictable, therefore educational. Most of us tend to think of it … as a clash of rival dogmas, a shouting match in which neither side gives any ground. But arguments are won by changing opponents’ minds – something that can happen only if we give opposing arguments a respectful hearing and still persuade their advocates that there is something wrong with those arguments. In the course of this activity we may well decide that there is something wrong with our own.

[Sam_Stone]

I’ve cut my posting down in Great Debates by about 90%. Days go by when I drop in there, see an interesting thread, then see who’s participating in it and go, “Why bother? Life’s too short.” - and move along.

I’ve come to expect that political debates are generally a waste of time. No minds are changed. But the debate itself can be fun amd help clarify your own thinking and occasionally challenge your beliefs and cause you to grow as a person. But as soon as it becomes an exercise in who can land the cleverest insult without getting nailed by a mod, or even just a shouting match, it’s not just a waste of time but counterproductive.

So I hang out more in Cafe Society, IMHO, and the other boards, and what do you know, I get along famously with some of the people who are impossible to talk to in GD.

Politics makes people nuts. If you become really nuts, you can be a politician.

Maybe it will change in a few years after Bush is gone and the war stops being in the news every day. But my guess is that it won’t get that much better until a Democrat is elected and the wacky left calms the hell down.

Then the wacky right will probably start screaming… Maybe I’ll just go talk about TV and movies some more.

[minty_green]

Thank you for your considerable contributions, manny.

[Muffin]

When Bricker or Sam Stone posts, I listen very carefully, despite my being on the opposite side of the political spectrum. If either were to leave, I would not enjoy the boards as much as I do. With Manhattan, however, often the signal to noise was way to high for there to be meaningful communication, and often the level of rage he put forth ruined otherwise interesting threads. Putting politics aside, I found Manhattan getting more and more viscous in his posts.

So where did it lead him? Being frustrated by being a conservative on a liberal board, or being frustrated from conflict resulting from his viscous aggression, or combination in which the one fed upon the other? If leaving the boards helps him better deal with his over-the-top aggression, then good for it. As far as the health of the boards goes, one less bully, of any political bent, is a good thing.

[Marley23]

That there are more liberals than conservatives on this board is not news, nor is it unsurprising given the demographics. What manhattan wrote in leaving is something he and a number of others have been saying - in some cases incessantly - for quite some time. So this can’t be a wakeup call, it’s not even a new complaint. Conservatives are right that they’re a minority here, but those who try and make it into a persecution thing are just beginning for sympathy in my opinion.

[rowrrbazzle]

@Hamlet

But, considering everything, I come down to being disappointed in him for leaving. I understand what I think he feels, but I just can’t quite buy it. Not just because I think the board needs more balance, or because he was amusing, but because I think he’s giving up. And I never thought he was a quitter.

I agree with Liberal: Manny’s no quitter. He wrote columns and was a mod. For that alone, to even consider thinking of him as quitter is total bullshit. I am disappointed about the fact that he has left. I am in no position to judge him for good or ill. But for what little my opinion is worth, I think he put up a heroic fight, I am not disappointed in him, and I salute him.

The cold, hard reality is that sometimes you’re outnumbered or just tired and the battle’s lost anyway, and if you don’t withdraw, you’re dead. One or more lost battles doesn’t mean the war is lost.

[DMark]

Actually, I heard Manhattan is simply changing his name to Crawfordso the geographical location fits better with his philosophy.

I see no need to apologize for bashing Bush at every given opportunity, lest people think all Americans are ignorant, hypocritical bible-thumping, warmongers. The pubbies won by constant sabre rattling, so as long as I am trapped in this mess, I will be just as loud as they were/are. The conservatives on this board would love nothing more than to have us all just admit defeat and shut up. Ain’t gonna happen. 49% of voters, and a good percentage more on this board are still pissed off and feel an obligation to rattle those sabres until November, 2008.

Still, I am sorry to see him go as I like to see how the other side rationalizes the crap that is happening, and **Manhattan]/b] was a good little soldier for their team.

[Measure_for_Measure]

Let me take this moment to thank Manhattan for his services to the board.

The guy single-handedly moderated GQ for I-don’t-know-how-many-years. And did a damn fine job of it too, IMO, notwithstanding the enormous numbers of whiny pit threads he spawned during those years.

Most of the complaints about Manny’s moddom were a crock, IM-not-so-HO, BTW. Of the ones that were not, I can’t remember them.

Best wishes Manhattan.

[Marley23]

@rowrrbazzle

The cold, hard reality is that sometimes you’re outnumbered or just tired and the battle’s lost anyway, and if you don’t withdraw, you’re dead. One or more lost battles doesn’t mean the war is lost.

Who went and decided this was a battle? It’s a message board; I don’t see a battle that manhattan was hopelessly outnumbered in unless for him, liberalism = ignorance. I take time out and moderate my participation in GD too, for different reasons. But I’ve never seen any of this as a battle or a war.