Let me see if I can lower my IQ enough to respond to this:
Whatever, dude… :wally
Thankfully, October 1 is only twelve days away.
I actually do that several times a day. On the other hand, I do not insist that others adhere only to my reading and posting styles. When I encounter a thread that has deteriorated into partisan rhetoric and personal abuse, I simply stop going back to read it, thus saving myself the time to open frivolous and non-productive threads.
It is even possible to maintain the same conduct in a thread in which one is participating: when the partisan one-liners and drive-by attacks are launched, I tend to simply ignore them and concentrate on those posts and posters who are participating in good faith. It is not that difficult. Any very long thread will generally turn out to have at least three separate themes running through it; simply ignore the silliness and pay attention to the meat (or to the pasta if you are vegan).
I fully agree with your point of complaint, by the way, Hambil. It’s even more tricky to witness this as a foreign interloper. Even the people I agree with are starting to bug me. November can’t come soon enough, when the board will no doubt get back to regular sniping and backbiting, rather than the party political version.
I’ll take Door Number 3, please.
The one that leads to the vacant lot.
Arrrrr! Keelhaul the mains’l, ye gobsmacking futtocks! Arrrrr!
Ohh noooo!! Puh…Puh…PuhLLLLEEEASEEE Staaaayyyy! Puhleeezzzzeee! <Wraps desperate arms around Hambil’s ankles.>
That’s not even original within this thread. :smack:
Hambil, You sound like a pretty cool person, and I hope you stick around. Don’t judge all of us by those rabid fucktards over in Great Debates. Many of us have hardly any opinions and are hesitant to express the ones we do have.
Well, if you can’t stand the heat, get the fuck off the message board, is my motto.
Hi, Hambil. Welcome for at least a while!
I wasn’t sure what you meant by “rhetoric posts.” (And we may have differing opinions about who the nut jobs are!)
But I have noticed that personal attacks have been on the increase enough to wonder if partisan politics is affecting the judgment of one or more of the mods of GD. (I am not making an accusation; it’s just something that I’ve thought about.)
At any rate, the topic you introduced is appropriate here. Do you mind explaining what you mean by “rhetoric posts”? Maybe you can give examples from both sides of the political spectrum to help make your point.
Yo ho ho an’ a bottle o’ rum!
Sure. I don’t know that there is a absolute criteria for a rhetoric post (it might be interesting to try and build one), and I’m sure opinions may vary, but, here goes my attempt:
A political post not based on reason, and not backed up by information. A post that focuses on emotional impact, rather than content.
An example from both sides (your mileage may vary):
Bush haters harrass 3-year old girl!
Is Osama already captured?
These are threads, but the problem appears a lot in single or multiple posts within otherwise rational threads too.
I presume our new friend means “rhetorical” or (guessing here) “partisan” posts, since “rhetoric” is a noun, not an adjective.
Thanks for the correction. However, it is acceptable (to other than english teachers) to name something for what it is. For example, I might call a barking dog, a ‘bark dog’. i.e. I hate those like bark dogs.
Not to tell people how to behave, but sheesh people!
The guy comes in with a flame, some words are exchanged, he admits he was a bit hasty, apologies are made, and then folks come in and respond to the OP as if the rest of the thread hadn’t happened already. Cut a guy some slack!
“Rhetoric thread” rang a little odd to my ear at first too, but Hambil is right on this. It is called a compound noun and is perfectly valid – even to English teachers. Examples abound – church bells, fruit tree, police dog, even (gasp) BBQ Pit.
It may help you if you mentally pronounce it with the emphasis on the first word (rhetoric), which is how compound nouns are generally pronounced. Adjective-noun pairs, on the other hand, usually have the accent on the second word.
I agree – the bark dogs are worse that the bite dogs.
“… worse than the bite dogs.”! :smack:
Arrrrgh, the scurvy bilge rat in charge of me word swabbing will be walkin’ the plank tonight!
The second example – the one about the possibility of bin Laden’s captivity should probably have been in In My Humble Opinion instead of in GD. I don’t think that it is an unreasonable question – just speculative. I’m sure there are others here who would find the question ridiculous. It would be difficult for either side to cite sources. So I’m in agreement with you to an extent. But, as you know, not everyone who posts in the wrong forum is a nutcase. 
In the first example, I can see why the person posting the thread was indignant. His response was emotional, yes. And to him that was a very appropriate response to what he saw as the abuse of Bush supporters – especially a little child – at a Kerry rally at an airport. He was further annoyed by what he thought was a lack of media coverage.
I don’t think that the appropriateness of tearing up signs is debatable. The fact that he found out about it through the media undercuts his own argument about a lack of media coverage, but at least the question of the media’s liberal bias is debatable. He just goes about making his point in a sort of ranting way – which probably belonged in The Pit instead of GD.
With that said, I don’t find appeals to the emotions inappropriate in debate as long as what is said can be backed up with facts. What is your thinking on that?
Has your access picked up speed yet? (They’ve been in the process of changing servers and things got unusually pokey for a while.)
Thanks for answering my questions. I hope you hang around and contribute. You may not be able to change or control what others post, but there are so many choices here it hardly matters. Just take what’s good and leave the rest.
What I’m talking about, is intent. Statements like “Kerry is a weak!” or “Bush is Hitler!” are made with the intent of having an emotional, not logical, impact. They shut down, rather than foster, debate.
The board is actually useable today. Cross my fingers that it will continue to be so 
Thanks. And thanks to everyone who was encouraging in this thread despite my initial rant. I can’t promise I won’t go ‘crazy’ again in the future, but, hopefully not often. But then, I guess that’s what the pit is for
Hmm. Well there are those around here who will tell you that you can say whatever you want and it can mean whatever you want it to, but I’m going to have to ask for just one example of anyone other than you referring to a barking dog as a “bark dog.”
They also expose the debater to be a complete fool who no longer needs to be interacted with.
You should stick around, but I’d recommend you toughen up your skin a little.