Are we about to squabble over the definition of the word “and?” I sure hope so.
Well, how would you interpret the title of this thread?
I’d interpret it as meaning that you are an idiot.
That’s interesting, because it seems like most people understood it to be referring to smiling bandit.
Perhaps you are the idiot here.
That’s not how I’d bet, but YMMV.
Let’s take a poll and find out.
BTW, you might note that in my first post I said I didn’t find **SB’**s infraction to be all that bad, compared to what usually happens in those types of threads. Yours, however, was about as bad as they get. Thread closingly bad.
Let’s just ask the original poster.
Qagdop, you titled this thread “Posting wild speculation in GQ & citing ‘A friend who is usually right.’”
Was this title actually intended to refer to me and call me an idiot?
What does that have to do with my defense of smiling bandit’s post?
It looks to me like you are just trying to distract from your sketchy statement.
Poor smiling bandit. Even in his own pit thread, some other attention whore comes along and hijacks it.
I’ll vote:
John Mace: Not an Idiot
brazil84: An Idiot (of course I am prejudiced by the Global Warming threads)
brazil84, You seem to be the only one that does not understand the gist of this thread. It looks more like trolling than debate to me.
Jim
Actually, it looks like you have a problem with people who go against the majority.
But what do you interpret this thread’s title to mean?
I hardly ever open GQ as most of the posts in there are variations on smiling bandit’s template, including my own while I was active there. Now, on the fairly rare occasions when I post there, I will research my own supposed “knowledge” before I post.
When I started on these boards, I spent almost all my time in GQ, because I thought I was a real smart guy and “knew” lots of facts. Over time I realized how little I really know, and as a consequence I spend most of my time in MPSIMS and IMHO, where the focus is on bullshit, nonsense, and uninformed opinion.
That is my forte. I know it, I’m ok with it.
Smiling bandit, this, from today, is as worthless a piece of crap post as I’ve ever seen there. You don’t even bother to cite your invisible friend. Thanks to John Mace for pointing it out. You don’t belong in that forum – nothing wrong with that, neither do I. You just don’t understand it yet.
Well, I for one took it to mean that *Posting wild speculation in GQ & citing “A friend who is usually right” * is BAD. I agree.
Is this too complex a concept?
Nope. I agree with you about what the title meant. I disagree about whether it’s bad. The latter issue is a matter of opinion.
So posting wild speculation in GQ and citing “a friend who is usually right” is OK?
No wonder GQ sucks so much. This issue should not be a matter of opinion. Maybe we need to flesh out the posting rules or the forum description to clarify things for the extra dull.
Yes, I don’t have a problem with it, as long as it’s not advice that might get somebody into trouble. I would of course respect any rule on the issue.
Well of course you would say that…else you would be banned from GQ.
Man when you get your teeth in a thread you don’t let it go do you?
Would you kindly remove your teeth from my ass? Thank you. 
Okay, but I need to know, did you vanity search on ‘Liberal’ or ‘Drama-Queen’? 
Jim (Yeah, it was a cheap shot, I know)
And since all opinions are equal, that’s ok?
Sorry if this make me an elitist, but some opinions are steaming loads of crap.
Facts are what belong in GQ.
If you’ve got unsupported opinions, go spend time in IMHO.
Not necessarily.
If that’s the rule, I would follow it.
Personally, I enjoy reading the discussions that develop in GQ when people speculate about the answer to a question.