Same Tired Bullshit - Part Two (GD)

Part One (GQ)

Part Two may be found here.
a) What the hell is an OP like that doing in GD?

B) And, Stoid, have you taken a page from the Rashak Mani/Reeder playbook? No intention of returning to your topic for even a friggin’ driveby response, let alone a substantive one? This is bullshit, Stoid.

The OP seems much more like a rant than a debate topic. But it is GD-ish in nature (addressing politics as it does), and looked to be going through its natural thread death on the 24th until someone bumped it today.

By “OP” I meant “OP of the linked thread”, of course.

Is it not possible, sir, to be both a curmudgeon and a gentleman? No, I suppose not, the demands of surliness being what they are.

Is there some unwritten code regarding the participation of the OP? Have you never dashed to the barricades, only to find your point better expressed by another, and simply eschewed posting a pallid imitation? I have, to be sure. Well, I’m not sure exactly, but I must have. Probably.

And kindly refrain from slur by association. Stoid, Our Lady of the Feelthy Peectures, is unique, and I, for one, welcome her participation and her perspective, as much if not more than I welcome the participation of a inveterate grouchy-pants like yourself.

Absent a recognition from on high that you are empowered to set standards, I respectfully request that you bite me.

Beyond not returning to the thread, I’m not sure what the problem is. Seems like a valid debatable topic. Why shouldn’t that be in GD?

Well, yes, actually. As long as I’ve been here, it’s been considered good form.


I agree that the topic is, itself, debatable. It could be fodder for an excellent GD thread.

But i was always under the impression that the OP of a GD thread was under a certain obligation to make at least an attempt at a reasoned, thought-out argument, rather than simply posting a link and saying, in effect, “Hey, whaddayathinkothatyouRepublicans?”

Reasonable enough. But is the misdemeanor worthy even of mention, much less a Pitting. As well, Uncscar the Grouch seems to imply by his associaton that he objects at least as much, if not more so, to the point of the OP than to the rather trivial offense to “good form”. Has he combed the GD forum and dragged other miscreants here to be scourged?

And would it be poor form to posit a debate on a topic about which one is not well informed? In order to encourage one’s own education, as well as anothers, and thereby to, ahem, “fight ignorance”, in compliance with the Prime Directive?

Well, when Unclebeer starts ranting, it’s almost certain that there will be some screed against those who don’t share his political worldview. In cases like this, i’ve learned to tune out the inevitable noise and search the rest of the post in case there’s a nugget of reason tucked away in there somewhere. In this case, it seems to me that there is.

But it is curious how bad form and left politics so often seem to coincide when Unc is the one making the call.

Why, I hadn’t noticed that until you mentioned it! Curious, indeed!

(…batting big, brown, innocent eyes…)

I thought there was the basis of a semi-reasonable debate there, despite the unfocused twittery of the linked article.

And perhaps there is. But isn’t it incumbent on the topic starter to, I dunno, pose the fucking thing? Else, why post the topic at all? If you’re not willing to spend the time to kick off the debate, or frame the your argument, or respond in any fashion, even if only superficially, then you goddamned well oughtta not start the fucking thing. Just like december used to drop hot potatoes into GD by linking a biased story (c’mon, Mother Fucking Jones?) and making an off-hand antagonistic comment, Stoid’s done the same thing here. At least, however, december would have the courtesy to return to the thread and post furhter comments. Stoid can’t even be bothered to do that small favor. As I said, it’s bullshit.

And in this case, I quite deliberately avoided dragging politics of any stripe into my bitch. I’d hoped everyone might follow suit. Apparently not tho’. Kinda makes me believe that the rest o’ ya just might have your own political agenda festering.

As I’ve said here several times in recent weeks, I’d tired unto death of the fucking content-free OP’s. Especially in the forums where content is king. Here in the Pit (or MPSIMS, or IMHO) it doesn’t bother me so much, since I don’t come in here looking for informational content.

Well, i tend to agree with this part, as i suggested above. I think that opening a thread in GD suggests that the person in interested in being involved in a serious and ongoing debate. For that reason, the OP should present an argument or a point of view that is worthy of debate, and the person starting the thread has a certain moral obligation to take an ongoing part in the conversation.

See, despite your assertion that you hoped to keep politics out of the question, you can’t help yourself. What’s wrong with Mother Jones as a source? Sure, it may not be as conservative as your own reading material, but that magazine has, over the years, produced many examples of thoughtful, sober reporting from a left-liberal viewpoint. If you have a problem with the particular assertions made in the article, why not join the debate and offer your own rebuttals?

Sure i have a political agenda. I don’t think i’ve made any secret of my politics on this Board. But, as my agreement with you earlier in this thread demonstrates, i can also put it aside when questions of Board etiquette and protocol come up. But, as elucidator has already suggested, one could be forgiven for thinking that there’s an association between your critiques of board etiquette and the political leanings of those whom you take to task.

Why not just report the thread to the Mods? If they feel that the OP is sufficiently content-free, they can move or close the thread. If they don’t feel that way, then maybe the thread is fine where it is. Either that, or well-known leftist bias of the Boards will prevent the Mods from seeing your point of view. :slight_smile:

Yeah, the Mother Jones comment is definitely gratuitous, but it is not I who dragged politics into this particular instance of this particular argument.

Therein lies a significant, and as yet unspoken, facet of my gripe. I have often spent more than an hour researching and composing a single response to a GD thread. It irks the hell out of me to have spent that great an amount of time on something, only to have someone come back and tell me that either: a) that I’m refuting a point about which they feel the same, or b) tell me that I don’t understand their point of view. Well, fuck, how can I know what your point of view is, if you can’t be bothered to lay it out there? It’s a disingenuous “debating” tactic that permits the perpetrator to claim all counterpoints are strawmen.

Are you assuming I haven’t done such? But beyond that (and I ain’t saying whether I reported it or not) is there a reason I shouldn’t report it and start a Pit thread?

Yes, you did. And I appreciate it.

Sometimes a GD can be started by someone who knows next to nothing about the topic in order to learn from those wiser and more thoughtful than themself. In such cases the OP cannot be expected to control or participate much within the debate that he/she created. Maybe this is a case of such a debate?

By that measure, should someone who doesn’t read a comic books start posting ‘Batman vs Superman - Who Would Win?’ & ‘Does Wonder Woman Have a Libido?’ OPs in GD?

Hmmm. Are we to suppose that **Stoid **knows next to nothing about politics? I guess I can get jiggy with that. :cool:

Further, wouldn’t it seem reasonable to expect that person to return to their fucking thread to post some kind of response, even if it’s just a follow-up question? (Although “follow-up question” is definitely the wrong word in this case, since Stoid failed to ask even a lead-in question.)

Indeed, when they have gained enough understanding to be able to formulate that question, but it may take some time to gain that understanding. Of course a polite OP would at least post some sort of thankyou message, maybe even ask a few points of clarification.

And friend Stoid hasn’t even the cordial respect to come here and offer gratitude for Unc’s sternly avuncular criticism! Boy, some people, huh?