Putting a Mercedes hood ornament on a Yugo does not a Mercedes make.
I appreciate that, and hope folks will give you the space to do so.
Daniel
Your goal should be to learn to write well. A change in the way you post will naturally follow.
I believe that in order to write well one must be able to think well; and, furthermore, that the discipline of learning to write will make one a better thinker. Now, it is entirely possible that you have a brilliant mind and are hampered in your communication by some kind of wiring snafu in your brain. It would not be the default hypothesis, however.
You have said over and over that you have a mindless job that makes no demands upon your time. You would be very well served by enrolling in a basic writing class in a community college, and using your free time to **do the work ** required to become an effective writer. And it is work. If you see someone on these boards whose style is clear and open, who communicates well and makes it seem easy, then I guarantee that person has spent long, hard hours practicing the craft in one way or another.
Other posters have mentioned respect. I have mentioned respect. Respect yourself and make yourself a better thinker. But above all, respect the people here who have taken the time to try and help you, and who deserve better than your half-witted, dashed off ramblings. Read what Lefty said, and what Rubystreak said; and yes, what Bricker said. I suspect I would disagree with him more often than not, but he keeps himself above the fray and puts his efforts into persuasion and reason. You could learn a lot fron him.
A worthy opponent is a valuable asset, and hard to find. Sycophantic yes-men are a dime a dozen, and therefore valueless.
At the time this message is posted:
Maus Magill - 1220
Scott Plaid - 3477
Finn, you suck at math. 
:smack:
D’oh!
I thought by post count Maus meant, like, posts per day. Then again I’m going on about two hours sleep. I will properly flagelate myself later
Nope, no the only one. His posts often raise a fever in me too.
Take pictures, OK? I want to put them in the folder with the ones of you going down.
Shit, I’m spending way too much time in the Pit.
Not trying too hard, though, are you?
Like here, even after several gay and gay-friendly dopers point out to you that a wedding ring isn’t necessarily a “hetero flag”, you post a dismissive fuckhead comment instead of just admitting you might have been wrong.
Can somebody tell me what’s going on? I’ve gotten 37 e-mails in the past 18 hours – in fact, 12 of those e-mails came from mods. All of them are telling me that there’s a movement afoot to have me post nothing but questions on the boards for, like, a year. None of my pithy, witty, factual answers; none of my amusing yet poignant stories; none of my incredibly apropos throwaway lines that enlighten (and in some cases, define) a thread.
What’s the deal? Can’t you people see how this board would DIE if I stopped posting all that stuff?
Well, that’s what you get for not starting a thread in ATMB letting them know you won’t be able to access email for 18 hours.
Scott,
Indeed I am a teacher. British Telecommunications Computer Training School, teaching graduates computer programming. Seven years running. First ever full-time chess teacher in a UK School, organising and running all chess activities, including local and national press and TV publicity. Fifteen years running. National newspaper chess columnist.
Rubystreak already covered most of what I wanted to say on your use of English, but here’s a useful way to judge if you are ‘winning’ a debate:
- see what other posters say about you
P.S. Thanks, Contrapuntal!
And politically?
Close enough on the religious side. I consider myself a religious humanist, actually, and agnostic. I only wondered because it seems you might have assumed, on the basis of my occasional disagreements with you, that I must be your opposite. That is to say, I’ve gotten the impression that you classify me among the religious and among the right-wing.
I’ve lurked on these boards for a year or so, thanks to Threadspotting. I’ve read several long pittings and meltdowns. I’ve seen something happen in some of those threads that is also happening in this one, and it impresses me. Here we have Scott, who has pissed off nearly everyone, and whose writing ranges from simply juvenile to incoherent. While he’s being righteously pitted, many of you are giving him what I view as kind advice concerning his writing, posting frequency and other things. Pretty nice for a pitting. Bravo.
I think it is mostly due to the quality of the board. However, had I not stated my intent to change my posting style in my first post in this thread, I think the tone would have been different.
Don’t give yourself too much credit. I think if you go back to some of your earlier threads, you’ll find folks giving you helpful advice long before your turning-over-a-new-leaf declaration. You simply failed to recognize it as such.
I suspect a lot of people noted your, um, “enthusiasm” for posting in your early days, assumed you were younger than the average poster, and decided to help you along in the hope of ferreting out some meaning from your meandering posts.
In essence, the advice is always the same: slow down; read; write; edit.
No, I recognized it. Due to the advice, I took a two week break from posting (very much) in GD, a few weeks ago.
If I had known Scott needed his subscription paid, I’d have done it.
And you may draw from that whatever inference you please… 
Well, the inference I draw is that you see me as someone easily defeated.
However, Should we support the mutant registration act? puts the lie to that.
Uh…no it doesn’t. On the contrary, it supports exactly what he’s said. Once again, you’re a very poor judge of who’s won a debate, especially when you’re a party to the debate.
As I read it, the closest you came to winning anything was in slipping a Godwin reference past Bricker in a juvenile and unhelpful fashion. That does not constitute a great debate victory.
Daniel
I disagree. Last time I looked, he was still proposing a list. However, he has not shown my case to be false. I claimed earlier in the thread, that the existence of such a list would enable law makers to later prove that the government recognizes mutants are dangerous. He has posted no refutation of this.