Sorry, I think there’s a blog blasting a Republican somewhere that you haven’t linked to the rest of the message board yet–so run along, you have work to do.
So what you’re saying is, no poster who is known by you to be an Obama supporter (or Clinton supporter?) will be allowed by you to start a thread about McCain without you hijacking it? That seems really ridiculous. I also think it’s against the rules of this message board, since Shayna’s thread was closed due to your hijacking.
Have you considered that the posters in that thread (there were lots, not just Shayna) actually wanted to talk about John McCain? Not Barack Obama? Why didn’t you just Pit Shayna in the first place and not ruin the first thread for everyone else? Or Pit Obama, or Rev. Wright. But let other people discuss John McCain’s idiotic statements in a thread devoted to that topic if they want to.
No, it wasn’t. I feel like I’ve walked into The Argument Clinic. I’m picturing you as John Cleese right now. No, it wasn’t about Obama. It seriously, really, totally, absolutely wasn’t. That was all in your head.
Anyone who criticizes a candidate in a Pit thread probably likes another candidate better and supports the other candidate. Let me see if I can state this clearly for you: that doesn’t give you the right to hijack the thread all to hell. I wasn’t really aware that Shayna was a rabid Obama supporter. I hadn’t been reading or posting in the Pit for a while and I have a hard time keeping track of who is who anyway unless it’s a poster I have had some sort of personal interaction with. Your appearance and behavior in that thread was just a big WTF to me.
There were other people in that thread who wanted to talk about McCain. It’s assholish of you to derail it because you have a problem with the OP of the thread. I hope you don’t plan to do this with every anti-McCain thread, because I guarantee you that most of them will be started by pro-Obama and pro-Hillary people. Doesn’t negate their right to criticize McCain… in fact, who the hell else is going to do it? You and Shodan?
Yes, I think they would. I think you’re missing the point. The point isn’t that Shayna needs to be spanked by you for posting anti-McCain threads as an Obama supporter. The point is, you were a jerk for hijacking the thread instead of opening your own on the topic you wanted to discuss. The thread in question was a legitimate thread until you screwed it up with your grudge against Shayna, which no one else cares about anyway. Do you understand? This isn’t really about your politics or Shayna’s, because I don’t give a damn about either. It’s about being able to discuss a topic without some other person with an axe to grind derailing it.
Martin, there are conservatives who add something to this board. You are not one of them. I look forward to your departure, as you are clearly spiraling further into madness.
Maybe not, but the two of you are not the only people on this message board. You do owe the rest of the board the common courtesy not to ruin threads simply because you disagree with the OP.
I’m not reading the whole goddamn thread, but I couldn’t let this go:
For not worshiping the guy, you sure throw a shit fit if someone calls him stupid.
This isn’t helping your cause in any way.
He’s still here, he’s just not all there!
Oh, wait :smack: , I mean how dare you BrainGlutton, you degenerate, mentally ill, unwashed mass of extreme left SDMB cancer. Martin Hyde is one of, if not the, greatest assets (and the most credible poster) this board has!
CMC* +fnord!
*Proud, degenerate, mentally ill, unwashed mass of extreme left SDMB cancer.
You’re addressing this to the guy who, despite a mod or two, plus a bunch of folks on his side saying ‘yea, dude, you hijacked that thread and it wasn’t cool’ or something to that effect, still claims he did nothing wrong.
I know. This was actually responding to the earlier attempts to steer everyone away from using his admitted past uncertainty against him. I agreed with those attempts. Unfortunately, the quote of his I used makes it much harder.
Did you bother to listen to any more of Wright’s sermons which contained the objectionable sound bites? Have you done any research on the Trinity church or black liberation theology? Or, are you basing your conclusions on those few clips that ran over and over again?
Obama clearly supports the man but has just as clearly denounced the specific comments. It’s just a ludicrous double standard when you consider the republican party’s relationship with the religious right and seeking their favor and support after they have made statements just as hateful as anything Wright said. McCain specifically denounced Jerry Falwell only to recant later when he needed the support for votes. Regardless of how you spin it or what justifications you grasp at there’s no way to to honestly condemn Wright and then Obama by association without condemning the republicans and McCain.
This is so transparent and hypocritical. You dropped into a thread specifically about Obama, Wright and racism to post this
telling readers that you weren’t afraid of open debate. Then when the pit thread was closed because of your hijack you were challenged to return to that thread and debate. You reasons for declining are pretty dam lame. You don’t have to repost all your arguments but can merely provide links to the more pertinent ones. If that’s all it takes for you to refrain from defending your arguments it’s pretty feeble. Calling someone else intellectually dishonest when pulling a stunt like that only makes you look bad.
You don’ t have to ignore it, as long as you don’t mind the reflexive pile-ins.
There’s a reason why some liberals are called “knee-jerkers”. They really don’t think; they just re-post whatever they read in the latest blog from Kos or whatever.
Like I said, those folks can be dismissed, or else baited into logical incoherence and then enjoy the howls. But the reasonable members of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy owe it to the rest of the board not to ignore all the left-wing foolishness. We need reasonable thinkers to forestall the descent into liberal madness. Sometimes these loonies get carried away, and we get a half-dozen threads about how Bush is going to cancel the elections or that Laura is going to divorce George because he is drinking again (“I believe it! It was in the National Enquirer, right next to Bigfoot’s miracle cure for arthritis!”).
Don’t let the trolls get you down.
Regards,
Shodan
I think everyone is missing the obvious middle ground here. I propose the Martin Hyde Rule for Political Debate:
To debate one candidate, one must start a thread about another. To avoid confusion, we should set some ground rules and pairings. To debate something said by Barack Obama, one must start a thread about John McCain (prefixed “McCain is stupid:”). Conversely, to debate McCain, one must start a thread about Obama (“Obama is Racist:”). Hillary is left out, so we’ll pair her with Nader (“Hillary is a Liar:” and “Nader is a Communist:” to debate Nader or Hillary respectively). Working in secret collusion with a closet supporter in order to ensure that the specific topic you want to debate is raised will be allowed, but may cost you points in the Artistic Merit category. It’s much better to wait whilst the proponents for your named candidate throw charges willy-nilly until one hits the mark. At this point, the ball is in play and the game may begin. Actually debating the person named in the thread title will result in a 15 yard penalty for unsportmanlike conduct. A topic which “crosses over” (ie, names McCain, but manages to talk about both Hillary and Obama) will result in an extra base being awarded, but if you catch all three other candidates, a golden goal kick will be given, which, if made, wins the thread.
Sure it’ll confuse the shit out of everybody, but it’s consistent, and besides, we just love being all cliquey and engaging in insider jokes that nobody else gets, so touchdown!
Just my humble 2 pesos.
ABSOLUTELY NOT.
I don’t think McCain is stupid. I think he is lying. He knows better. He just wants to president so bad. We have not had enough lying in the last 8 years ,so lets vote for more.
I like that. The next time he starts a thread on any subject, everybody should post to it as if he meant the opposite.
I’ve got to ask you, do you think it’s trolling to deliberately hijack a thread because you have beef with the OP, then refuse to discuss the topic in the appropriate venue?
Maybe it’s not trolling. Maybe it’s just being an asshole. That particular quality is completely non-partisan. I wish you’d stop defending it, because that’s what happened here. It wasn’t about Obama or McCain, or politics at all. That’s a red herring. It was a personal grudge that led to a violation of board rules. I’m sure you wouldn’t condone it if one of your ideological opponents did it to one of your threads.
In the Pit? No.
Although one must admit, the thread that was solely about Obama got all the way to the second page before McCain got brought in as a tu quoque (along with Sean Hannity, Pat Buchanan, etc.)
Regards,
Shodan
But you’ve not defended him against the charges of assholery or violating board rules. Can I take your silence for agreement?
Yeah, so two wrongs make a right.
I don’t understand this. How is the forum relevant? If the behavior is trollery in GD, then it’s trollery here.
Well, then I suppose you could express it by saying that certain forms of trolling are OK in the Pit. (Some forms of trolling are OK in GD, for that matter. It is a time-honored tradition for some people to ask for cites on things that are perfectly obvious, in an effort to derail a discussion that is trending against them).
But insults and so forth are OK in the Pit. And instances of a Pitting backfiring on the Pitter are too numerous to require a cite. So thread hijacks, in some sense, although not quite SOP, are tolerated in the Pit.
You can take it any way you like. The charge of assholery is too tainted to be much of service, since most of those making the accusation are only doing so because Martin Hyde is a conservative (and a highly intelligent and articulate one). Besides, the assholery of bringing up someone’s personal life to make attacks because you don’t like his politics is far more assholish than a hijack. And, with some honorable exceptions, I don’t see much condemnation of it.
And I am not the one who decides what is and what isn’t a violation of the rules. The mods do that, and, as I have seen no warnings issued, I am assuming no rules violations have occurred. I am not aware of any rule specifically outlawing hijacks per se. No doubt if it were persistent it would lead to warnings and banning, but hijacks are too common for me to believe that such a rule is either widely or consistently applied. Although I am open to correction.
No, I didn’t say that. I am merely pointing out that the outrage over Martin Hyde hijacking an anti-McCain thread does not seem to match the outrage over an attempt to hijack an anti-Obama thread. The reasons for that can be left as an exercise to the reader.
Regards,
Shodan