Never posting.
Alrighty. On a message board with multiple foras with a myriad topics presented, the interests of a person who actually posts – i.e., a non-lurker – can reasonably be inferred from the topics to which he or she posts. You quite literally NEVER post to any other topic, EVER. Yet you do post, single-mindedly, to this one topic. Thus it is established that this is the only topic that interests you, because if you were interested in any other topic, you would post about it SOMETIME. Not a lot, maybe but, y’know, more frequently than once every four years.
Not much invested in convincing the fictional anonymous onlooker, no.
Believe me, I don’t.
Allow me to break this down for you, using small words. What I said was: “What are you current thoughts on any subject other than (a) religion, or (b) stalking those who disagree with you on religion? Oh, that’s right: You don’t have any.” Now, stay with me here: This wasn’t actually an inquiry as to your other interests. It was a rhetorical device to underscore the fact that you don’t actually HAVE any other interests. You can tell this by the sarcastic ending: “Oh, that’s right: You don’t have any.” IOW, since it blew by you, I wasn’t really asking what your interests were. At no time did I actually care. There was another reason to ask other than actually caring. If “rhetorical device” gives you any trouble, run it through your handy Wiki-ometer.
I figured as much, but I thought it would be worth asking.
I came to a similar crossroads myself awhile back. It dawned on me that I was never going to agree with most other dopers about religion and if I kept arguing about it so passionately I would eventually wear out my welcome here. I decided that all the other aspects of the boards outweigh the religious ones, and I would severely limit my participation in religious threads.
:dubious: Do you realize that this very thread has over one hundred times as many views as it does participants?
Gee, is THAT what those numbers mean? How does that make it incumbent upon me to explain myself for the edification of silent onlookers who haven’t even indicated they give a shit? And on what basis do we attribute to those silent onlookers particular motivations or “wonderings,” as bachad took it upon himself to do? For all we know, each of those “views” was another person opening the thread, going “Jesus, another trainwreck!” and hastily closing it again. :dubious: indeed.
I dunno, Jodi. There’s plenty of topics I enjoy reading about here that I’d rather eat glass than post in, ever ever ever. For badchad maybe that number is just a lot higher than most of us. I don’t think that unto itself should be taken against a poster, especially when there are plenty of other, more concrete strikes against them.
I think it’s just that he figures some threads are easier to hijack than others.
The evidence we have indicates he’s nothing more than a one-trick pony, and a particularly tiresome and offensive one at that. We can theorize that he secretly loves the American Idol threads but is just too darn shy to post in them, but that would not be supported by either his posting history or his posting style. I consider his one-trick-pony-ism to be a definite strike against him. I consider his protestations that he actually cares about other topics to be laughable. But I never said it was the only strike against him, or even the most damning one.
By my math, it is a bit over 31 1/2 times, (303 vs 9,558). 
Besides, that is actually 1 spectator and 30 participants who rush to see the most recent comment whenever the “last Posted by” changes. 
I tend to disagree with Jodi as to whether there is some large non-participating audience. I suspect that it varies quite a bit from thread to thread. An intense discussion among Bricker, wring and Jodi, herself, regarding rules of evidence will probably attract a large audience of people who desire knowledge but may be afraid to venture an opinion. On the other hand, she is probably right that the latest insult fest between bushhater and BushWorshipper consisting of page after page of “did too”/“did not” wrapped in thinly vieled (in GD) or blatant (in the Pit) insults gets sufficiently tedous that by page six only they and the Mods are reading them.
My unscientific notion is that about 30-40 views/post is normal for most threads.
Sorry. You’re right; I’m wrong. I misread that. There are 86 posters vs 9,558 views, making the ratio better than 100:1.
My other comment stands, however. 
It’s not that I assert there is NOT a large non-participating audience; it’s that I don’t care if there is. I figure the vast majority of people posting / reading / lurking here are grown-ups who will wade in when and if they feel it is appropriate. I do assert:
-
It is highly unlikely that a person who has demonstrated he is generally comfortable posting in these forums would be interested in multiple subjects, plural, but NEVER post to ANY subject except one, EVER. I don’t buy it. Maybe other people give him more credit in this regard, but I don’t give him much credit, period.
-
No poster has some duty to carry some torch or explicate some point or defend some position in light of completely hypothetical non-stated opinions or objections from the silent audience. That’s the sort of “playing to the peanut gallery” that Mtgman was alluding to, that IMO actually obscures instead of fosters communication. If someone has a question, they can post and ask it. I find it hard enough sometimes to keep up with everyone that is actually participating in a discussion without feeling like I have to anticipate and respond to those who are choosing NOT to participate. Who’s got that kind of time?
Well I asked a business question once before, and once on Ayn Rand. On other message boards I frequent I’ve talked about investing, guns, and exercise, but you’ll have to just take my word on those. Still, whether I post on a topic does not in any way prove that it does not interest me. Other people may have asked what I would have asked, or argued what I would have argued, and as such I just observe. On this forum however, liberal Christianity is given a giant pass, giving me a unique voice. So I use it. You can disagree but you can’t prove I have no other interests. As an attorney, I would expect you to realize that.
Prove my hypothetical onlooker does not exist.
Well your rhetorical device failed. Current interests include guitars, guns, hunting, snowboarding, business, investing, government, philosophy, psychology, mackin’ betties… well that’s all I can think of right now. If you want to ask me any questions about any of these, or any other specific topic, to see if I have more than a superficial understanding, be my guest. I only ask that you answer my questions in return on a one for one basis. That’s fair right?
I think your lord Jesus specifically instructed you not to hide your torch under a bushel.
Do you have a problem with me or are you just irascible?
All I did was point out that anonymous onlookers are not fictional, which you contradicted yourself by stating this:
I was starting to wonder why you were asking. On other topics I’m happy enough to lurk. On religion I see the pass given to liberal Christianity here unacceptable, and I think I’m somewhat adept at arguing against it, and I have no realistic intention of stopping. Sometimes I think it’s a waist of time, and do so to such a degree that I really don’t care much if I get banned. I’m actually really curious as to whether it will happen without my breaking any explicit/objective rules. If it happens I’ll just erase the cookies on my computer and go back to lurking, which I have been content to do for a number of years.
However, I really think that if you and others rationalists were to press the issues I do, then acceptance of religion, as something other than ignorance, would be stamped from these boards in short order. When you give guys like Polycarp a pass, you give the impression that his opinions about the existence of gods are actually learned, when they aren’t.
Apparently the hatred of badchad outweighs the controvery over a raped woman getting 90 lashes. I’m not sure how I feel about that.
[COLOR=Red]Ding, Ding, Mother Fucking Ding.[/COLOR]
The Iraq War is over. Cancer has been cured. All the illegals left the country. The Fountain of Youth has been found. Tomndebb has admitted making a mistake.
Well, at least one of those things has come to pass. (Although he chalks it up to misreading—but hey, gotta take what you can get.) Mark the date. A day we might not see again before we see Haley’s Comet.
Let’s see if he posts again or if he dropped dead (as I think he feared) or something. I hope not, because maybe now he will also answer questions posed to him and stop slitherin.
post now irrelevant
Take it from me, it’s not healthy to get that excited over MMORPGs.