You quote out of context quotes that are, themselves, quoted out of context. Interesting strategy, but easy enough to defeat. I continue to stand by everything I have said in those, and all of my other, posts.
I won’t be searching through your posts to make some lame attempt at nailing you. Because I WANT to hear what you have to say.
Which was?
Bolding added for the comprehension-impaired, although it will not help.
What, in your opinion, am I seeking?
Oh, okay. Your meaning wasn’t clear in your post.
Personally, I think a lot of people get away with pretty shoddy debating techniques around here, because dishonest/bad-faith debate is not strictly against the rules around here. And if you call people on it, you’re more likely to divert the thread into a personalized hijack than to actually shame them into behaving. In my fantasy version of the SDMB, the moderators have enough time and resources to police each thread for bad-faith debating, but I understand why that’s not a practical possibility.
It would be nice if everyone (including me of course) posted here with the standards of, say, a peer-reviewed journal, but that’s not the case.
Another bout of rope-a-dope for your own amusement.
Ali won that bout, and against all odds. Still, I’m not hoping that, nor even plying, posters to “punch themselves out,” for my own entertainment, or anyone else’s.
I want to hear what others think. That’s what my posts boil down to.
Adulation.
It’s what we all want, au fond.
The board would probably be a better place if we could find some means of praising a poster despite our overall conclusions as to his/her ancestry, intelligence and moral fiber.
For instance, I agree with your assertion that there are plenty of idiots with credit cards. Someone is buying all those Thomas Kinkade prints and Riverdance CDs. :dubious:
But, when I called you a knuckle dragging goat felcher, I meant that in a good way.
Sure, you want to “hear what others think.” But why do you want to hear what others think? From your posts, it seems clear that you’re far more interested in demonstrating your (percevied) intellectual superiority over them. You’re not interested in education, here, you want self-validation.
Now, what does it say about you that you need self-validation from a bunch of random strangers you’ll likely never meet in real life?
He’ll never meet me in real life as long as I see him first.
I agree that that’s a big problem in GD.
And another problem (one that I’ve been guilty of plenty) that’s strongly related to it is that people, when they do address strong posts, tend to cherry pick the weak parts (often out of context) instead of adressing the entire substance. USENET-style line-by-line rebuttals do not a good debate make.
You could try ignoring the idiots. 
Since you asked:
I think you’re an attention-whore asshole who thinks he’s three times smarter than he really is.
I think you are insincere in what you say you believe.
I think you’re lying about your job.
I think the SDMB would be better off without you.
Based on past experience, if I wanted only “self-validation” I certainly wouldn’t be here. Nor is the selection of posters at SDMB “random.” You have to know about SDMB, find it, subscribe to it (for a fee), and then post and/or start a thread. A considerable selection process takes place all along the way.
And after all that you still end up with a group comprised chiefly of screeching little turdlings. You have to grind through all of the ore to get at the button of gold. Still, I find it worth the effort.
Well, I didn’t really ask for a lot of personal criticisms, but I don’t mind them, and since you insist…
“Attention whore“? If I got paid for posting, I guess I could be called that. But I pay, like everyone else. I think the more accurate term might be “Attention John,” under the existing circumstances. But, alas for you, attention in and of itself is not what I’m after.
As for thinking I am “three times smarter” than I actually am, such an observation has little meaning to me. You see, I do intelligence testing, and the concept of being “three tiimes” more intelligent than another person has no real meaning. One might be more or less “intelligent” than another on some factor or factors, but declaring multiples of such intelligence is simply inappropriate.
Okay, but about what, specifically?
Nope. You must understand that the truth remains the truth, regardless of what you opt to believe. I’ve said that before, and I’m sure I’ll say it again.
Really? How so? How can these, or any boards, be “better off,” by limiting membership and input? Such a sentiment is in opposition to the free exchange of information that boards such as these provide to a degree unprecedented before in human history.
You should be grateful for all of the information you receive, as I am.
You have an odd way of showing gratitude. It’s virtually indistinguishable from “being a condescending dick.”
I think you’ve got wit, drmark2000. I like you’re posting style. You’ve some Hermes in you, which I appreciate.
I can clearly state the difference between drmark2000 and his opponents in this thread. His opponents are (or at least being, or at least are in the mode of) validators of the group and invalidators of the individual whereas drmark2000 is a decrier of the group but validator of individuals.
He has no trouble bashing the mean of SDMB, yet is remarkably polite to each individual he encounters. He’s a rebel, but he has a cause.
Kinda like me. I have a hard time holding grudges on this board toward individual posters, yet I’m continuously aware of the problems that plague it overall. And like the good dr I stick around despite the problems because, overall its worth it.
And, no coincidence, my favorite poster, lissener, is in here being a voice of reason.
Anyhow, keep in mind, drmark2000, that if you rub people the wrong way that often means you have grit. Those that don’t have grit are pussies. Rock on.
B-b-but, it cannot be! Such a statement in regard to myself is patently impermissable!
Hmmmm, Hermes, the trickster god, a thief, but also a messenger and dispenser of knowledge. A god of poetry, athletics, travel and commerce. A god of all trades. I like the comparison. I like it a lot.
I never identified with Hermes before. Now I do, and thanks. Even if I only have “a touch” of him.
Perfectly and beautifully put! Which is preferable? Both! Neither! We each play our part.
“Though Hamlet rambles and Lear rages,
And all the drop scenes drop at once
Upon a hundred thousand stages,
It cannot grow by an inch or an ounce.”
Lapis Lazuli - Yeats
Yep, I‘ve got “no trouble bashing the mean” at all. As for being “remarkably polite to each individual,” I do my best, but I have been rude, at times. But never rude gratuitously or without any purpose. I’m rebellious; I have something of a cause. Mostly, I just want to hear what people have to say on a given topic.
Be careful what you say, Aeschines, or you’ll find yourself on various posters’ “ignore“ lists. Just the same, and as I conclude in the cited thread within this thread, I found that being placed on others’ ignore lists has actually improved the overall quality and usefulness of the responses I have received. The gritless sort of weed themselves out, without me having to do the pulling. They are their own RoundUp®. I’m saddened by the loss of information, but still it’s been a pleasant surprise.
He’s only posted once in this thread. I’d like to hear more.
One of my favorite movies of all time is “True Grit.” As long as I’ve got some grit, I’m happy. Those without any are, indeed, pussies. Rock on I will.