Look, dumbass - if you make snide comments to people, they aren’t going to respond with “Gosh, Monty - I sure appreciate your rational and well-reasoned response”. I do not care in the least about your particular assessment of what direction a thread is allowed to take. Even if you HAD a point (which you don’t), your “try to keep up” crap is not worthy of a response; that’s just unnecessary rudeness. If you disagree with a point I made, you may say so; but if you just make vague, snipey little comments, you won’t be taken seriously.
THEN, you proceeded to bitch and whine about MY “asinine responses, especially those lacking intelligence, wit, or even validity”. Physician, heal thyself.
Seriously, guy - if you can’t handle a political debate without getting all hot under the collar and acting like a baby, you need to stay out of them.
Monty, you really are a drooling idiot, unable to discuss people’s arguments. You just have to go around the threads taking childish potshots at people whose opinions you dislike. I have ignored your childish potshots in several threads but in a thread about how the prisoners at Guantanamo might not get fair trials I said I hoped that would not come to pass and that for a trial to be fair
Your response:
If you consider me saying America should not stoop to doing what communist countries do is “bashing America” It just shows you are a drooling idiot. Damn what “facts”? That post is an expression of my opinion of what requirements a fair judicial system should meet. What “facts” does that ignore? And how is it antiamerican? I am sick and tired of your labeling those whose opinions you disagree with as “antiAmerican”.
What bothers me about Monty is that he does not address the substance of my posts but just keeps insulting me, calling me anti-American and sympathiser of terrorists. that is the extent of what he posts. I wish he would address the substance of what I say in a civil manner. But, as blowero says, it seems Monty cannot talk about these things without throwing a tantrum every time he sees a post by someone he dislikes. Seeing that, I don’t know why he doesn’t just ignore posts that make him so uncomfortable. That’s what I do.
I am a rare poster but an avid lurker. Given that I don’t have a horse in this race I am compelled to say Monty is an ass. A flaming, rude, insulting, ignorant jackass. How he isn’t pitted on a daily basis I can’t imagine.
I can’t tell you how many interesting and civil threads I have read that come to a train wreck of a halt because Monty can’t help himself. Really, are you like this in real life? Do you live in a bubble? I just can’t imagine it is that hard to maintain a reasonable level of civility towards your fellow man.
I wouldn’t have said smartass; he’s an insulting *$&%ing bastard. It doesn’t help that your thread topic is controversial, but I’ve yet to see Monty be disagreed with more than once without him resorting to one-line insults.
Nanoda, perhaps you missed some of the discourses he and I have had, or he and Poly have had, or various others. He has all the respect in the world for those who are educated and ask honest questions and know of what they speak (though when, from his POV, this is not the case, he can and sometimes does engage in a bit of egregious ad hominem attacking). I don’t have the thread URLs at my fingertips but I promise you it’s true:)
I just read page 1 of the cited thread and I must say I don’t see Monty’s initial objection at all. If anyone gives more than two shits about my opinion of page 2 I’ll post it, but otherwise I’d rather not see a pile-on, as that’s (for the topic matter) a relatively civil discussion going so far.
[on preview]
Ok, just read the cited comment by Monty in the cited thread. I do think he was out of order there and came in with a few too many guns blazing, as it had been a relatively civil discussion (again, for the topic matter).
blowero, I understand your comment, but … I dunno if it served your purpose best to return fire so quickly in that thread. But I do understand your point. My best guess is that perhaps Monty didn’t read all the thread for whatever reason.
iampunha: IIRC, many of those involve politics, so they’re something I don’t usually read or comment on. What I’ve seen of Monty elsewhere, I don’t like. I’m keeping my opinion for now.
Monty specializes in the drive-by sniper attack and adds almost nothing of any substance. Monty does not refute another’s argument point by point, but rather simply says something antagonistic. Monty does not offer informed opinions supported by knowledge, but rather poses with an attitude of negativity.
People should just learn to instantly agree with everything Monty says. Or thinks. Then they’d always be right, just like *Monty, and he wouldn’t have to call them stupid.
I first encountered Monty when he told me to “fuck off” or something like that in GD (I tried searching for the thread, but I think it got lost in the Disaster). I fought back but only he got reprimanded. Then he started to whine that I broke a rule too, forgetting he had started it by insulting me first.
That very day, I read a post by him that I agreed with 100%. It taught me a valuable lesson: someone who acts like an ass in one situation can be decent in another. This makes it kinda hard to hate them.
I have found myself both disagreeing and agreeing with him countless times. He can be an ass sometimes. He can be alright sometimes. I’m sure anyone can say the same about me too. I dunno, when he’s being an ass I just try to ignore it, hoping the storm will pass.
I can’t help but compare Monty to Collunsbury. At their worst they both have the same condescendingly mean-spirited attitude…only Collunsbury is smart, experienced, and has a lot to offer. Had Collunsbury been able to keep his language in check he never would have gotten canned. Monty, OTOH, is just a jerk without the language, only occasionally offering seed pearls of wisdom.
Dunno what it is with the guy. So much to offer, yet he chooses to pick stupid, confrontational, inconsequential battles…and be mean and jerkish about it.
And what I really don’t understand is why the PTB give him so many passes on that paramount “don’t be a jerk” rule.
Monty is NAMED after a smartass for goodness sakes. It’s no surprise that some posters have uneven posting histories, but I can’t say that I’ve ever picked Monty out, in my time here, as someone especially belligerent to no purpose. Even some of the best and most respected people here seem to have had periods in which they only stopped by to do snarky drivebys. I’m happy with even occasional pearls of wisdom.
Well, I didn’t have any purpose in starting this thread, other than to take the argument out of Great Debates, so as not to clog up the discussion there. That is the preferred thing to do, isn’t it? His rudeness wasn’t that big a deal, and to be fair, I certainly sniped right back at him; I’m not one to shy away from an argument, and I admit I can be pretty sarcastic. But what really gripes me is the self-righteousness of the guy, saying: “What smartass comments? I’ve made none.” Like the kid with frosting all over his face saying, “I didn’t eat any cake.”
That, and that drive-by, one-line posting style. If he had a point, he didn’t seem interested in expounding on it; he just wanted to interject little snide comments. And when you try to just dismiss his antics, he gets more and more worked up about it.
While Monty’s intentions are often noble, he expresses them in such a condescending and bitchy manner that, regardless if he’s right, his actions will most likely sour anyone to his point of view. One of the ideals I try very hard to keep on the Internet is never saying something to somebody I wouldn’t tell him or her face to face in real life. Of course, we all get impassioned about certain topics and I’m no exception to this; however, generally, if I find myself acting like an ass, I apologize. That’s just my little philosophy on the subject.