Lol, you blamed Nader for the Iraq war and now excusing Hillary's vote for the war because it was inevitable? The DNC has to move you off Sherdog and get you on CNN.
Do you think that the Iraq War would have happened if not for Nader's vanity campaign? Would it have happened if Clinton had voted not to authorize it?
Being civil is great. Not a flaw at all. Heck, you're talking to the nicest guy on Sherdog.
But when it's, "here's a lot of evidence, you retard," and the response is, "I can't handle being called a retard so I'm going to pout instead of responding to the evidence," that can be annoying for people. Again, it's all up to you. Just thinking since I like both of you that I can clear that up.
Yeah, well that would be fine, albeit rude. Why would you want to converse like that? I'm here to enjoy myself, and I don't think it's enjoyable to get into an insult-match on the internet. I speak on here like I do IRL.
If I don't want to have a back-and-forth with someone who can't be civil, it's hardly because his proofs are logical. It's rarely the case that you need to respond like that if you have logic on your side.
Yeah, well that would be fine, albeit rude. Why would you want to converse like that? I'm here to enjoy myself, and I don't think it's enjoyable to get into an insult-match on the internet. I speak on here like I do IRL.
If I don't want to have a back-and-forth with someone who can't be civil, it's hardly because his proofs are logical. It's rarely the case that you need to respond like that if you have logic on your side.
To be fair Jack takes tons of shit on here and gets personally attacked daily. You've always been a cool headed civil poster so I would never go there with you but I can totally relate to why Jack goes off on people on here. I get some shit myself in here.
Part of me wishes there were more posters like you but I guess the asshole types do keep things interesting.
Yeah, well that would be fine, albeit rude. Why would you want to converse like that? I'm here to enjoy myself, and I don't think it's enjoyable to get into an insult-match on the internet. I speak on here like I do IRL.
If I don't want to have a back-and-forth with someone who can't be civil, it's hardly because his proofs are logical. It's rarely the case that you need to respond like that if you have logic on your side.
To be fair Jack takes tons of shit on here and gets personally attacked daily. You've always been a cool headed civil poster so I would never go there with you but I can totally relate to why Jack goes off on people on here. I get some shit myself in here.
In this case, it's Thames, and he didn't really go off on DS. DS just has a low threshold for any abrasive language (which is up to him, of course). On my end, I'm happy to draw the ire of the shitposters here. I think people can read the a few posts up and see the caliber of poster that is giving me shit. I don't even have to say anything, really, as Thuriasz, Anung and that other creep make my point for me.
To be fair Jack takes tons of shit on here and gets personally attacked daily. You've always been a cool headed civil poster so I would never go there with you but I can totally relate to why Jack goes off on people on here. I get some shit myself in here.
Part of me wishes there were more posters like you but I guess the asshole types do keep things interesting.
It takes all kinds, I agree. It wouldn't be the same if everyone was even-keeled, but there is a time and a place. It shouldn't be the go-to.
I agree Jack takes a lot of crap, and I've given him his fair share, too. Jack is one of those rare people who can argue any side of an argument very well, and that frustrates people, especially when he's wrong. Yes, Jack in not infallible, despite how it looks. The only thing that keeps me from nominating him as number one, is that I disagree with him on too many things, but I recognize he's not your average Sherdogger.
I like to be civil. If that's a flaw, then so be it.
My main objection is not only people being rude, although it bothers me, but it's using insults instead of evidence. Like, "well you don't agree because you don't understand my nuance, because you're stupid." It's not just an insult, it's meant to poison the well, and thus it's an ad hominem in the truest sense.
I don't think this is a big deal. Thames is accusing me of being sensitive, but he's clearly upset about our past exchange. I'm willing to let this go and move on.
No. What annoys me is that you don't want to stand by what you said, or heavily implied, and when someone calls you on it, instead of defending yourself you just dismiss it as a "strawman".
Let me spell it out for you, quote by quote, why I think you suck:
"Super Pac WARNS Trump presidency could lead to the EXTERMINATION of Muslims"
Ok.. So you're comment was in response to my "they're insane enough to think they're in a war" comment?
I meant the loonies on this board, who think they're at war with everyone that is muslim, and the ones who are not as crazy as them (friend of my enemy and all that). Sometimes I wonder if a new Breivik is in the making on this board. They go absolutely insane if you just hint at the notion that you shouldn't discriminate against all muslims.
As to your first comment, the people who think they are at war with every Muslim are few and far between. I can't dispel the notion entirely, given that I just quoted @BVG, as he commented that the world would be better without religion in it. Some atheists are very much at war with the concept, but this whole line of thought has been thoroughly piledrived into the ground by Muslim apologists who want to use it as a red-herring and strawman all in the same breath.
In this post you start by dismissing my point (ironically in a thread where several posters have just advocated for the literal extermination of all muslims). But you then note that you can't dismiss it completely because a poster said this:
Let me explain this to you really simple. In a thread where several posters explicitly supported the idea of "exterminating all muslims", the post you decide to take issue with is the one advocating for atheism. That is the only post you brought to attention, as an example of that mindset I took issue with (I'm well aware you probably did this deliberately, because you knew that was not what I meant at all) . Because of this it is entirely reasonable to think that you do not take issue with the ones advocating for violence, or at the very least see them as less threatening as a person advocating for atheism.
Either you're too dumb to see this, or what is more likely the case, you know this to be true and that is why you pull the plug with idiotic screams of "strawman", "ad hominem" and "BE CIVIL!!".
Therefore it is not a strawman to point that out. Look up the word implication. You do not need to have said a thing explicitly, word for word, for someone to gather what you actually mean. If you disagree with how I viewed your post, then fucking defend yourself. Don't start to cry and just dismiss the entire post. If you can't even do that, you do not belong in a forum called "the war room".
If you're just going to pull the plug everytime it gets hard, then as I pointed out, you are wasting my time to begin with. So don't call me out, if you're not able to handle grown up dicussions.
Also, go fuck yourself with being civil (in the most non-civil way you can think of). If you bring integrity and substance to your argument, a civil discussion will naturally occur with reasonable people. And believe it or not, I'm reasonable. But I don't have time to play nice with people, who are just looking to bring in their agenda with nothing to back it up.
Whatever, Thames. If you don't like me or my views, I don't really care. At least not enough to wade through that and respond. I've said all I need to.
It takes all kinds, I agree. It wouldn't be the same if everyone was even-keeled, but there is a time and a place. It shouldn't be the go-to.
I agree Jack takes a lot of crap, and I've given him his fair share, too. Jack is one of those rare people who can argue any side of an argument very well, and that frustrates people, especially when he's wrong. Yes, Jack in not infallible, despite how it looks. The only thing that keeps me from nominating him as number one, is that I disagree with him on too many things, but I recognize he's not your average Sherdogger.
Idk, I see Jack as an extremely consistent poster. I don't see him arguing "both sides" as you put it. I just think he's a lightning rod around here and it's mostly a great thing. Makes for interesting reading.
Idk, I see Jack as an extremely consistent poster. I don't see him arguing "both sides" as you put it. I just think he's a lightning rod around here and it's mostly a great thing. Makes for interesting reading.
Oh, well, most of the intelligent posters can do that too. I've been in threads where the conservatives were doing so badly I helped "play devils advocate" for my own positions.
Oh, well, most of the intelligent posters can do that too. I've been in threads where the conservatives were doing so badly I helped "play devils advocate" for my own positions.
Whatever, Thames. If you don't like me or my views, I don't really care. At least not enough to wade through that and respond. I've said all I need to.
If you are passionate about or even desire to be knowledgeable about an issue you should try to understand both sides, i agree, no doubt Jack can do this with most topics he posts about.
Lol im really far from a delicate flower but nice try
I just don't have much time for posters who post like Louis Black sounds when hes going off and i thought that was plainly aggressive if you thought it passive i appologize for my lack of clarity .
Violence/Genocide: Do not condone violence or genocide on a person or group of people. You are free to attack a person or groups ideas but you are crossing the line when calling for violence. This will be heavily enforced in threads with breaking news involving victims.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
