Social War Room Lounge Thread #325: PotWR Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
Islam Imamate said:
You don't know someone would want to ignore toxic posters or report rule breakers?
Click to expand...
I guess... I've never used either one myself and I've been around since '07. Obviously the ignore function wasn't always there. I guess I can see some people not wanting to deal with trolls but @LangfordBarrow is hardly one of those. I know some good peeps that use those things so I'm not harshing on them as much as I am not sure the point of those things. I support having them available LOL
 
Cajun said:
I guess... I've never used either one myself and I've been around since '07. Obviously the ignore function wasn't always there. I guess I can see some people not wanting to deal with trolls but @LangfordBarrow is hardly one of those. I know some good peeps that use those things so I'm not harshing on them as much as I am not sure the point of those things. I support having them available LOL
Click to expand...
You don't see the point of ignoring toxic posters or reporting rule violations? This isn't 4chan, it's important to enforce rules.
 
Rule breaking in terms of serious stuff of course. I've been around when people at E-suicided porn and things like that.
 
Islam Imamate said:
What makes you say they're overused?
Click to expand...
I have some friends in here that use them too much in my opinion. I think labeling someone toxic when you've had a difficult back and forth is a very subjective thing. The number of times I've been insulted in here just trying to have civil discourse. One guy in here wanting to meet up for a irl fight haha. But if I put everybody I disagree with on ignore then I'm just looking at people that think the exact same way as me which is not the point.
 
Last edited:
LangfordBarrow said:
I do think Biden was the best choice to beat Trump in the '20 election, which is why he was attacked with the Ashley diary/Hunter laptop and foreign agent allegations of corruption scandals, but he should have made it clear from the start that he wouldn't run for reelection.

I thought Harris was a horrible pick, mostly because of her race/gender and the perception of her being a progressive squad member, and I think it was @Rob Battisti I told to keep dreaming when he posted she'd be the nominee.
Click to expand...
Is what it is. Given a choice, there was never any way she’d ever have won a primary which should tell everyone she was a bad pick.

I would doubt she would run again but who knows!
 
LangfordBarrow said:
You need to make the distinction that she might have been a good pick for the country but obviously not for the election if she lost.
Click to expand...
I made that distinction like 10 posts ago!

She was a bad pick for the party because she lost. The goal is to win. Any loser is a bad pick. Any winner is a good pick. Doesn’t mean they are good for the country as evidenced by the person we have in office.
 
Islam Imamate said:
You don't know someone would want to ignore toxic posters or report rule breakers?
Click to expand...
I just skip their posts. I used the report button only to clean up a thread I made of off topic posts. Different strokes for different folks but it seems to me some people take this place too seriously.
 
LangfordBarrow said:
I just skip their posts.
Click to expand...
I technically have a bunch of people on my ignore list but I'm happy to report almost all are banned which is to say I'm probably a good judge of poster quality if the guys I ignore get themselves banned. The few guys left are frequently on dubs from what I can tell.
LangfordBarrow said:
I used the report button only to clean up a thread I made of off topic posts. Different strokes for different folks but it seems to me some people take this place too seriously.
Click to expand...
I think it's good to report posters who break the rules. First time I got dubs here was for posting "ass floss" which also happened to be an image sourced from a site that had porn. I didnt know about the ass floss rule nor did I know that the source was from a site with porn since I grabbed it off Google images. The reason for some of these rules makes more sense on the backend and has to do with stuff like how the forum is indexed on search engines based on the content of the forum, something that might not be obvious to posters. In the case of the rules I broke, that kind of thing can get the forum indexed as a porn site which is no bueno as we'd get filtered out of safe searches.
 
The researchers found that people’s political beliefs form patterns that closely match whether someone is a Democrat or a Republican. Using a method called ResIN, they mapped out how different political opinions—like views on abortion, immigration, or gun control—are connected. They discovered that Democrats’ opinions tended to cluster very tightly around extreme liberal positions, meaning they often answered in very similar ways. Republicans, on the other hand, had a wider range of answers, from moderate to strongly conservative. Because of this, Democrats were more easily identifiable based on their beliefs—they tended to think more alike and held more extreme views on the issues studied. The closer someone’s beliefs matched one of these clusters, the more strongly they identified with that political group.

In the second part of the study, people were shown short statements expressing just one political opinion, and asked to guess whether the person behind the opinion was a Democrat or Republican. Participants were highly accurate—especially when the attitude was one held by many Democrats, since those were more extreme and predictable. People also liked others more when their opinions matched their own. This shows that not only do we use political attitudes to figure out who’s on “our side,” but we also judge people based on whether their views line up with ours. The study reveals that political identity today isn’t about just one issue—it’s about how a whole group of beliefs fit together, and Democrats currently show a more unified belief pattern than Republicans.

The study suggests that Republicans hold a broader range of beliefs on key political issues, while Democrats tend to share a more unified and extreme set of views. When researchers mapped how people responded to questions on topics like abortion, gun control, and immigration, they found that Democrats clustered tightly around strongly liberal positions, making their political identity more easily recognizable based on their answers. In contrast, Republicans were more spread out across moderate to strongly conservative positions, showing greater internal variation. This means that being a Democrat in this context was more closely tied to holding specific, consistent opinions, while being a Republican allowed for a wider mix of beliefs. The authors suggest that Republican identity may be shaped by other social factors—like religion or cultural identity—in addition to political attitudes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,956
Messages
58,330,868
Members
176,002
Latest member
Shock7

Share this page

Back
Top