Silly childish games

I have a serious question in regards to the validity of current events articles.
It seems a poster everytime I post about a topic is digging up old stories to spam the forum with as if this counters any present articles I post.
It is like a childish game being played by this poster and basically spamming up the forum with articles that they think coiunters any view I hold.

I am just wondering what other posters think about this, because they are clearly being posted in desperation to find anything to counter current events. If anything should they not go in the history section?

I can provide numereus examples to Admin by PM as I do not wish to name any names.

yeah seen them but other posters have done similar.

I personally think stories should be less than a year old and preferably newer than that.

it is a bit disingenuous to post articles over 2 years old.
but I don't think they should be in history section, Maybe posted with a disclaimer saying this is old or from whatever year, and a reason why it is relevant to current events.

we will see if Ben or others have an opinion

veya_victaous wrote:yeah seen them but other posters have done similar.

I personally think stories should be less than a year old and preferably newer than that.

it is a bit disingenuous to post articles over 2 years old.
but I don't think they should be in history section, Maybe posted with a disclaimer saying this is old or from whatever year, and a reason why it is relevant to current events.

we will see if Ben or others have an opinion    

It is the reasoning behind posting them I find poor, they have nothing to post relevant to topics, and they have an agenda whether it be against Israel or Sam Harris it seems for example. That is what you call a camapaign of hate and there is no two other words to describe that and I fail to see how a athiest Liberal is such a threat to soceity or is justification for such poor unwarranted attacks being made by this poster.
Imagine if such a poster made it their goal and campaign to target Mandela for example, would anyone find that reasonable or excepable?
Now think about it, if you stand against Sam Harris, are you then not support bad ideas and going aginst Liberal principles that he advocates for the well being and equality of people?
He like I just wish to see reformation within Islam itself because at present it forms some bad ideas within the world, now is that too much to ask?

The fact is, this is nothing more than a silly childish game being played to spam down the threads on the latest scroll, to make theirs the current ones, I have not seen this since the likes of the God squad. They have no relevant new articles so drag up countless old ones, which I have to say is childish and very pathetic.

Laters

Sam does not see the forest for the trees and needs to look into his own eyes first before he casts blame on others.
I am not Christian but 'let he who is without sin cat the first stone' is actually pretty wise. We, the West, are in no position to start throwing stones at anyone, we may be better than we were but we have only begun to make up for our previous crimes (that have given us the political and military power we posses today in the first place)

Good men Lead by example not by the force

veya_victaous wrote:Sam does not see the forest for the trees and needs to look into his own eyes first before he casts blame on others.
I am not Christian but 'let he who is without sin cat the first stone' is actually pretty wise. We, the West, are in no position to start throwing stones at anyone, we may be better than we were but we have only begun to make up for our previous crimes (that have given us the political and military power we posses today in the first place)

Good men Lead by example not by the force

He knows far more than you will ever hope to know and is far more qualified, what I find poor is the disingenuous attacks which have no validity or grounds to them.
Like I say the campaigns this poster does or born from hate
Please spare me and Christian babble, it has some of the worst discrimination also found within its works.
I take the views and morals not from myths but understanding what is right.

The question you have to ask yourself is this a debate forum, or a platform for promoting hate?

Brasidas wrote:I have a serious question in regards to the validity of current events articles.
It seems a poster everytime I post about a topic is digging up old stories to spam the forum with as if this counters any present articles I post.
It is like a childish game being played by this poster and basically spamming up the forum with articles that they think coiunters any view I hold.

I am just wondering what other posters think about this, because they are clearly being posted in desperation to find anything to counter current events. If anything should they not go in the history section?

I can provide numereus examples to Admin by PM as I do not wish to name any names.

Could you say which threads? I'm not sure what you mean.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Brasidas wrote:I have a serious question in regards to the validity of current events articles.
It seems a poster everytime I post about a topic is digging up old stories to spam the forum with as if this counters any present articles I post.
It is like a childish game being played by this poster and basically spamming up the forum with articles that they think coiunters any view I hold.

I am just wondering what other posters think about this, because they are clearly being posted in desperation to find anything to counter current events. If anything should they not go in the history section?

I can provide numereus examples to Admin by PM as I do not wish to name any names.

Could you say which threads? I'm not sure what you mean.

Sorry as stated, i will point them out to admin and moderators only if asked

Brasidas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Could you say which threads? I'm not sure what you mean.

Sorry as stated, i will point them out to admin and moderators only if asked

OK. It's just that you asked what other posters think about it, and I can't say if I don't know what you mean.

Brasidas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Could you say which threads? I'm not sure what you mean.

Sorry as stated, i will point them out to admin and moderators only if asked

Veya has posted his thoughts.
As moderator Irn Bru is online perhaps he will post his?

Or perhaps not

If people want censorship on here then that's fine but past views are often used to make a point.

Either way I don't really care.

Nems wrote:

Brasidas wrote:



Sorry as stated, i will point them out to admin and moderators only if asked

Veya has posted his thoughts.
As moderator Irn Bru is online perhaps he will post his?

Or perhaps not

Morning Nems

My point more than anything and we have seen this before on this site, where every day we had posts on blacks, Muslims, Asians etc with the view they were criminal. Little debate was had and threads were just being spammed and I know for a fact Ben saw this as nothing more than using the forum as a platform to promote hate.
How is this any different now with the countless articles on Israel for example, many of which are suspect and unrealiable to say the least to the point of posting old articles to keep this topic on just about every thread? It is spoiling debate and not allowing for any genuine discussion on them. To me again the forum is being used as a platform of hate and not discussion, because apart from Irn and myself we are the only ones that debate them, where Sassy uses the poor ignore facility to avoid having to debate them. I thought this was a debate forum, not some where to just spam articles with the view to promote hate.
Either we have genuine discourse on these topics or rightly we should question what is going on with this constant spamming. It has gotten tot he point I am countering every article posted by posting articles myself, which is just getting absurd.
I just want some genuine discourse, but where a poster is just spamming them and then not even offering debate, then this should be questioned, even more when it is old articles.

Irn Bru wrote:If people want censorship on here then that's fine but past views are often used to make a point.

Either way I don't really care.

I thought this was a debate forum, I have no problem debating, but they are not posted to debate, but as a platform to promote hate, there is a huge difference but no surprise how you would excuse your master

There are rather a lot of threads about Israel, but then again, I find that other people on this forum do tend to start new threads on the same subject. For example, I think there were four about that German plane crash, and I think I've seen at least three about Katie Hopkins.

Raggamuffin wrote:There are rather a lot of threads about Israel, but then again, I find that other people on this forum do tend to start new threads on the same subject. For example, I think there were four about that German plane crash.

That was new hot news though Rags, which is understandable, yet daily there most be 10 plus articles on bashing israel. Again I have no problem debating them, but many are not debated and when I make any points on them, they are followed up with a reply of yet another article. That is not debating is it, but spamming.
If there is to be genuine debate, then this is what I want, but that is not happenning and there is a fine line between posting articles for genuine discourse and where they are just being spammed to promote hate, of which is clearly the later.
Again this has happened before with articles daily about Muslims, Blacks, Asians etc and was certainly also back then criticized for trying to deter genuine debate.

Brasidas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:There are rather a lot of threads about Israel, but then again, I find that other people on this forum do tend to start new threads on the same subject. For example, I think there were four about that German plane crash.

That was new hot news though Rags, which is understandable, yet daily there most be 10 plus articles on bashing israel. Again I have no problem debating them, but many are not debated and when I make any points on them, they are followed up with a reply of yet another article. That is not debating is it, but spamming.
If there is to be genuine debate, then this is what I want, but that is not happenning and there is a fine line between posting articles for genuine discourse and where they are just being spammed to promote hate, of which is clearly the later.
Again this has happened before with articles daily about Muslims, Blacks, Asians etc and was certainly also back then criticized for trying to deter genuine debate.

I think that there's far too much copying and pasting on here when people start threads anyway - some people just paste tons of text instead of giving their own thoughts and backing them up with a link.

I don't tend to read the threads about Israel anyway - probably because there are so many of them, and I know they will contain walls of text.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

That was new hot news though Rags, which is understandable, yet daily there most be 10 plus articles on bashing israel. Again I have no problem debating them, but many are not debated and when I make any points on them, they are followed up with a reply of yet another article. That is not debating is it, but spamming.
If there is to be genuine debate, then this is what I want, but that is not happenning and there is a fine line between posting articles for genuine discourse and where they are just being spammed to promote hate, of which is clearly the later.
Again this has happened before with articles daily about Muslims, Blacks, Asians etc and was certainly also back then criticized for trying to deter genuine debate.

I think that there's far too much copying and pasting on here when people start threads anyway - some people just paste tons of text instead of giving their own thoughts and backing them up with a link.

I don't tend to read the threads about Israel anyway - probably because there are so many of them, and I know they will contain walls of text.

I take your point, sometimes you have to as people do not have access to the site and this is only when it should be used, but fair point and for my part will cut back from doing this.

Brasidas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think that there's far too much copying and pasting on here when people start threads anyway - some people just paste tons of text instead of giving their own thoughts and backing them up with a link.

I don't tend to read the threads about Israel anyway - probably because there are so many of them, and I know they will contain walls of text.

I take your point, sometimes you have to as people do not have access to the site and this is only when it should be used, but fair point and for my part will cut back from doing this.

That would be great - cheers.

Irn Bru wrote:If people want censorship on here then that's fine but past views are often used to make a point.

Either way I don't really care.

Way to go with the moderating Irn!

Only kidding

Brasidas wrote:

Nems wrote:

Veya has posted his thoughts.
As moderator Irn Bru is online perhaps he will post his?

Or perhaps not

Morning Nems

My point more than anything and we have seen this before on this site, where every day we had posts on blacks, Muslims, Asians etc with the view they were criminal. Little debate was had and threads were just being spammed and I know for a fact Ben saw this as nothing more than using the forum as a platform to promote hate.
How is this any different now with the countless articles on Israel for example, many of which are suspect and unrealiable to say the least to the point of posting old articles to keep this topic on just about every thread? It is spoiling debate and not allowing for any genuine discussion on them. To me again the forum is being used as a platform of hate and not discussion, because apart from Irn and myself we are the only ones that debate them, where Sassy uses the poor ignore facility to avoid having to debate them. I thought this was a debate forum, not some where to just spam articles with the view to promote hate.
Either we have genuine discourse on these topics or rightly we should question what is going on with this constant spamming. It has gotten tot he point I am countering every article posted by posting articles myself, which is just getting absurd.
I just want some genuine discourse, but where a poster is just spamming them and then not even offering debate, then this should be questioned, even more when it is old articles.

We have been here before, I hate endless cutting and pasting and endless sodding threads on Israel.
But hell will freeze over before Irn Bru contradicts Sassy and Ben agrees with her views so we are stuck with the Sassy show.
As the song goes "same as it ever was"

Nems wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Morning Nems

My point more than anything and we have seen this before on this site, where every day we had posts on blacks, Muslims, Asians etc with the view they were criminal. Little debate was had and threads were just being spammed and I know for a fact Ben saw this as nothing more than using the forum as a platform to promote hate.
How is this any different now with the countless articles on Israel for example, many of which are suspect and unrealiable to say the least to the point of posting old articles to keep this topic on just about every thread? It is spoiling debate and not allowing for any genuine discussion on them. To me again the forum is being used as a platform of hate and not discussion, because apart from Irn and myself we are the only ones that debate them, where Sassy uses the poor ignore facility to avoid having to debate them. I thought this was a debate forum, not some where to just spam articles with the view to promote hate.
Either we have genuine discourse on these topics or rightly we should question what is going on with this constant spamming. It has gotten tot he point I am countering every article posted by posting articles myself, which is just getting absurd.
I just want some genuine discourse, but where a poster is just spamming them and then not even offering debate, then this should be questioned, even more when it is old articles.

We have been here before, I hate endless cutting and pasting and endless sodding threads on Israel.
But hell will freeze over before Irn Bru contradicts Sassy and Ben agrees with her views so we are stuck with the Sassy show.
As the song goes "same as it ever was"

Well it just ruins debate which I thought was the idea of a forum to debate.
Ben has remained silent, mainly as he backs discrmination against Israel and makes all its people culpable for their Government.
He has no backbone.
Again nothing against him personally, but it just makes me laugh how biased they are on views they agree with.
If he wants his forum ruined with spam, on his head so be it.

You really need to get over your obsession Nems. You might not think that children being imprisoned and tortured every day, suffering PTS and being stoned and assaulted on their way to school is important, but I do. I also think that the fact that Gazan and Syrian children froze to death over the winter is important, and that Gazan children are still living in rubble is important, and as it is happening every day, if I want to post about it every day I will. As you only ever seem to come on here when you think you can have a dig, it rather shows what a sad little person you are. In fact, you even have to resort to agreeing with Dodge, when you are normally at each others throats. Totally pathetic. As for Dodge, he's the joke that everyone laughs at.

Why is it Sassy the worlds refugees are still the Palestinains?
Because the Muslim world does not give one shit abaout them, every other refugee group after time has been given homes, so you have to start placing the blame at the foot of those who have denied them a place to live and be citizens.
The fact is your pathetic little game and promotion of hate is being exposed for what it is and you are nothing more than antisemitic, I mean to post articles claiming Israel is racist is nothing short of a poor lie, when it has as much racism as many countries. That proves you are poorly trying to promote hate against Israel and by proxy its people.
That is disgusting on any level and the sort of tactics the Nazi's used against the Jews in Germany. The fact you fail to see you use the same methods and you ignore the extremist policies by Hamas and Fatah in how they mistreat their people shows you are the most dishonest person  I know because you ignore all this, where at least I condemn Israel for wrongs.
There is no place here for someone who just promotes hate as you do, your methods are no different to those who daily bash Muslims, Blacks etc, so why should you be treated any different?
Its your constant spamming and dragging up old articles because I have posted something recent.
Take yesterday, I posted a recent video by Sam harris, for you to then drag up an old article 2 years out of date attacking him.
I show women in Palestine glorifying their children as terrorists and you drag up for articles old articles at that again about Israel with the view on banned weapons. That is you clearly not having me on ignore but playing the most infantile game and with a view to promote hatred against Israel


Grow the fuck up

So is this a thread about Israel and Palestine now?

Raggamuffin wrote:So is this a thread about Israel and Palestine now?

Sadly it always turns to that.

Brasidas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So is this a thread about Israel and Palestine now?

Sadly it always turns to that.

If Sassy starts loads of threads about Israel, people are free to ignore them, then they will fall down the page of new posts.

Very true Rags, and if you look, Dodge has started loads.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Sadly it always turns to that.

If Sassy starts loads of threads about Israel, people are free to ignore them, then they will fall down the page of new posts.

Maybe that is the best method as I have countered many with factual articles instead of the made up fabrications she posts.
Best thing to do is to ignore her as she does not debate anyway, but if she contiones to spam threads back up when nobody is debating or use other articles to reply to people, I will start making official complainst because it has to stop as it is spoiling debate for everyone.

risingsun wrote:Very true Rags, and if you look, Dodge has started loads.

Yes, I know, and the same thing applies.

Both of you start a lot of threads. Some of them are of interest to me, so I post on them, and others are not. Some of them are a bit spam-like tbh with walls of text and not much else.

It's more the duplicate threads I'm not keen on. If one has been posting on a thread about a particular subject, and someone starts a new one about the same thing, one loses track of the debate because it's all over the place.

Not that my option matters - but I have no problem someone providing a link to any article to counter another, no matter how old, as long as that information is still valid.

Even if it's not valid, it doesn't really matter if it's posted. It makes the poster look silly.

What should stop is the copy and paste of incredibly long news articles. I know a max limit was set on the size of a post but I think it should be reduced to something like 1000 characters, maybe even 500. This will force people to be more succinct.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Not that my option matters - but I have no problem someone providing a link to any article to counter another, no matter how old, as long as that information is still valid.

Even if it's not valid, it doesn't really matter if it's posted. It makes the poster look silly.

What should stop is the copy and paste of incredibly long news articles. I know a max limit was set on the size of a post but I think it should be reduced to something like 1000 characters, maybe even 500. This will force people to be more succinct.

Agreed to a certain extent, some posters myself included do write long replies, this does happen on historical debates and theological ones also, as they tend to be more in detail the replies.
So it just should be policy the first paragrapth from an article then a link is all that is needed and this is moderated till it is dummed in.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Not that my option matters - but I have no problem someone providing a link to any article to counter another, no matter how old, as long as that information is still valid.

Even if it's not valid, it doesn't really matter if it's posted. It makes the poster look silly.

What should stop is the copy and paste of incredibly long news articles. I know a max limit was set on the size of a post but I think it should be reduced to something like 1000 characters, maybe even 500. This will force people to be more succinct.

Well, as you would expect, I disagree. Many people don't click on the link and many articles have far too much information in them to be cut down to that level. What really annoys me is when only the link is put on.

Brasidas wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Not that my option matters - but I have no problem someone providing a link to any article to counter another, no matter how old, as long as that information is still valid.

Even if it's not valid, it doesn't really matter if it's posted. It makes the poster look silly.

What should stop is the copy and paste of incredibly long news articles. I know a max limit was set on the size of a post but I think it should be reduced to something like 1000 characters, maybe even 500. This will force people to be more succinct.

Agreed to a certain extent, some posters myself included do write long replies, this does happen on historical debates and theological ones also, as they tend to be more in detail the replies.
So it just should be policy the first paragrapth from an article then a link is all that is needed and this is moderated till it is dummed in.

Agree with the first paragraph from an article policy. But the only way to enforce that is to set a character limit for all posts.

Even the long replies are hard to read sometime. With char limited posts, you can say the same thing using multiple replies. This makes is easier to read (I'm a little dyslexic anyway) and easier to reply point by point.

Anyways, just an idea.

risingsun wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:Not that my option matters - but I have no problem someone providing a link to any article to counter another, no matter how old, as long as that information is still valid.

Even if it's not valid, it doesn't really matter if it's posted. It makes the poster look silly.

What should stop is the copy and paste of incredibly long news articles. I know a max limit was set on the size of a post but I think it should be reduced to something like 1000 characters, maybe even 500. This will force people to be more succinct.

Well, as you would expect, I disagree.  Many people don't click on the link and many articles have far too much information in them to be cut down to that level.   What really annoys me is when only the link is put on.

Most people don't read the articles pasted either. One can mention what the article says. You can't force anyone to read, let alone accept what the article says.

And pasting long articles from multiple sources seems to have become a spamming tool. Spoiling any fluid discourse on this forum.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

Agreed to a certain extent, some posters myself included do write long replies, this does happen on historical debates and theological ones also, as they tend to be more in detail the replies.
So it just should be policy the first paragrapth from an article then a link is all that is needed and this is moderated till it is dummed in.

Agree with the first paragraph from an article policy. But the only way to enforce that is to set a character limit for all posts.

Even the long replies are hard to read sometime. With char limited posts, you can say the same thing using multiple replies. This makes is easier to read (I'm a little dyslexic anyway) and easier to reply point by point.

Anyways, just an idea.

Its a fair point, just sometimes things need detail to explain and they can do espcially I have found on historical debates, but I suppose this could br broken down to a point at a time and would make the debate run longer. So in a way it could make the debate better by limiting.

I'm a little loathe to say people can't paste up old stories or articles actually, it's not really doing any harm.
There are too many threads on the same topics at times, but isn't that to be expected in a major current situation like Israel, for example?

If I am not interested in a topic I don't read it.
If an answer isn't an opinion but a C&P I don't read it.
If someone just answers me with articles and links (unless really, really relevant) I don't read it.

I prefer people's opinions rather than C&P text.

Look, this is the point: some current affairs last a day, some last months or years. All threads on these news stories are relavant as this is a news debate forum.

Personally, I think post two short paragraphs about a news item and provide a link, then give your opinion.
That's fair and precise and readable.

Is that fair enough?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Well, as you would expect, I disagree.  Many people don't click on the link and many articles have far too much information in them to be cut down to that level.   What really annoys me is when only the link is put on.

Most people don't read the articles pasted either. One can mention what the article says. You can't force anyone to read, let alone accept what the article says.

And pasting long articles from multiple sources seems to have become a spamming tool. Spoiling any fluid discourse on this forum.

Do agree with you, zack—and I think Raggs said it as well—that some people use cut and paste, without critical comment.  This suggests to me the poster is lazy, and then exacerbates the situation by saying: "Well if you had read what I posted!"  That's bullshit...if you want to point something out, write it down, argue it, but don't act like some ditzy school marm...tut, tut, you didn't read.  Fook...it's obvious you didn't read your own post!  And didge, you do this just as much as Sass...so I'm not playing favorites here.

I used to tell my students: We all know what Bull is...conclusions without facts.  But do you know what COW is?  That's a load of facts, with no conclusion at all.  What's missing, in either case, is any kind of critical thought.  If you are a bullshitter, you didn't think to support or even connect your thesis with facts.  If you are a cowshitter, you didn't bother to think at all...you have offered NO original thought, period!

I"m against use of oblique devices to accomplish some purpose.  What I mean by 'oblique' is something not in line with the point.  Who was it...veya, I think you suggested an oblique rule when you suggested a word limit.  That's oblique...wtf does size have to do with content?  I've got nothing against lengthly articles, if you use them...use the ideas, use the words, expand on it.  Likewise, didge your rule is oblique...I see no reason why you can't use a two-year-old article, if it is connected up to the point at hand.  Just as page limits is beside the point, so is time not a relevant barrier.  Some far-sighted person might have pointed out XYZ out ten years ago, and it helps us clarify by making that connection.

Critical thinking is the main thing, and most of y'all are missing the point.  Do some original thinking, dammit!  Anyone who thinks because it is long, or it uses fancy words, or it was written by some Tibetan PhD...that in and of itself is going to impress us, forget it.  Because it's going to come through: you are not adding to the dialogue, you are trying to sell yourself to us.  If you are insecure, go see a therapist.

As for what Irn said, he's right.  Don't try to use/invent the rules to promote your personal agenda.

Pretty much what I said Quill but I said it quicker

eddie wrote:Pretty much what I said Quill but I said it quicker

Yeah, but I said it stickier.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:Pretty much what I said Quill but I said it quicker

Yeah, but I said it stickier.

That is true. You're stickier than a stick insect who got stuck on a sticky bun.

Actually, you posted yours while I was writing my post.  When I saw yours, I actually said to myself...Yeah, right on!

Original Quill wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Most people don't read the articles pasted either. One can mention what the article says. You can't force anyone to read, let alone accept what the article says.

And pasting long articles from multiple sources seems to have become a spamming tool. Spoiling any fluid discourse on this forum.

Do agree with you, zack—and I think Raggs said it as well—that some people use cut and paste, without critical comment.  This suggests to me the poster is lazy, and then exacerbates the situation by saying: "Well if you had read what I posted!"  That's bullshit...if you want to point something out, write it down, argue it, but don't act like some ditzy school marm...tut, tut, you didn't read.  Fook...it's obvious you didn't read your own post!  And didge, you do this just as much as Sass...so I'm not playing favorites here.

I used to tell my students: We all know what Bull is...conclusions without facts.  But do you know what COW is?  That's a load of facts, with no conclusion at all.  What's missing, in either case, is any kind of critical thought.  If you are a bullshitter, you didn't think to support or even connect your thesis with facts.  If you are a cowshitter, you didn't bother to think at all...you have offered NO original thought, period!

I"m against use of oblique devices to accomplish some purpose.  What I mean by 'oblique' is something not in line with the point.  Who was it...veya, I think you suggested an oblique rule when you suggested a word limit.  That's oblique...wtf does size have to do with content?  I've got nothing against lengthly articles, if you use them...use the ideas, use the words, expand on it.  Likewise, didge your rule is oblique...I see no reason why you can't use a two-year-old article, if it is connected up to the point at hand.  Just as page limits is beside the point, so is time not a relevant barrier.  Some far-sighted person might have pointed out XYZ out ten years ago, and it helps us clarify by making that connection.

Critical thinking is the main thing, and most of y'all are missing the point.  Do some original thinking, dammit!  Anyone who thinks because it is long, or it uses fancy words, or it was written by some Tibetan PhD...that in and of itself is going to impress us, forget it.  Because it's going to come through: you are not adding to the dialogue, you are trying to sell yourself to us.  If you are insecure, go see a therapist.

As for what Irn said, he's right.  Don't try to use/invent the rules to promote your personal agenda.

I totally agree.

If something interests you, start a thread and make your own point - then use an article to illustrate your point. Just taking an article, copying it, pasting it, and adding a link tells the viewers nothing.

I guess it's a matter of taste. I prefer to have someone read the facts, digest it, and then have a discussion with me. I want facts before opinion, opinion without facts is useless and just that, opinion.

Read the facts, take them in and then discuss. If a teacher had stood up and given me his opinion I'd have nodded off, give me the facts, then I'll discuss it.

risingsun wrote:I guess it's a matter of taste.  I prefer to have someone read the facts, digest it, and then have a discussion with me.  I want facts before opinion, opinion without facts is useless and just that, opinion.  

Read the facts, take them in and then discuss.  If a teacher had stood up and given me his opinion I'd have nodded off, give me the facts, then I'll discuss it.

Or do them both simultaneously. How can you even know what facts are relevant without having a thesis? They are one and the same thing in the art of making a point.

Original Quill wrote:

risingsun wrote:I guess it's a matter of taste.  I prefer to have someone read the facts, digest it, and then have a discussion with me.  I want facts before opinion, opinion without facts is useless and just that, opinion.  

Read the facts, take them in and then discuss.  If a teacher had stood up and given me his opinion I'd have nodded off, give me the facts, then I'll discuss it.

Or do them both simultaneously.  How can you even know what facts are relevant without having a thesis?  They are one and the same thing in the art of making a point.

No that are not. Facts are facts. A thesis is what you come up with after reading and understanding the facts.

risingsun wrote:I guess it's a matter of taste.  I prefer to have someone read the facts, digest it, and then have a discussion with me.  I want facts before opinion, opinion without facts is useless and just that, opinion.  

Read the facts, take them in and then discuss.  If a teacher had stood up and given me his opinion I'd have nodded off, give me the facts, then I'll discuss it.

I don't mean start with an opinion, start with a summary of what the thread is about - ie, what is the point of it. Then give the facts, a link, and an opinion. Walls of text are OK if a subject really interests you, but they're just too long and boring otherwise.

Raggamuffin wrote:

risingsun wrote:I guess it's a matter of taste.  I prefer to have someone read the facts, digest it, and then have a discussion with me.  I want facts before opinion, opinion without facts is useless and just that, opinion.  

Read the facts, take them in and then discuss.  If a teacher had stood up and given me his opinion I'd have nodded off, give me the facts, then I'll discuss it.

I don't mean start with an opinion, start with a summary of what the thread is about - ie, what is the point of it. Then give the facts, a link, and an opinion. Walls of text are OK if a subject really interests you, but they're just too long and boring otherwise.

That's a pointless exercise when it is already laid out. If people can't read something that takes at the most three minutes in order to understand what has happened and then discuss it, that's up to them. How long does it take to read a short article. Tell you what, point one out to me, I'd read it and tell you how long it took. It pisses me off when people don't put the whole article.

risingsun wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't mean start with an opinion, start with a summary of what the thread is about - ie, what is the point of it. Then give the facts, a link, and an opinion. Walls of text are OK if a subject really interests you, but they're just too long and boring otherwise.

That's a pointless exercise when it is already laid out.  If people can't read something that takes at the most three minutes in order to understand what has happened and then discuss it, that's up to them.   How long does it take to read a short article.   Tell you what, point one out to me, I'd read it and tell you how long it took.  It pisses me off when people don't put the whole article.

It's not a question of time, it's a question of grabbing someone's interest. At school, if you just did an essay spouting a load of facts with no introduction, no explanation of the point of it, and no opinion, you would get low marks - unless you were ten years old.

Well, I don't need my interest grabbing lol. And it's not an essay, it's putting something up for discussion. I do too much writing IRL to do a synopsis of an article that people can read for themselves in seconds, happy to discuss it once they have read it.