The Unofficial Poster of the Year 2005 by way of vote

Vote for Phat.Phat is the most improved poster over the last year, and his posts are now normally well balanced and well thought out.Brian.

Second Phat. Varied and interesting and well mannered.

I agree with the others who voted Holmes.

Mike, I hate to sound like a nit-picker, but your numbers are off.Yaro, for example, was nominated earlier this month for a POTM for one of the most brilliant analogies I've ever encountered.Ahem. And my total is shy 1: not a big deal, but the notches carved in my PC don't lie I'm still contemplating my own vote.We have an embarrassment of wealth here. I would find it hard to argue with any of the nominations posted so far.

I tend to like Crashfrog's posts the best. They are direct and usually make a clear, concise point. Honorable mention to Percy, cavediver, Modulous, and Parasomnium.

Put down my vote for Holmes. Definately, in my view, the preeminent personality throughout 2005.

Holmes vote here, too.

Over the years we've had POTM topics, I've probably given more nominations to Holmes than anyone else. I think he wore me out, and I don't bother anymore. As I recall, his great strengths are in the "Coffee House".For lack of a better idea, I guess I have to vote "Holmes" also.Maybe that "fool" (meant to be friendly) mike the wiz can compile the entire years POTM nominations.Moose

I don't care how clear and concise people's posts are, my vote goes to Brad.

Although there are loads of great posters, I like reading holmes the most.His writing is assured, thoughtful and sexy.

Well thanks for all the nominations (and yes Tony I read yours and appreciate knowing what "lurkers" think). I really did not expect this (esp from crash).There are way too many people that I like to say who is "best" and essentially it comes down to picking one of the bubbling balls at the top of the lotto machine of really great posters. Here's my thought processes...While I like Crash's posts and think he is definitely a pre-eminent poster and personality, if it is quality of posts I honestly can't return the favor. He is fantastic but not consistent in his fantasticity (and admittedly I myself would not pass that test).If they were still regular posters dsv and CK would have been up there and I probably would have chosen them. But attendance is mandatory!I think Phat is really great, and I don't want to continually sound condescending to suggest he is "most improved". My only problem might be that he is lesser in providing answers than asking important questions.As a big surprise to most, I'd almost consider nominating Faith or Canadian Steve. They both write so well, and what is debate without opposition? Unfortunately they don't do well with the "continuing" of debate, or thoughtfully resolving it.I think it would come down to Parsomnium (sic?), RAZD, and Ben as being those who I felt were best moving things along for me personally during this year. Ben was certainly one of the most inspiring for me.But I think I'll put RAZD down as my choice. He posts more than the others (at least to me it seems he did) and what's more he created some pretty good (we're talking long and well laid out) posts to try and bring closure or at least a focus on closure to debates. We had some disagreements, but most lay within grey areas of logic where anything could happen.Man, but I really want to say that this is just a specific selection for this year, and does not mean that I think "less" of anyone else, especially those I might not have mentioned. Like I noted earlier, watching EvC is like watching the balls in a lotto machine, posters bobble up and down (I know I hit some really low portions of the bowl this year). RAZD's ball just seemed (for me) to stay around the top and perhaps get picked more often.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Are you referring to Brad, or are you referring to Brad McFall?

gosh{shuffles feet}thanks holmes. Ah, the benefits of the profligate shotgun approach, eh? 6 POTM out of 4329 (with this one) is not that high a productivity percentage. Especially when you consider that I started 3/15/2004 ....(For an early post see {PROOF against evolution} thread (Probability silliness) subtopic, msg 191 (click)) Ben regularly makes me think another level deeper than I had considered, getting more to the heart of the argument in the process. I think he has been a big help as another administrator too, helping the whole forum to operate better.ButI think that an award should be considered for the best topic of the year rather than a specific poster - it may originate with one view but through a really good debate come to some resolution from opposing viewpoints: the contributions of all posters on the thread being valuable to that end. Without discussion the topics would be dead words, what makes a topic great is the give and take, post and riposte. RiverRat is one that comes to mind as well.The question to me is what topics made you reconsider your position and then either validate it or change it based on the input of others?For me that would be the {Atheist Morality} thread (click) ... where both you and ben were involved? Still considering that one.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

before i post anything, i always ask myself, 'how is arachnophilia going to pick this apart?' so i guess he is the one poster who has had the most impact on me. it just goes to show that we don't have to be in abject opposition to have a good discussion.

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

Well you should probably start a new thread on that, so as not to divert this one. There were a couple points where people showed me something I was wrong about or had not known, but that is not something earth shaking.Unfortunately no thread this year related to EvC in specific got me thinking "best thread" in terms of really making me think. Canadian Steve's thread on voluntary adjudication could have been great until its actual intent was revealed, which was not the stated topic. I'd say your thread on defining abortion and life based on how we look at death was probably the best. It was a unique an interesting take on the subject.To be honest, and why I feel okay writing this post in this thread, it largely contributed to my nomination of you for POTY. On top of good writing, it was a novel approach.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)