Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,077 Year: 5,334/9,624 Month: 359/323 Week: 203/160 Day: 20/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Even More Awesome Presidential Election Thread
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


(1)
Message 46 of 308 (671616)
08-28-2012 12:47 PM


Foolish Democrats
because for some reason the democrats prefer these guys
WTF are you thinking democrats
We though when they denied the cardinals' blessing that it was some seperation of church and state thing, turns out its cause they are supporting the POTUS' religion instead.
why the double standard Democrats?
Charlottein2012.com is for sale | HugeDomains
I'll never vote for these fools.

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by jar, posted 08-28-2012 12:50 PM Artemis Entreri has seen this message but not replied
 Message 48 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:06 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


(1)
Message 49 of 308 (671620)
08-28-2012 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by NoNukes
08-28-2012 1:06 PM


Re: Foolish Democrats
They must have finally responded after all the bad press they were recieving.
http://www.examiner.com/...braces-20-000-strong-muslim-jumah
http://m.nypost.com/...w_off_blessing_aLYqq7VnyqG8maCqZaui2K

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:06 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:29 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 51 of 308 (671624)
08-28-2012 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by NoNukes
08-28-2012 1:29 PM


More semantics from NoNukes...YAWN
Or the DNC never turned down the Cardinal Dolan to begin with. The Posts says that Obama "turned down a chance" when the reality is that the only thing to report was that Dolan had offered and had not yet gotten an answer back.
Ignored him, blew him off, snubbed him, denied him, turned him down....really what is the difference? oh yeah you just post here on semantics, my bad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:29 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:54 PM Artemis Entreri has replied
 Message 53 by Taz, posted 08-28-2012 2:58 PM Artemis Entreri has replied
 Message 56 by Taq, posted 08-29-2012 10:36 AM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 59 of 308 (671692)
08-29-2012 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Taz
08-28-2012 2:58 PM


Re: More semantics from NoNukes...YAWN
you 1st: Are you willing to admit that you are here as a troll (just like your avatar)?
it's weird how some people are held to the rules of this site while others are not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Taz, posted 08-28-2012 2:58 PM Taz has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 60 of 308 (671693)
08-29-2012 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by NoNukes
08-28-2012 1:54 PM


YAWN
pure semantics.
I am beginning to see why there so little activity on this board.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by NoNukes, posted 08-28-2012 1:54 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 08-29-2012 3:22 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 62 of 308 (671696)
08-29-2012 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Taq
08-29-2012 10:36 AM


Re: More semantics from NoNukes...YAWN
really? how have they changed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Taq, posted 08-29-2012 10:36 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by jar, posted 08-29-2012 4:18 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 08-29-2012 4:32 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 65 of 308 (671702)
08-29-2012 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Taq
08-29-2012 4:32 PM


No thanks man.
Before JFK was elected many doubted that he would be elected because catholicism was seen as heretical by the religious right. Now we have the religious right questioning the religiosity of a candidate because he didn't immediately add a catholic leader as one of his speakers. That just seems like a complete about face over the last 50 years.
that is not the reason at all, but I understand the "game" of this website now, it just took me a couple of weeks.
I would prefer to not play it.
I know if I disagree with you I will be called names, and my words will be misrepresented and taken out of context against me. none of this will be noticed by the Admin, and then when I retaliate I will get into trouble because the Admin are in on the silly Charade of EvC.
I'll lurk and post occasionally, but I am pretty much finished with active participation on this dishonest and false website.
have a great day.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 08-29-2012 4:32 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by NoNukes, posted 08-29-2012 5:03 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 69 by Taq, posted 08-29-2012 5:06 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 71 by Theodoric, posted 08-29-2012 6:52 PM Artemis Entreri has not replied
 Message 72 by AdminModulous, posted 08-29-2012 7:11 PM Artemis Entreri has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4335 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 74 of 308 (671721)
08-29-2012 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by AdminModulous
08-29-2012 7:11 PM


Re: No thanks man.
You can avoid the getting into trouble part by not retaliating and instead alerting the moderators to someone that is calling you names or causing other discussion problems. We're not all-seeing, and we have our biases - we accept such frailties and ask the membership to put some effort into helping keep discussion civil.
I am sorry but to me that is a total bitch move. and there aint no bitch in me, I feel like its your job as Admin to Administer the site (I am not a rat nor a snitch). But from reading the public record forum it just seems like the Admins are part of the whole thing; I do not find them to be very objective. Hence the charade. I am just glad I figured this cleverly disguised liberal flame site as soon as I did, instead believing the lie.
You, chaoticskunk, have posted one message in Report Discussion Problems Here 3.0, it was Message 642. You reported Theodoric. He was warned, and then he apologized. It seems for you, the system worked.
I felt bad about that, it was more of an inquiry as I was really new and trying to figure out if name calling was allowed here on your debate site, for I had never had one interaction with Theodoric and he comes out of left field accusing me and attacking me, and being insulting. I was really wondering if I could tell him off or if his actions were allowed around here.
But now, instead of using the system, you just condemn it. If you think someone else is being problematic, you could still alert the moderators (preferably with links to the most obvious examples of the problem), rather than getting upset at the moderators for not noticing the problem (or in this case, getting upset that the moderators will at some time in the future, fail to notice a problem until you retaliate).
I am by no means upset. Disappointed maybe (I thought I found a good debate site), but not upset and surly not at the moderators (when you say mods do you mean admin, for I have seen no mods). All I am trying to say is I get it.
I see this site for what it really is:
One person has an opinion that is not radical left.
Five or more people dogpile ontop of that person, accusing them of various things they never stated, insinuating many things (straw manning), and pilling up the responses.
While another group of 3-5 people just make snide snarky remarks, in ALMOST every thread. For example take Jar and click his name, and look at the last 10 -20 posts he has made.are any of them adding to the debate? Are any of them more than two lines of text (my reply to you is probably equal to the trolls that run rampant here, last 3-5 posts added together) or even 50 words? He is not alone (anyone who posts here or lurks knows who adds and who talks smack all day long); unfortunately there is no ignore button and I can’t ignore the trolls (something in my brain auto reads texts when my eyes see it).
I was trying to figure out why there is the huge site with many forums and there are rarely more than 10-15 people on at any given time, and why there are many forums who only have one thread active in them and why the next thread is from last year. I wanted to see why a site like this that looks like it has so much potential, is so stagnant. I think I figured it out. I think this is a flame-site that is run as a charade of this debate style with a topic that is only supported by one side. I mean you have people like Buzzsaw who aren’t even allow to post in science forums (talk about silencing the opposition so no one can disagree with you). Take Foreveryoung, he was permanently banned for sticking up for himself, and un permanently banned probably because there was no one else in the opposition.
I think this is a fairly poorly run site, that is about ran into the ground, and I can see why. (I am sure I will be edited and then banned for speaking the truth) As a new and observant member, who doesn’t know the community (of 15+) and doesn’t have the history and built up biases, I am speaking only in terms of observable evidence that I have seen and read in the past 6 weeks (though one can go back and read about the decline of this site over the years).
Let the trash talking and straw-manning about me commence. You seem like a decent person so I wanted to answer you instead of trying to ignore you with the rest of the trolls/flamers/smack talkers.
Back to lurking

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by AdminModulous, posted 08-29-2012 7:11 PM AdminModulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024