Starting to get tired of this forum

Deliberate irony or are you really that addicted to the Kool Aid?

Do you have any idea the personal attacks I endure in this place, from Democrats?

Is your side well represented when Obama lemmings suggest I am illiterate? What does it say for the intelligence of liberals when, based on one post you decide I am a Tea Party member...when, based on your politics I'm closer to socialist?

What intelligence do Democrats deserve when hundreds of times per day you people troll with absurd crap and when challenged run away and hide in another forum....

I am much farther left than Obama...but from what I see, Republicans are the only ones worth debating...at least they can usually substantiate their claims and don't immediately degenerate into "Zombie" characterizations. If you had anything to say you wouldn't have to go cheap (*)(*)(*)(*) like that..

 

Can you name one?

 

I understand completely what you mean. I'd hate to see you go though. You post some intelligent and thought out arguments. And sure sometimes I don't like what you have to say but I certainly respect you as fellow PF'ite.

If you do leave try to pop in once in awhile and see how things are going. Say hi to everyone.

 

The issue is that it wasn't always like that. The conversation today is dominated by hyper-partisans who have no interest in genuine dialogue, whereas not even two years ago it was dominated by relative intellectual giants who were interested in genuine dialogue.

I think that mentality itself is problematic. Outside of the forums, I discuss politics with a lot of friends, and most are of a very different mindset politically. Heck, in my group that I talk politics with there are more who identify with socialism than with Republicans.

The difference is that most in my group are genuinely interested in the dialogue. It usually starts with a general issue, followed by statements of general opinion, followed by an explanation of that opinion. After explaining a what are major differences of opinion, we (speaking of my conversations with a majority in my group) come to an understanding of each other, oftentimes changing each others views in the process. Here's a rich coin for thought - I'm a libertarian, but have been convinced (through a combination of their reasoning and my own) that a Scandinavian-style welfare system would be far superior to our own. This is the kind of system where everyone is given a check from the government. Everyone.

But there are those within my group, one in particular, who are problematic. See, when we discuss things we do so openly, and things are said that could certainly rattle people's views. This one individual on a recent occasion talking about religion mocked the idea of miracles, mocking something important to at least half the people in the room - and, even though it wasn't in good jest, I was fine with it. Later, when they were discussing the president, I made in good jest a racist joke, which most laughed at, and really all knew it was as serious as when we joke about white trash (not at all). This guy is so pc that he couldn't stand it. The issue I have isn't that he was upset by a racist joke, that's actually understandable. The issue I have is that he's comfortable actively insulting half the people in the room by mocking their faith, but not okay with a joke made in good jest that insults no one in the room.

It's this kind of double standard that is a major issue in political discourse in general. The idea that it's okay to mock and insult groups and general, but not these select groups. It's one thing when there's a double-standard based on intent (like it's okay to make a joke about women so long as it's clear it's not serious). I'm fine with people having open season on being offensive and saying we shouldn't offend anyone - but it's the selectivity is troublesome. The idea that you can mock certain groups, irrespective of the 'humor' or intent, so long as it's those groups and not these groups, is a barrier to genuinely beneficial dialogue.

My issue is that the political discourse has deteriorated here, not how much of it I get. I'm not really interested in exposing anyone or proving anyone wrong, but in the genuine discourse. I like getting down to the root of beliefs so that I can better understand the opinions of others, and so that others can better understand mine, but fewer and fewer people here are interested in that kind of genuine discourse.

 

Oh yes, I've proposed that several times to the management: That the whole sub-forum organisation of this site be redone. Currently the sub-forums are way to specific as to not get any attention and vitrually being dead, and some forums cover the same things. Generally the way they have divided the forums is bad in my view. What they ought to do is to have a forum for each big and popular topic, and a miscellanoues forum for the rest. Israel releated stuff would get it's own, as would religion and atheism, gun rights, abortion, etc. That way when you feel like having an israel debate, you just go to that forum, and when you're looking for something more serious and intellectual you stick to the misc forum (because the trolls' issues will have a separate sub-forum).

 

Apparently Jew haters, American haters, Tea Party haters, God haters, religious haters, homophobe haters that also populate this Forum don't really exist? Come now....I see a divergence of views here that do reflect what I see in society as a whole. I was with a group of musicians last week when someone brought up that he didn't want to pay for Obamacare. He was immediately deluged by several libs who said he'd HAVE to pay or get fined. An argument ensued. I said I there were some that said the Republicans should just let it the bill pass and when it crashes and burns, they will then have the upper hand.

You could have heard a pin drop and they all decided not to discuss politics....

 

I appreciate that. I don't think I'll be leaving, I just am so frustrated with the deterioration in quality of posting that I don't think I'll be posting as much.

 

I suggest that would be a tremendous mistake.

I know exactly how you feel. I sometimes get so frustrated by the stupidity and personal garbage I start thinking of getting a TV again...bet then sanity prevails.

The level of debate is not going to go up by taking away the quality. One less reasoned debater means other reasoned debaters get fed up faster and then THEY stop posting.

I was a Canadian in Western New York in my teens. I was not a great hockey player, not all that good actually, but like most Canadians I grew up on frozen ponds and I was at least better than the American kids around me. After two years I told my coach I was done, that I wouldn't stand how bad the other kids were.
He made me stay, I had grade issues, and said basically, how will they get better if you aren't here to beat them up?" I was an, ahem, physical player.
In my senior year, we got our asses killed by a team we had been destroying for three years and I realized those kids had risen to our level. It was humbling and exulting at the same time and we came from behind, as Canadians LOVE to do, and creamed them in 6 of 7 after being down 2-0. It was the best hockey I had ever played and that win, having to work for it was the sweetest I have ever known.

It was also the last hockey I ever played as I had moved on to a better sport, sex and drugs.

Stick around, set an example, make the rest of us rise to your level...

Who knows, you could lose an argument and learn something......it happens.

 

Well, having obliterated my TV with a 12 Gage shotgun in '92 I've been around the internet thing awhile. I know that any regulation is hard swallowed by the wired weird, and maintaining it involves thankless man hours by volunteers who seldom get thanked for deleting threads or moving them to sub forums.

So it's not an easily asked question nor readily solved.

In my opinion the internet is the epitome of the First Amendment, a part of what I still believe to be one of the finest legal documents in the history of mankind, to be held alongside the Magna Carta, Napoleon's civil laws and Canada's Charter of Rights and freedoms, the next logical step from the USC. Forum owners are the vanguard of the New Republic and stand as the last bastion of civil rights expressed...not just identified and given lip service.

Where else will we be able to scream when they come for us because someone SAYS we once dressed as an Arab for Halloween?

With few exceptions, everyone has access to their soap box here, a concept I suspect would have horrified the founding fathers. Idiots and genius, far left and far right, with some far out for good measure; democracy in action. The uneducated but brilliant mixing it up with the over-educated and dim, the blue collar worker standing his own against an MBA and sometimes two morons arguing about nothing.

How much can we screw with that before we are eroding the very concept.?

 

I see what you are saying but I worry about the lug nuts being discarded. The PC ones and others because like you say a double standard is not fair. I tend to think this forum lets people speak their minds pretty openly and there is always the option to ignore certain people if you find their views completely ignorant. Shame is a tool that can only be used against you if you have some doubts about your ideas or behaviors.

I know what you mean about liberal intolerance. I am a moderate which means I bounce back and forth between liberal and conservative ideas and follow a circumstantial ethic. I tend to feel most comfortable around conservatives even though I disagree with many of their ideas. I tend to feel judged and doubted around liberals despite agreeing with many of their ideas. Its a funny world. I just worry about trying to force anyone to play nice.

As Pogo said ---"We have found the enemy, and he is us."

Some of the people on this forum represent "off the curve" political groups. When I quote them I try the best I can to nudge them a little nearer to the edge of normal. But if they lash out I back off. I am free to do that, I do not grudge them their point of view or feel that they restrict mine. A lot of what makes an extremist is the idea that others must think like they do. If I feel that the person blasting me has to shut up for me to be free how am I different from them?

In real life we have the choice of who we let talk to us. In a way we have that same choice here, just look at who is quoting you and if you have had a bad experience with them just don't reply. Personally I don't reply sometimes because I'm tired or bored with the conversation in general, nothing against the poster at all. But I have been on this forum long enough to know who some of the real jerks are and I do not waste my time arguing with them.

So every now and then the forum will be bleak for you. We are all spoiled to getting almost instant quotes and replies, but sometimes the people doing it will be offensive to you.

I hope you stick around though, even if you have to reduce your input to keep sane.

 

Well it's improved from how it was - even though some were concerned with censorship after the new rules came into effect, I noticed a lot of the worst disruptors making less of a presence here - I think they've started cracking down harder on the rules and it's driving some of the serial disrupters off

 

At russian and ehglish-speaking political forums all has the same problem like this one . I mean this topic . If to someones shows a symbolic middle finger then that someone run to create the topic like this one .Another popular topic of forum's insulted member is " I Leave This Forum".

 

Well as I said, I enjoy the meaningful dialogue even if it's with someone with a starkly different view, but it's more about their conduct than the content of their beliefs (which is why I sometimes enjoy discussions with Armor_For_Sleep or w/e his name is, but not with Roy, even though they have almost the same beliefs). As long as they're not being actively problematic, as with insults or such activity, I don't think they should be banned or anything of the sort. There are a few guys here who post 10+times/day but from whom I don't think I've ever seen meaningful contributions, but so long as they follow the rules and just chime in, "well, imo.." then that should be allowed, but they certainly aren't contributing towards any meaningful conversation.

I don't plan on leaving just yet.

You're right, but the frustrating part is that I feel a chunk of good posters have already left after getting fed up with the bs, and I feel like the 'other' you mention left behind.

Just wish there was more we could do to actively improve the forum other than sitting around, waiting and hoping for people to become better posters.

Rule crackdowns are always a mixed bag. I can think of at least one poster who was great, genuinely interested in good dialogue, but he had an extremely low tolerance for the silly posters who didn't have anything of quality to offer (or at least just weren't offering it). He left around the time that they stepped up rule enforcement.

And then there are a few of whom you accurately describe who left, so like I said it's a mixed bag.

Nothing personal, I can guess, but I really don't know what you're trying to say.

 

I agree completely, as long as the play by the rules......

People come and people go, they go and they come, and sometimes its the reverse of that too...

Besides, there isn't much better out there....

Simply posting your frustrations seems to have triggered not only empathy, but desire for change. That's never bad and usually is the beginning of a lot of good. Any recovering alcoholic will tell you that the journey of self learning begins with admission of a problem...seems to me there's not only an admission, but an eager desire to embrace it and fix what needs fixin...

Being a typical Canadian, I LOVE rules. I also hate their enforcement. It is Canadian to expect people to obey them, unseemly to report others and "disappointing" when they do not, so you can make all the rules you want, people need to know where they stand. The question for me, in a true democracy, is how do you implement reasonably and fairly?

I was a hockey official in my mid twenties, for Junior A & B, 15 to 19 year olds....no hockey game is clean, every call is a judgment, and every player breaks the rules several times per period. Which one do you call? You have rules on every damn thing that goes on on that 13,000 square feet of ice, including how much tape is covering the blade. Call them all and you have 44 guys sitting in the penalty box and 250 angry moms and dads marching with feathers and tar and torches.....

I suspect if mankind can figure out how to bring order out of the chaos of a hockey game we can, if we put our minds to it, determine how to keep order with a bunch of adults talking...

Wait!

An image of Harry Reid and John Beohner just leaped into mind......

Screw it, we're doomed....

Drop the gloves..

 

Good.

If I get it right the crux of what you are saying is that you are very frustrated with posters who misrepresent your views and then force the dialogue down un-constructive paths. All the sudden a meaningful conversation becomes impossible as almost everyone throws insults and becomes wildly defensive.

How to fix it though, hmmm. Maybe if there were a way to split the thread if it gets too off track? Somehow force the screamers to scream elsewhere? Or maybe a way to invite more reasonable posters into a more private debate?

Things to think about.

 

You haven't seen anything until you've been to Germany, in terms of rules. I bought a ticket to a movie in a theater where apparently it is assigned seating. Whatever seat is on the ticket is where you sit. Well, the theater showing the film has about 10 people in it, but seats about a 100. I ignore the seat number on the ticket and sit someplace else closer to the screen and in the center. About 5 minutes before the movie starts an usher with a flashlight approaches me.

"Ticket gefallen" meaning ticket please...show me your ticket.

So I show him the ticket...holy crap, you would have thought I robbed a bank.

"Sie muss sitzen, wo Sie zugewiesen sind!"....You must sit where you are assigned!

I almost started an international incident, by sitting in an unauthorized seat in a near empty theater.

I'm hoping you Canadiens/Canadians aren't like that.

 

OH GOD NO!

We MAKE rules, but as I wanted to convey, hate their enforcement. We have that kind of seating at events too, but no one cares after the first period....whether it's a hockey game or the opera...

Hell the City of Vancouver has BANNED cigarette smoking in all parks, beaches, and city owned property. However they only hired about four people, in a city of 600,000 to enforce that rule, and even then only between May and Labor Day and armies of people to pick up butts.

We switched to metric 35 years ago and still publish many prices and distances in both, we have no laws outlawing prostitution but we don't condone it and it is NOT a very big problem..

Marijuana is not legal anywhere, but no one gets arrested for simple possession, ever and if it should happen they would not likely have to really face the charges.

Vancouver seldom is ever enforces jay walking, and yet it is only a problem in the slums and the financial district....odd that..

No, we like knowing where the boundaries are so we can sneer at the people who veer out of them....and it works. It delights but confuses libertarian Americans and Swedes, Norse, Poles, Ukranians, Indians, and Russians absolutely love it...

We're all kind of schizoid but we've never had a race riot, our crime rate is among the best in the world, we are among the healthiest people in the world even with the high cancer and diabetes rate among our natives...

And I like not having to do things a certain way because "there's a man with a gun over there..."


And oh, good German there. I was in East Germany by way of Poland during the rebirth of Solidarity ...in those days that "usher" would have been armed with a baton and had a KGD agent lurking in the shadows..

Canadiens est les en Fancaise Quebecois. Ju suis en Anglo, du Canadian, who speaks little French a spattering of Mandarin and Cantonese and can ask for butter chicken in Hindi...


And if you think that French is terrible, try me in German. HA!

 

But that is the problem. Racists, nazis, and Islamophobes very rarely have anything of substance or value to say. The Nazis are at least open about themselves, but the rest are stuck in the intellectual limbo of having to deny their very nature!! Being a racist is what bad people do, they are not bad people, so they must not be racists!! They are simply telling a truth the "PC liberal media" covers up. Good thing they are around to enlighten us all!! So they say Islam is a death cult (a comment entirely free of substance), but don't you dare call them Islamophobes!! Or they say that black people are inherently more prone to criminality, but don't you dare call them racist. It is a boring game, and one no person of intelligence wants to play. I want to be exposed to alternative viewpoints, I am a very weird mixture of beliefs that extend from the far right to the far left, but I do not want to be exposed to idiocy, simply because it is an alternative perspective which I already rightly dismissed long ago!!

 

The real problem is no conservatism, it is partisanship. Partisanship requires one to give up on critical thinking. To abandon all principle. One need only repeat the party line at all moments. The fact that the line changes radically from one administration to the nex is irrelevant to them!! It leads to unthinking members repeating the same nonsense and apologizing for their team no matter what they do, and attacking the other team no matter what they do. Principle, effective governance, etc are all irrelevant. All that matters is the D or the R next to the candidates name.

 

Based on recent developments I'm feeling like it's all a waste of time myself.....

I think I'll be taking a break myself......

I cannot stand double standards, ...

 

The country is divided, but the principles are nearly identical. You have simply been made to believe they are polar opposites by all the political theater which takes place in this country, in order to distract people from the real problems in this country. The government shutdown is a perfect example. Our healthcare system is very seriously broken. We spend at least twice as much as any other country and get equal or worse outcomes. Yet in 2009, when our politicians sought to fix this crisis, they let the healthcare lobbyists write the bill. That is where the loyalties of both parties really lie. Not with any ideologically consistent platform, but with the elite interests that pay their bills. Since both parties are lobbied and funded by the exact same interests, their actions are unsurprisingly only radically different in rhetoric.

 

A wholly incoherent and uninformed post, filled with nothing but ad-hominem towards a group you fundamentally misunderstand. I have a graduate degree in Middle Eastern studies. I have read numerous books on Islamism and similar subjects, and never once did I see them talk about Jihad as a primarily spiritual endeavor. I have often heard Muslims themselves speak of this, and decry terrorists for misconstruing their religion. But among western academics, not much. It is a strand of thought you wholly invented in your own mind.

 

Quite the bubble measuring contest. I'm just going to throw this rhetorical question out there to everyone then back away slowly.... Does it feel like they're stepping on your toes when others refuse to conform to the same stereotypes as you do?

 

Since I have gotten off topic from the gist of this thread, I will weigh in. There are many problems at this forum, and I think the culture of the forum has become so diseased, that doing something positive to change it is nearly impossible. This is not a place for serious intellectual discussion, it is a place for light entertainment. And as I said, there are many problems, the most serious one is not one which can be moderated away. The problem is that posters at this forum almost all have a terribly inaccurate sense of their own intelligence. In their mind, they are absolutely brilliant individuals running roughshod over their political opposites at every opportunity!! They are consistently destroying the idiots with their intellect and facts. When in reality, there are maybe a handful of very intelligent people at this forum. We are not discussing the nature of power, Empricism vs rationalism, materialism vs its post-modern critique, etc, etc. We are discussing whether or not Obama is a Muslim and was born in Kenya, whether Bush did 9/11, whether Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery, and so on and so on. We have one side telling us Obama is the greatest president of all time, while the other is telling us he is the worst world leader from any country, other than Hitler and Stalin. This is not a place which draws in intellect. So there is a very good chance, that if you are at this forum, you are far less intelligent than you think you are. A giant dose of humility is what people need. If they got it, they would be more willing to listen to alternative viewpoints, because they would know they didn't have it all figured out yet.

 

We've reached a point where the topics being discussed are extremely serious and the prospects for avoiding a national disaster caused by one man look really dire.

Polity in the face of disaster is a power I find difficult to muster.

Troianii, who knows? Maybe you'll be the one to write this country's 21st Century version of, "Why England Slept."



PK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_England_Slept