Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Stupid pointless flame wars (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   piscivorous & AemJeff (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=5705)

piscivorous 08-03-2010 04:13 PM

piscivorous & AemJeff
 
Now that sounds like a wonderful recommendation. Once it's built we should all goo take a dump there

AemJeff 08-03-2010 04:17 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 173307)
Now that sounds like a wonderful recommendation. Once it's built we should all goo take a dump there

Sometime soon, pisc will complain that his posts aren't being taken with the seriousness they deserve. It'll be a mystery.

Don Zeko 08-03-2010 04:18 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Hahaha! Yeah, that would be hilarious, because some people elsewhere in the world that they vehemently disagree with but which have the same religion did horrible things. Serves them right.

piscivorous 08-03-2010 04:36 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
And soon you will be able to recognize sarcasm when you read it; or so one would hope! But then I forget just how serious some here take themselves

AemJeff 08-03-2010 04:43 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by piscivorous (Post 173319)
And soon you will be able to recognize sarcasm when you read it; or so one would hope! But then I forget just how serious some here take themselves

Seriously pisc, nobody missed the attempted sarcasm.

AemJeff 08-12-2010 08:48 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
I would like to know what it is about either of my two posts here that warranted putting my name into the thread title. Really - I'm baffled.

bjkeefe 08-12-2010 09:01 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 175123)
I would like to know what it is about either of my two posts here that warranted putting my name into the thread title. Really - I'm baffled.

We must have Balance™.

Also, no talking back to Our Valued Conservative Commenters. It's the new rule, evidently (e.g., e.g.).

Brenda 08-12-2010 09:01 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
The titles aren't meant to imply fault. The threads have to be named something when moved here, but maybe I'll just start numbering them or something.

AemJeff 08-12-2010 09:13 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brenda (Post 175127)
The titles aren't meant to imply fault. The threads have to be named something when moved here, but maybe I'll just start numbering them or something.

Thanks for the clarification. I'm really not too concerned about the use of my name in this context, so long as it's relatively clear what the rules are.

chiwhisoxx 08-12-2010 10:39 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AemJeff (Post 175130)
Thanks for the clarification. I'm really not too concerned about the use of my name in this context, so long as it's relatively clear what the rules are.

But now what can BJ whine about!?!?!

TwinSwords 08-13-2010 01:00 AM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Brenda (Post 175127)
The titles aren't meant to imply fault. The threads have to be named something when moved here, but maybe I'll just start numbering them or something.

Hi Brenda,
I think one of the flaws, if I may be permitted to say so, with the new system is exactly what Jeff and Ocean have expressed, and which I and others have felt: "Why are we being lumped in here?"

Here's a suggestion that might help address this problem: Only move the offending comments to the dungeon -- not the entire thread segment from whence the trouble started. The other posts would just be deleted. In the case of this thread, for example, you would have deleted Don Zeko's and Jeff's posts, and only moved Pisc's to the dungeon.

I like the idea of stigmatizing the true troublemakers (though we clearly disagree about who the troublemakers are). So I think there is value in placing them here in the dungeon. And there is value in titling the sub threads with the names of the belligerents - it increases the stigma, and therefore the likely effectiveness of your new strategy. But it's a mistake, in my view, to drag the innocent into the dungeon along with the troublemakers.

I should finally say, however, that I think this whole exercise is really unnecessary, and reflects nothing so much as BhTV's refusal to come to grips with the fact that it has one (1) problem commenter. Maybe two, if you count Lyle. If you would just ban Fur, and probably Lyle, the character of the forum would be completely different. I realize, though, that you can't do this because (I suspect) you feel compelled to treat them with kid gloves. Conservatives use rage and threats to dominate and manipulate everyone in our society; BhTV's admins are apparently no exception.

TwinSwords 08-13-2010 07:53 AM

Re: Madame Defarge still a'knittin
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Whatfur (Post 175206)
Rage? Threats?... Link?

This is funny, TS. I would say the liberals use hyperbole, misrepresentation, and projection while relying on ignorance to dominate and manipulate everyone in our society and would only have to point UP for my example.

Well, I should clarify. In this case I don't mean physical threats. Broadly speaking, of course, a lot of conservatives really do use threats of physical violence as a kind of low-grade terrorism to influence how the media, public figures, and even school teachers behave. (Remember last year, that video that went around the wingnutosphere showing a classroom of children singing a song about US presidents that briefly included a verse about Barack Obama? That tiny, quiet, suburban school's teachers and administrative staff received thousands of death threats from conservatives all across the country, including from many who travelled hundres of miles to camp out in front of the school protesting. What effect do you suppose this campaign of low-grade terror had on those poor public servants? Like retail clerks who say "happy holidays" instead of the Christian-mandated "Merry Christmas," once you've been confronted by a deranged Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or George Bush fan, you're not likely to make the same mistake twice.*)

But yes, here in the forum, I certainly didn't mean to suggest anyone was physically theatening BhTV. Except for the violent fantasies you have explicated on your blog and the theats (plural or singular) you have privately PMed to forum members here, I was talking about a different kind of threat -- sort of like the threats your hero Kidneystones made before BhTV made the courageous and correct decision to ban him. Remember how he hilariously promised to report Bob and Brenda to the New York Times? I still laugh when I think of that.

Also, too: You're right, I do tend to indulge in a little too much hyperbole. And as for your suggestion that liberals dominate anything, all I can say is "LOL." Well, unless you live in a world, as many teabaggers do, in which even George Bush is a liberal.


*What mistake is that? The mistake of acting and thinking like a free citizen.

bjkeefe 08-13-2010 08:24 AM

Re: Madame Defarge still a'knittin
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Whatfur (Post 175211)
Ohhhhh ok so I should be banned because of other conservatives and because one of your buddies lies about an email and/or PM he has always failed to produce which at this point we know he doesn't have (or would only expose his lie) and because of a story on a website that I have never linked here that has me lampooning a beer commercial.

Still over-protesting, I see. What in the world are you so worried about?

And weren't you just a day or two ago going all tough-guy "bring it on" Bushie about the thought of your AFK and online identities being connected someday?

The more you babble, the more you contradict yourself, and the funnier it is, though, so please, continue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whatfur (Post 175211)
You could have just left it at "Your right" and added an apology.

Well, that wouldn't be honest or accurate for Twin to do that. Besides, if it were appropriate, I'm sure he would have spelled you're correctly.

graz 08-13-2010 10:04 AM

Re: Madame Defarge still a'knittin
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Whatfur (Post 175211)
Ohhhhh ok so I should be banned because of other conservatives and because one of your buddies lies about an email and/or PM he has always failed to produce which at this point we know he doesn't have (or would only expose his lie) and because of a story on a website that I have never linked here that has me lampooning a beer commercial.

You could have just left it at "Your right" and added an apology.

Do you know that the admins have whatfur: The early bhtv years posts? You must remember the violent fantasies and overt (albeit internet) threats you made.

Maybe I'm giving you to much cred ... you can't seem to argue with the same line of B.S. from one thread to another. I think they call that flailing ... one of your faves.

But the admins mustn't have the time or really don't care. Maybe you're the token angry conservative they keep for balance. I hope they don't ban you.
What would I do without you?

graz 08-13-2010 10:17 AM

Re: Madame Defarge still a'knittin
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Whatfur (Post 175219)
So much finger pointing so little fact. Not only do the admins have that information, but so does everyone else. Again, links?

As I said, nobody really cares. You win again!

Ocean 08-13-2010 12:23 PM

Re: Splitters and Lumpers (Josh Cohen & Jim Pinkerton)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinSwords (Post 175181)
Hi Brenda,
I think one of the flaws, if I may be permitted to say so, with the new system is exactly what Jeff and Ocean have expressed, and which I and others have felt: "Why are we being lumped in here?"

Thank you, Twin for your fair inquiry. I will add, that until now I had objected to being thrown in this purgatory, but now I realized that the quote in the thread heading connotes a different place in Dante's geography, which makes it even worse!

I strongly suggest to correct the heading to indicate the appropriate assigned level, where remorse and reconciliation will wash the "Ps" ("Ss" for English speakers) marked on our foreheads.

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/d/dant...ates/09-74.jpg


Hmmm... There's a remote chance I'm supposed to be the one sitting with the sword in her hand...

Nah. I don't like to carry weapons... ;)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.