Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jackrabbit]

Nikov was a nice guy (except when he wasn't) but he was always very confrontational and had trouble letting things drop. Mostly I think that had something to do with him being genetically predisposed to rub Aqizzar the wrong way. Seriously, it's almost like he was grown for the purpose.

[Max White]

Well they were/are both big persona, sometimes heads collide.

[nenjin]

I was wondering how long it would take to invoke his memory.

[GlyphGryph]

I think Powder needs to work a bit on realizing that he is not all Republicans.

There are always going to be the wingbats in any party, and the Republican party leadership has decided the path to victory is encouraging and embracing the wingbats, something the democrats generally avoid doing (with notable exceptions).

This doesn't make conservative thought wrong. It doesn't even make it a poor strategy (it works, after all!). But it does make them ridiculously easy to make fun of.

But making fun of the wingnuts is not making fun of you. Making fun of the candidates is not making fun of you. "Republican" is just a label and a political organization, not some facet of personal identity, and stupid Republicans doing stupid things doesn't reflect on you any more than Virex's man hating feminist rants reflect on me, even if people call them on it.

You really need to develop a better sense of humour about this stuff. You are not the party you tend to vote for.

[Jerick]

Urrgh!
So despite massive public and even corporate outcry, despite other TDs literaly yelling at him that what he's doing is terrible and destructive he gives no heed to the concerns raised by pretty much everyone who's heard about this SI and plows on anyway.
Tens of thousands of emails ignored (the Labour party whip reportedly called the storm of emails "vandalism")
The condemnnation of the biggest employers in Ireland disregarded.
Thousands of face to face visits to TDs unimportant.
Written letters to the labour party where replied with a copy of the Minsiters speech to the Dail (which is an immensely patronising thing to do) or smugness.
And for those of you interested a rough description of what was said in the Dail debate on this

Now to clarify my feelings on this matter; THOSE [Redacted because reading the removed material can summon the elder gods]! If I ever get my hands on them I'll [Cesnsored to avoid reader mental scaring] and gather the bone fragments and [Trust us you're better off not knowing]. And then when all that's done I'll [Removed due to copyright notice]

[MaximumZero]

@Nikov discussion: If we're getting some of our banned members back (and we already have one that's been banned again, I'd happily take Nikov back into the fold. He seemed like a cool dude, when he wasn't beating people over the head with his conservatism or being extremely defensive.

[Willfor]

It's very, very difficult to not take some things personally when you're faced with shaming messages directed against members of your own belief system on a constant basis. This is the problem I tend to face whenever religion is brought up on pretty much any topic on this forum. Which, considering the threads I tend to follow, is, in fact, near constant. Especially when on the same forum you are never presented with the good that the non-nutbat members of your belief system are doing.

Yes, the individual is not the collective. However it can seem like a giant piling on of negativity when you're always presented exclusively with the negative. You can't blame a person from getting the impression that he's going to be instantly lumped in with the collective that people are railing against if he lifts his head out of the foxhole.

[Vorthon]

Bunch of douchebags are tossing around paper airplanes in my English class.

[GlyphGryph]

It's very, very difficult to not take some things personally when you're faced with shaming messages directed against members of your own belief system on a constant basis. This is the problem I tend to face whenever religion is brought up on pretty much any topic on this forum. Which, considering the threads I tend to follow, is, in fact, near constant. Especially when on the same forum you are never presented with the good that the non-nutbat members of your belief system are doing.

I guess I can understand this sentiment, especially in regards to religion. It reminds me of being non-straight on a fairly conservative board I use to visit - while I knew I wasn't being singled out for it, and there were people there who had no problem with it, the sheer number of posts threads dedicated to opinions I /knew/ were wrong like complaining about people pushing the "gay agenda" were eventually enough to make me leave.
I guess what I really have a problem with is the idea that someone would make something so crass as political affiliation such a core component of their self identity that THAT would be enough to create the same response. That boggles my mind.

Yes, the individual is not the collective. However it can seem like a giant piling on of negativity when you're always presented exclusively with the negative. You can't blame a person from getting the impression that he's going to be instantly lumped in with the collective that people are railing against if he lifts his head out of the foxhole.

If it bleeds, it leads - the negativity is unsurprising, especially in those threads dedicated to complaining and arguing. Eh... I'll think more about it.

[Tellemurius]

Bunch of douchebags are tossing around paper airplanes in my English class.

Least they aren't paper clip wasps.

[Scaraban]

Bunch of douchebags are tossing around paper airplanes in my English class.

Least they aren't paper clip wasps.

My friends and I started a massive firefight with those during a pep rally once. Are they supposed to leave marks? Because we did.

[Leafsnail]

@Nikov discussion: If we're getting some of our banned members back (and we already have one that's been banned again, I'd happily take Nikov back into the fold. He seemed like a cool dude, when he wasn't beating people over the head with his conservatism or being extremely defensive.

It wasn't really about beating people over the head with his conservatism.  It was more about dropping into threads to taunt (or "Neener neenering" as Toady called it) then acting outraged and walking away as soon as possible instead of answering anything.  Or locking threads while taunting.  Beating people over the head with your ideas in a thread dedicated to arguing about those ideas is better than just trying to annoy people with them as far as I'm concerned.

I guess what I really have a problem with is the idea that someone would make something so crass as political affiliation such a core component of their self identity that THAT would be enough to create the same response. That boggles my mind.

I think the difference is more that as a member of the Republican Party you are supporting Republican leaders and their policies by voting for/ funding them.  Therefore you can be to some extent held responsible for what they do since you're the one of the people supporting them and giving them power.

Wheras if you're part of a religion you aren't directly supporting members of that religion who are doing bad things - you aren't voting for them or funding them (...well, I guess you could be in some cases such as Scientology, but in most cases you aren't).  You don't have a share of responsibility for their actions in the same way.

[Tellemurius]

Ladies and probably gentlemen, when you email customer support we try our hardest to use proper English so you can understand and we don't look like fools. That being said, I don't like being sent "Y U NO REFUND?!?" or that sort. As an adult that can purchase products online I expect more decency than 4chan. Please respond to us with a proper email lest you want a reply of "LOL U MAD?"

[ToonyMan]

That's more reddit than 4chan man.  Reddit love breaking words into small pieces while 4chan are anal about even using emoticons. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Except ;_: and :3 ironically.

[Jackrabbit]

I guess what I really have a problem with is the idea that someone would make something so crass as political affiliation such a core component of their self identity that THAT would be enough to create the same response. That boggles my mind.

I think the difference is more that as a member of the Republican Party you are supporting Republican leaders and their policies by voting for/ funding them.  Therefore you can be to some extent held responsible for what they do since you're the one of the people supporting them and giving them power.

Wheras if you're part of a religion you aren't directly supporting members of that religion who are doing bad things - you aren't voting for them or funding them (...well, I guess you could be in some cases such as Scientology, but in most cases you aren't).  You don't have a share of responsibility for their actions in the same way.

I'd disagree about the religion thing. If you're involved in a religion and members of the clergy (just using Christianity as an example because I don't know that much about other religions) do something like, say, try and cover up a sex-scandal you should be complaining or at least taking some action. Just because you're not supporting them monetarially is no reason for you to sit by whilst evil things (or even just bad things) happen.