Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

10-12-2017 , 11:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
While Fly is certainly belligerent, he clearly knows things and makes substantive posts.

However, I agree about the chezlaw thing. Fly posts exactly the same **** every time chezlaw posts anything. It's tiresome.



This seems pretty unfair, because the post of Clovis's that you give for your evidence here was made after you brought up Clovis' post reports. I have no idea what the rules are, but bringing those up out of the blue does seem like pretty bad form.
The venn diagram of people calling for wholescale ignores of a poster and people who want that poster banned is effectively a single circle, and people quibbling about that are just trying to angleshoot.
10-12-2017 , 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
Clovis literally acts like the deplorables of p7 when anyone questions him, it's never a good look.
Politics Forum Rules
1. Attack the argument, not the arguer.
2. Don't be a troll.

adopting the passive voice doesn't make you less guilty of being a low-content troll
10-12-2017 , 11:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
That you aren't the least bit pragmatic and don't understand that free speech doesn't mean unlimited speech.
Impressively disingenuous post given multiple times during the debate it was explicitly pointed out nobody is arguing for unlimited free speech, some of which you responded to so you know I don't think this.
10-12-2017 , 11:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
You are being so ****ing disingenuous it's disgusting. You don't have infractions or deleting posts?

I never called for his banning. You are straight up lying.
I can only assume from your stance on fly and on banning gnatzi speech that you are in favor of gnatzis. We got ourselves a Canadian Gnatzi friends!
10-12-2017 , 11:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6ix
Point: Ignoring context, it seems chez is saying it's ALL harmful to some degree so the metric shouldn't be 'offensiveness', as people can have thick skins and not have their feelings hurtover things that are clearly harmful to society as a whole. Just to name one thing.

Counterpoint: Not ignoring context, the dude let nazis come in the windows over at pv8.8, in broad daylight. And all we told him to do was just close the windows and bar the door for a spell until it could be sorted out. So, uhhhh, yeah.
Point: if people stick to the substance of the post then it's real politics and makes some sort of sense. If they instead just want to make it personal and about the Pv7 or Bruce or AC or ... then it isn't/doesn't.

Counterpoint: Same as point but in the other order
10-12-2017 , 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Why do people keep engaging fly over and over? He is hands down the worst poster itt and that includes the awful trumpkins. His thinking is poisonous for progressives. He has no interest in actually winning any debate and certainly has no interest in winning elections. He only cares about appearing ideologically pure. He is a left version of the taliban.

Put him on ignore. The thread improves 30% with that one action.

PS fly don't bother responding to me as I ignore everything you post.



p.s.

Spoiler:
10-12-2017 , 11:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
I can only assume from your stance on fly and on banning gnatzi speech that you are in favor of gnatzis. We got ourselves a Canadian Gnatzi friends!
Yep I'm a nazi. Checkmate you won the debate. Well argued.
10-12-2017 , 11:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty Lice
WTF guys. PR has like 15% power, 50% water, Trump attacked the press, is gutting the ACA via EO, god knows what's going on w/ NK, and you are arguing over stupid ****.
Welcome to the Internet.
10-12-2017 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by chezlaw
Point: if people stick to the substance of the post then it's real politics and makes some sort of sense. If they instead just want to make it personal and about the Pv7 or Bruce or AC or ... then it isn't/doesn't.

Counterpoint: Same as point but in the other order
Spoiler:
10-12-2017 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
The venn diagram of people calling for wholescale ignores of a poster and people who want that poster banned is effectively a single circle, and people quibbling about that are just trying to angleshoot.
I think you misunderstand what I'm saying is unfair.

Clovis said some things about Fly and not wanting him banned or whatever, and then you posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Lol, OK. So your post report asking me why fly was allowed to post as he does was not a request to have his posts deleted or to have him banned? Like, what other tools do you think I have in my tool box to use?
As far as I can tell, this is the first time that Clovis' post reports are mentioned.

He later replies:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Please post where I called for his banning itt or through reported posts?
He also later complains about you publicly mentioning his private post reports.

You then use the post quoted above as evidence that he said it was okay for you to bring up his post reports. I'm saying that is unfair, because he only said that after you brought up those post reports. At that point they were no longer private.
10-12-2017 , 11:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Truant
I get the sentiment. "We" fought wars over all kinds of things, from some folks pov we are fighting one over "radical Islam" right now. Slope re-lubricated?
As soon as you show a link between the Gnatzis and Radical Islam.
10-12-2017 , 11:31 PM
WaPo: Trump's anger over having to certify the Iran deal led his team to come up with a plan where he wouldn't have to anymore by kicking the can to Congress

Quote:
President Trump was livid. Why, he asked his advisers in mid-July, should he go along with what he considered the failed Obama-era policy toward Iran and prop up an international nuclear deal he saw as disastrous?

He was incensed by the arguments of Secretary of State Rex *Tillerson, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and others that the landmark 2015 deal, while flawed, offered stability and other benefits. He did not want to certify to Congress that the agreement remained in the vital U.S. national security interest and that Iran was meeting its obligations. He did not think either was true.

“He threw a fit,” said one person familiar with the meeting. “. . . He was furious. Really furious. It’s clear he felt jammed.”
10-12-2017 , 11:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
I think you misunderstand what I'm saying is unfair.

Clovis said some things about Fly and not wanting him banned or whatever, and then you posted:

As far as I can tell, this is the first time that Clovis' post reports are mentioned.

He later replies:

He also later complains about you publicly mentioning his private post reports.

You then use the post quoted above as evidence that he said it was okay for you to bring up his post reports. I'm saying that is unfair, because he only said that after you brought up those post reports. At that point they were no longer private.
He earlier posted in the open forum that everyone should ignore Fly. It's functionally the same thing, even if Clovis wants to angleshoot.
10-12-2017 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatkid
Hey bro your a twitter pro. Do you know the tweet they said got her banned? I was trying to find it.
tbh, I barely even know how to Twitter, but I think she mouthed off at Ben Affleck or whatever and caught a 12-hour ban.
10-12-2017 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
He earlier posted in the open forum that everyone should ignore Fly. It's functionally the same thing, even if Clovis wants to angleshoot.
Huh?

I don't agree with Clovis re: Fly, but "everyone should ignore Fly" and "the mods should ban Fly" are not remotely equivalent.
10-12-2017 , 11:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
Huh?

I don't agree with Clovis re: Fly, but "everyone should ignore Fly" and "the mods should ban Fly" are not remotely equivalent.
And also I sympathize with his complaint that post reports should be private, and should not be brought up by mods in threads in order to make a point.
10-12-2017 , 11:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
He earlier posted in the open forum that everyone should ignore Fly. It's functionally the same thing, even if Clovis wants to angleshoot.
Talk about gaslighting.

Your position is had there been no reported post you still would have equated my question about why people dont ignore fly as a call for his banning?
10-12-2017 , 11:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty Lice
WTF guys. PR has like 15% power, 50% water, Trump attacked the press, is gutting the ACA via EO, god knows what's going on w/ NK, and you are arguing over stupid ****.
I can't afford this right now, but if you're paying I'll go to PR and set up solar power generators.
10-12-2017 , 11:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
Huh?

I don't agree with Clovis re: Fly, but "everyone should ignore Fly" and "the mods should ban Fly" are not remotely equivalent.
Lol. It's a call that Fly should be invisible to everyone. A distinction without a difference.
10-12-2017 , 11:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I think you will see that I posted thoughtful responses to everyone who questioned me during the free speech debate. We had a good honest debate on all sides.

I mock people when they feel thier contribution is lol Clovis or Clovis is the worst with no content or engagement with the actual debate.
I especially liked when you said you believed in the 1st Amendment more than I did...
10-12-2017 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
And also I sympathize with his complaint that post reports should be private, and should not be brought up by mods in threads in order to make a point.
Especially given I didn't even ask for his banning in said reported post.
10-12-2017 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Talk about gaslighting.

Your position is had there been no reported post you still would have equated my question about why people dont ignore fly as a call for his banning?
Yes. Your hypocrisy was already obvious.
10-12-2017 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
Posts like this are the absolute worst. I'm pretty sure ~all of us agree that all of that **** is horrible, so what? You would just have the forum shut down until all is right with the world?
Yeppers. That is EXACTLY what I said. Shut the forum down until all is right in the world.
10-12-2017 , 11:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Lol. It's a call that Fly should be invisible to everyone. A distinction without a difference.
And arguing people shouldn't go see Ann Coulter speak is the same as arguing she should be permanently expelled from the US.
10-12-2017 , 11:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Impressively disingenuous post given multiple times during the debate it was explicitly pointed out nobody is arguing for unlimited free speech, some of which you responded to so you know I don't think this.
So it's just where we draw the line then. Groups that caused the death of millions of people and lost a war is mine. Your's is people who are mean on the internet?

      
m