Originally Posted By: sinij
Quote:
I guess I wish, for the purposes at least of having interesting discussions...


If I was having conversation only with you, I would consider, but so far I have seen too many "graceful exist" followed by "release the hounds!" ...

Quote:
As far as putting people in your neat little groups, I find it utterly amazing that you think that I am close in many regards to some people that have posted on this forum. Sure, there is some agreement... but as you yourself pointed out in a separate thread ( that I reallly wanted to jump into, but didnt) , different sets can have overlap but still be very dissimilar overall.


If you have disagreements, or even ever condemn any shenanigans, you are awfully quiet about it and don't act on it at all.

I mention that before, I will mention it again - if you want to differentiate yourself from conduct of others you cannot be "thick as thieves" throughout the argument, then quietly slip away once things turn ugly and pants-on-your-head behavior start coming into play. Like voting my profile to 1 star then going passive-aggressive when I retaliated. Your choices are : a) not participate at all b) participate and take responsibility c) participate and condemn actions.

Sorry for the derail, but I think Food Stamps argument was coming to a close, so I took this opportunity to have a frank conversation.

P.S. Your PM box is full and was that way for a long while.


As for my PM box.... that is interesting, sounds like Jet broke it again. It has happened before.

The bottom line though, is I am not moderator of this forum. If you want to continue engaging in discussions that have gotten out of whack, I can only assume it is because you enjoy doing so. If you had been following the discussions here for any length of time, you would also know that I have had many disagreements with people on this forum.

I think the heart of the matter is really individualist vs collectivist thinking though. You put people into collectives based on arbitrary judgement, I look at individual responsibility. If a thread goes to shit, sure, I will stop posting in it. But your insinuation that I am somehow "releasing the hounds" or have any communication with most of the posters here outside of these threads is silly.

Other people post what they think, I post what I think. Vuldan, who is the person I think you are referring too , had a short spat - the stopped posting of his own accord. That weeks later, you are still trying to paint others in a certain color based on the actions of someone who had a flame-out strikes me as immensely silly.

Some of the other flame-throwing that has gone on - you have clearly instigated. In cases where you have clearly ignored what was written by someone, twisted it, and put words in their mouth - I am not about to coming running to your defense when they flame you back. Besides, you have been pretty insistent on grouping together people from the get-go ; this trend of yours did not start after you ran into resistance to your dogmas, you came here with a clear chip on your shoulder. Many of your initial posts were even to the purpose and stated intent of lumping "conservatives" together into one homogenous group. Using left wing media articles as kindling, you tried to start flame wars as you attempted to fit anyone who disagrees with you into a box of "them".

I dont know why you would even admit to your one-starring campaign, I found it silly but so be it.

Where you really jumped the shark though, is when I got back from traveling and you started in on me with ad hominim attacks out of the blue. Which you then explained as retaliation for things other people had apparently posted. This type of behavior is a real pet peeve of mine. Ironically enough its also a page right out of W Bushes playbook " your either with us, or your with the terrorists". I reserve my right to be with neither.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)