[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not know but , I think many times Ryan was playing Devil’s Advocate[/quote]
Its offcourse a possibility he did, but I understood him for being honest about hes opinion and btw I often agreed with him.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
This quote from another thread is the perfect example of why there’s no good debate. Anyone with a half a brain sees this and leaves immediately. [/quote]
This was going to be my third point. The extreme-ism and lack of knowledge (intellect? education?) seems shocking in many cases. Obviously we cannot stop people posting their “opinions” or incorrect “facts” but we should ignore them or shoot them down.
For example, I recall a thread that was something like “candidate Obama is in league with the Muslim king of Kenya.” This type of post should either be ignored, or immediately dis-proven by the good posters of all sides. I recall entire threads that went on and on about mis-understood studies or incorrect “facts.” One thread I recall off the top of my head was about how the fort hood shooter was a part of the Obama administration…because he attended some academic conference (apparently no one understood what an academic conference was). Another thread went on-and-on about a study conducted in Mexico about THEIR expats living in the States. However, it was mis-understood and posters thought that immigrants had been questioned (not Mexicans in Mexico).
These type of threads decrease the signal-to-noise ratio considerably. Is there anything that can be done about them though? Obviously some posters will always post foolish or incorrect things in good faith, but can we correct them? Or is that just something that must be dealt with when operating on the internet?
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Yup. Back in the day, there were just as many liberals as there were conservatives - the Prof, Vroom, BigRagoo, etc. balanced out the Zebs, Rainjacks, etc.
[/quote]
I wherent here when does guys posted, but only a year ago it where more different posters than it is now.
Yhea I know, its fucking frustrating to argue against the army of Rand and Reagan ;p
joining in on those threads about homosexuality is as fruitfull as discussing womans rights with the taliban.
well some of them are upstanding anti-militarist, It showes that there are something good inside some them.
LOL.
agree.
Who is the hillbilly fuck?
[quote]John S. wrote:
I’ll be the first to admit that even tho I disagree’d with Lixy on just about everything, he was fun to have debates with.
PWI, while it has improved in some aspects really has lost the Liberal’s. I will be the first to say that I wrongly associated everyone who was liberal with Ryan and treated them all as such. For that I apologize and I believe I have changed my attitude.[/quote]
I find that you behave just fine John.
Sorry for the long post, but I wanted to reply to a lot of people and didn’t want to have 10 posts in a row as some posters are wont to do.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
All you’ll find is more sophisticated ways to call someone a cunt cropping up.[/quote]
Even if only this, wouldn’t doing that alone improve the forum?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Since I am part of a theoretical “old guard”, having been posting on PWI since 2003, I’d say there is a definite loss in quality and interest in PWI. A few points:
- To Gambit’s point, every thread gets hijacked into fight over the philosophical validity and unsolicited defense of libertarianism, it seems. It’s dull. Very dull. Used to be, practical politics were discussed by people of many different viewpoints who had lots of knowledge on real world policy. Now, you raise a point about whether the Fed’s QE2 program is bad or good, and the thread gets derailed into why we should privatize the air we breathe.
It’s almost childlike with some posters - an incessant need to constantly divert whatever topic people are discussing into a diversion into some “new” idea they happen to pick up and desperately want to show how “cool” it is. [/quote]
This is more-or-less exactly what I was thinking.
I personally don’t care so long as those type posts are limited to their own threads. Honestly, it’s been some of the only good discussions on here where people were overall productive.
You don’t think a more polite tone (at least to newer posters or one’s who don’t like/want the negativity) would encourage people with more reasonable viewpoints to come and stay here? I think it would.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
Bill Roberts [/quote]
Yeah, I miss him too. He’s one of the few posters who I recall saying “thanks.”
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
On second thought…if there were some that I wish would leave it would be the condescending posters.[/quote]
I’ll take some blame here because I think I’ve been condescending to you in the past and now I mostly ignore you. I don’t mean anything personal by it, but your insistence of posting about your “worldview” (about libertarianism?) in most threads becomes quite tiring. Could I ask you to derail threads less frequently?
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Yup. Back in the day, there were just as many liberals as there were conservatives - the Prof, Vroom, BigRagoo, etc. balanced out the Zebs, Rainjacks, etc. [/quote]
Vroom! There’s a name I haven’t heard for a long time.
Yeah, I think this is a major issue. I recall you being “called out” for not responding to every post on a thread you had posted in maybe 10times already.
Agree.
Yep, this is a major problem.
[quote]We used to have fantastic debates here between Democrats and Republicans. Now, there’s some slight, broken debate between Republicans and wingnuts, and the threads just gimp along.
It’s a shame.[/quote]
Exactly. This is why I started this thread.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
A long nit-picking post. [/quote]
Honestly DD, I sometimes wonder if you are purposefully trolling. FI was stating that he doesn’t like these type of posts and then you posted this…exactly what he doesn’t like. Why did you do so?
[quote]666Rich wrote:
I believe the name calling and ad hominem attacks takes away from what a knowledgeable post could be. It shows excessive emotional attachment to the issue at hand which is the prelude to bias of information as opposed to a constructive discussion.
People do tend to talk too much instead of listening on issues they are not as informed about. I post in a fraction of what i actually read.
[/quote]
I agree completely.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I agree , if you make a statement each of the so called Conservatives will take a word and ague that word, it has nothing to do with debate with some , it is all about must win
[/quote]
This is a good point that you and FI are making and one I honestly hadn’t considered before.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Heh. I’m amused with how this thread turned out, considering Gambit’s intent. [/quote]
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. This type of discussion was my intent.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Pretty much when Rainjack and Lixy left, this place lost all its appeal. I loved arguing with that hillbilly fuck, he was a good guy.
[/quote]
Who is the hillbilly fuck?
[/quote]
Rainjack was.
He was the man though- definitely one of those characters where we both acknowledged that if we didn’t talk politics, we’d get along fine.
Plus we were both “old timers” on this forum, which used to mean a lot.
And just for the record, I will never take a polite tone with anyone. I never have, and I’ve never asked for one in return.
I can deal with doucher insults, as long as there is SUBSTANCE in the posts, and it’s not just refuting for the sake of refuting.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally do not know but , I think many times Ryan was playing Devil’s Advocate[/quote]
Its offcourse a possibility he did, but I understood him for being honest about hes opinion and btw I often agreed with him.[/quote]
I agreed with him on occasion as well , like I say I would speculate his satanic advocacy 
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
This quote from another thread is the perfect example of why there’s no good debate. Anyone with a half a brain sees this and leaves immediately. [/quote]
+1. At least back in the day when someone made such a crazy post they would back it with a well thought out argument. Aka 300-500 words explaining their position. Now people seem to be going for quantity of posts rather than quality.
The current crop of posts really boils down to:
“Religious people are stupid”, responded by a guy who says “No. Religious people are not stupid. You are stupid.”. Back and forward for a hundred posts.
I remember a thread on abortion a few weeks ago. The pro- and anti- abortion sides were just flinging mud at each other and trying to come up with analogies to prove the other side was evil.
By the time I made a post, page 6 or 7, nobody had provided any data. People were basing all the arguments on their feelings. So I spent about 20 minutes coming up with data on proper use of birth control and unwanted pregnancies. And then proceeded to spend another 20 minutes making a post with this data. Time for one post = 40 minutes.
I logged on the next day to see what was happening and if anyone had responded to the data. Nothing. Just another 6-7 pages of the same people flinging mud at each other.
Thus I no longer get involved in abortion threads. They are fighting over feelings.
Likewise I ignore threads filled with libertarians unless it is a pure philosophy thread. Because otherwise arguments go like this:
Libertarian: “Open borders is the only moral option…you can’t tell people where they can move etc”
Reasonable poster (usually sloth): “But then what about all the extra pressure on social services (schools, hospitals etc).”
Libertarian: “In a libertarian world social services wouldn’t exist” or “Social services are also immoral”.
Me: /facepalm. “Fuck off retards we aren’t in a libertarian world and we do have social services. Honestly pick a position that makes sense given current events and policies, not according to an ideal world.”
Reasonable poster (again Sloth): “But the people coming in are dirt poor with little education, the exact type of person to vote for MORE government. So in practice they will make society less libertarian.”
I feel ashamed to say that Mak is one of the better posters in the current PWI. And most of his posts are still just snarky one liners and jokes.
[quote]phaethon wrote:
I feel ashamed to say that Mak is one of the better posters in the current PWI. And most of his posts are still just snarky one liners and jokes.[/quote]
That fact that you even think this frightens me. I’ll be the first to admit a lot of my posts are quite poor in quality.
Just for the record, I’d be up for a good debate, but I really can’t be bothered to put in any effort if all I’m going to receive is commentary about my age or country. The current problems (as I see them) are:
-
We have posters (always the same ones) thinking that bringing up age or origin is somehow pertinent to the topic being discussed. Simply put, the fact that I am from New Zealand or that Orion is from Austria has no bearing on the debate. The fact that the poster you are responding to is younger than you is not relevant.
-
We have posters who have given up and simply troll. I have been guilty of this. I have my suspicions about other people who have started to do this. I tried at one stage to spark discussion on the possibility of reducing abortion rates by furthering education instead of seeking a path that is the equivalent of beating your face against a brick wall. All I found was emotional response and people burying their heads in the sand. I quickly lost interest.
-
We have unbridled arrogance due to a majority of conservatives posting (although that’s not to say it is endemic to them). I don’t think any of the liberal posters (or anyone other than a conservative) appreciates being told that they are single handedly responsible for the downfall of society or just plain immoral. There is never any debate, it is just outright stated as if it were a well established fact (which it is not). No reasoning or justification is given, it is just shouted out like an insult on a playground.
Now, I feel that this has been the status quo since the beginning. Is this just a system that was doomed to self destruct, or are we not too late to still have some good debate? There have been some very good threads in the past, but they are effectively stifled by the crap that normally gets posted.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. This type of discussion was my intent. [/quote]
Referring to the DD and FI exchange looking like any other thread.
[quote]tom63 wrote:
Maybe people realize after awhile that the Internet can be a huge waste of time and don’t feel like bothering with it? It’s not like it really matters .
Check out any board where people talk about stuff of any sort . It’s all the same .
As opposed to real life where your words might have consequence and meaning .[/quote]
(I have not read all the other replies that follow this, so sorry if my reply contains redundancies.)
I agree that the Internet is a huge waste of time if used in that manner. However, I have learned a TON from this website since 2002 when I first started reading here. The website itself helped me to achieve a body I literally had not believed I could have achieved back then, and this forum has played a large part in helping to shape and crystallize my beliefs. In a different manner, the website and the knowledge I’ve gained here have helped me out massively in my business dealings. Granted at this point I do tread a fine line between learning and time-wasting, and I have to guard against the latter.
Incidentally I wish you didn’t feel that it was such the waste of time that you feel it is, Tom. I really enjoyed your posts back when you posted regularly and I learned a great deal from you. I understand you have a busy life with your practice and such, but you certainly did make this forum a better place.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
This thread seems to have sparked a little debate, of that I am glad.
One thing that I find surprising is that there seems to be avid proponents of name-calling and derogatory speech. To me, this is particularly surprising coming from posters who want others to come back. I think it’s one thing for two guys (let’s say Rainjack and Fighting Irish) to argue back and forth with vitriol as they know (knew?) each other and enjoyed such conversations. It’s another entirely when new or sometimes posters are “attacked” by 3 or 4 different posters who mostly just throw insults.
Perhaps there is a connection between negative speech and people leaving? Could we “tone it down” for newcomers or limit the personal attacks to people we know enjoy such things? [/quote]
We had this same debate in the steroid forum a couple of years back.
My take: any member worth his salt is not going to be deterred by a little bit of name-calling or foul language, asshole.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]John S. wrote:
I’ll be the first to admit that even tho I disagree’d with Lixy on just about everything, he was fun to have debates with.
PWI, while it has improved in some aspects really has lost the Liberal’s. I will be the first to say that I wrongly associated everyone who was liberal with Ryan and treated them all as such. For that I apologize and I believe I have changed my attitude.[/quote]
I find that you behave just fine John.
[/quote]
You are one of my favorite posters on this section. I look forward to more exchanges.
I would say most of the hostility comes when people(on all sides) bring up threads saying the same things all the time.
I think a good fix would be to have something like this.
A socialism thread-where we can talk about socialism and debate it
A Libertarian thread-where we can talk about Libertarianism
A Conservative thread-Talk about conservatives
A Liberal thread-Talk about Liberal’s.
And down the line, that way we can keep things in the thread confine and also avoid people jumping into the fray with shit we have already discussed.
Just my suggestion for cleaning up PWI. And it is nice to have Irish back even tho I disagree with that bastard on just about everything.
I disagree. I think we need more open debates which means
-
People not resorting to the ad hominem of ‘you’re just a high school kid, go sit on your pol sci professor’s lap’ ‘or go and learn pol sci’ (within two posts of each other). Or ‘why are you commenting on this because you are in UK/Austria whatever’. The amount of commentators on events outside the US is pretty much zero so that’s what we have to play with.
-
People not derailing threads so they become religious threads, gay rights or abortion threads. These are the worst because there’s no point posting, I know who’ll come in and argue their opinion for 50 pages and nothing you say will change their mind. There’s no point arguing, it just becomes a shouting match, and people resort to the most ugly insults and mudslinging
-
The preponderance of people who have incredibly extreme opinions that introducing to the debate does nothing but polairse. I actually have no problem with libertarian ideology as its fairly novel point of view (they basically don’t exist across the pond) but when people say (paraphrasing) liberals are responsible for all the evils of the world, why the hell should I bother responding. I’m not seen as a liberal by my peers, rather quite centre, but what can I say to that? Sometimes I take the piss but I would honestly like to have more open, reasoned debates.
[quote]John S. wrote:
I would say most of the hostility comes when people(on all sides) bring up threads saying the same things all the time.
I think a good fix would be to have something like this.
A socialism thread-where we can talk about socialism and debate it
A Libertarian thread-where we can talk about Libertarianism
A Conservative thread-Talk about conservatives
A Liberal thread-Talk about Liberal’s.
And down the line, that way we can keep things in the thread confine and also avoid people jumping into the fray with shit we have already discussed.
Just my suggestion for cleaning up PWI. And it is nice to have Irish back even tho I disagree with that bastard on just about everything.[/quote]
IMO that would work with your so called liberals only and why I feel that way is the so called conservatives think that so called conservative values and the only right answer
And if we were to make one category a forum to itself RELIGION , it dominates this forum.
This forum is Politics and world Issues.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
IMO that would work with your so called liberals only and why I feel that way is the so called conservatives think that so called conservative values and the only right answer
And if we were to make one category a forum to itself RELIGION , it dominates this forum.
This forum is Politics and world Issues. [/quote]
Good, bad or indifferent – Religion is a world issue. And a local issue. And an individual issue. It flavors most everyone’s worldview.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
This forum is Politics and world Issues. [/quote]
Sadly, religion makes itself a world issue.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this. This type of discussion was my intent. [/quote]
Referring to the DD and FI exchange looking like any other thread. [/quote]
Ahh, I see. Although, I think this thread might be for a bit of “that” too. What I mean is that I’m not so sure DD actually realized what FI was complaining about or how it related to him. Hopefully, he realizes now that FI was complaining about it (and he did give a perfect example for others).
OR if he did understand and continues to do so in this thread, we’ll all realize he’s just trolling.