Observation from a sleepy gosling

[maggot420]

This may get me stoned, but I think often people don't actually bother to read the other posts prior to responding. It seems, at times, that people walk all over each other, trying to make the exact points that have already been made, clearly and succinctly, on page one of the thread. They jump in on page 9 and act they are bringing the Truth for the very first time. I suppose it's the internet's version of people who can't hear what someone else is saying because they're so busy talking. It's kind of insulting. And a bit annoying, too.

But I'm just fluff, so feel free to gloss me.

Luck,

Yui

Takes alot more than that to get me stoned

 

[yui]

Takes alot more than that to get me stoned

But you are much tougher than me! I'm a wimp.

 

[BlackShanglan]

This may get me stoned, but I think often people don't actually bother to read the other posts prior to responding. It seems, at times, that people walk all over each other, trying to make the exact points that have already been made, clearly and succinctly, on page one of the thread. They jump in on page 9 and act they are bringing the Truth for the very first time. I suppose it's the internet's version of people who can't hear what someone else is saying because they're so busy talking. It's kind of insulting. And a bit annoying, too.

But I'm just fluff, so feel free to gloss me.

Luck,

Yui

Thank goodness I, um, never ... do that ...

I do actually read, or not comment if I haven't the time to read, but no doubt I'm as guilty of redundancy as the next horse - or jackass as the case may be.

Yui

 

[maggot420]

But you are much tougher than me! I'm a wimp.

Its not that I'm tough...It's just that my mechanism is gone.

 

[cantdog]

Latecomers who begin anew. Yeah. But that only bothers people who have been following the argument. Acknowledge them, and they quieten down.

 

[Liar]

This may get me stoned, but I think often people don't actually bother to read the other posts prior to responding. It seems, at times, that people walk all over each other, trying to make the exact points that have already been made, clearly and succinctly, on page one of the thread. They jump in on page 9 and act they are bringing the Truth for the very first time. I suppose it's the internet's version of people who can't hear what someone else is saying because they're so busy talking. It's kind of insulting. And a bit annoying, too.

Whenever I look at a freshly started political thread and find the subject interresting, I start by reading all the posts, then I write a reply.

By the time I've done that, the rest of the thread have rushed ahead five more pages, and my reply looks just like those annoying didn't-read-the-thread posts. What's a slow bloke to do?

But I'm just fluff, so feel free to gloss me.

Should I take that literally?

 

[Guest]

personally, i dont feel i know enough to argue most of my points of view and i lack the linguistics ... the verve to be so impassioned. sad yes? but truly arguing anything is not why i am here. so, i read...and i try to understand but youll not find me often posting in those threads. my ego is much too shallow to have someone telling me, yet again in my life, that i am wrong.

*hey liar... what happened to blipy? did he get a face lift?*

 

[yui]

Thank goodness I, um, never ... do that ...

I do actually read, or not comment if I haven't the time to read, but no doubt I'm as guilty of redundancy as the next horse - or jackass as the case may be.

Yui

I wasn't referring to you, Shanglan, (or anyone specifically). And, for the record, your courteous and well thought out posts are far from redundant.

Thank you for the kiss.

Latecomers who begin anew. Yeah. But that only bothers people who have been following the argument. Acknowledge them, and they quieten down.

You're right, cant! But many times there isn't an acknowledgement (or it is an erroneous acknowledgement) because the latecomers haven't actually read the posts. It's no big deal, but to me, it feels disrespectful.

Whenever I look at a freshly started political thread and find the subject interresting, I start by reading all the posts, then I write a reply.

By the time I've done that, the rest of the thread have rushed ahead five more pages, and my reply looks just like those annoying didn't-read-the-thread posts. What's a slow bloke to do?

The same thing happens to me, all the time. I am a slow writer. I don't know what a slow bloke is supposed to do, but I know a few things I would like him to do…

Should I take that literally?

http://www.addis-welt.de/smilie/smilie/japan/31515.gif

 

[gauchecritic]

If you consider that actual shouting is a legitimate party political tool in our council chambers across the oountry or deliberately slowing the discussion or lengthening it then maybe political debates should be carried on over the net or at least a network.

On assumptions, another decent technique (not often employed due to the fact that you have to be quick witted and positive) is to actually take up the extreme pole in order to create extreme opposition, then the middle can (if led appropriately) take the ground that you are actually in favour of.

Open debate on an open forum is usually just caterwaulering. (unless you're Cantdog who (like my son and my brother) take definite action, however small or large in order to make the world a better place.)

That which I particularly dislike about AH debates is when a single point from a long and well thought out post is taken as the main thrust and argued agsainst. Makes you wish you hadn't bothered.

 

[Liar]

http://www.addis-welt.de/smilie/smilie/japan/31515.gif

Just wanted to say that those über weird and equally über cute emos of yours have made their way into my dreams. They just float by when I least expect them to. I hope you're proud.


Ok, back to topic. What was it now again?

 

[cantdog]

If you consider that actual shouting is a legitimate party political tool in our council chambers across the oountry or deliberately slowing the discussion or lengthening it then maybe political debates should be carried on over the net or at least a network.

On assumptions, another decent technique (not often employed due to the fact that you have to be quick witted and positive) is to actually take up the extreme pole in order to create extreme opposition, then the middle can (if led appropriately) take the ground that you are actually in favour of.

Open debate on an open forum is usually just caterwaulering. (unless you're Cantdog who (like my son and my brother) take definite action, however small or large in order to make the world a better place.)

That which I particularly dislike about AH debates is when a single point from a long and well thought out post is taken as the main thrust and argued agsainst. Makes you wish you hadn't bothered.

The left in the US doesn't take the extreme position in order to be bargained down but seems to rely on dry facts and sweet reason. It's infuriating how stuck on the truth they all are in these meetings. We need some tub thumpers who will oversimplify without a qualm, for effect. Effect is something we need more of.

There were some breathtakingly well thought out posts in the last one on the AH, I thought. But this is such an imperfect medium. They were still misread. People still replied to something else. I think it's the nature of the beast, in this short, written form of discussion. You can be quoted exactly, but it's very hard to be listened to.

 

[BlackShanglan]

The left in the US doesn't take the extreme position in order to be bargained down but seems to rely on dry facts and sweet reason. It's infuriating how stuck on the truth they all are in these meetings. We need some tub thumpers who will oversimplify without a qualm, for effect.

Plenty of that to go 'round both parties, Cant - or have we not been reading the same posts?

Shanglan

 

[minsue]

Edited coz my sleepy pills kicked in and I make no sense....

Carry on.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Edited coz my sleepy pills kicked in and I make no sense....

Carry on.

Makes gosling sense! Much better than the ordinary garden variety. Although if the gosling is in the garden, it all becomes a little tricky.

 

[cantdog]

Plenty of that to go 'round both parties, Cant - or have we not been reading the same posts?

Shanglan

Oh I can thump tubs. But what good am I? I get going and people don't understand my vocabulary. They asked me not to reword the announcements at the church. I said the Diaconate would foregather. They do not foregather, they meet, only. A dozen churchly people had no idea what I meant by the word.

But we need a few more rousers of the rabble on the left. Mostly they're like Amy Goodman, gathering the threads, exposing the facts which are intended to convince, slowly, those in earshot that something is rotten in the State. Insisting on the facts. Disdaining to overstate, although searching for someone to thrust a mic onto who will do some overstating. Amy builds an edifice of facts and anecdotes, calls forth analyses from academics and insiders. But a few more Malcolm X's and ML Kings to give them some impact would help a lot. The ones that want to get angry just howl and call names. We need people who will refer to the facts and then ask the pointed question. Hear the slimy self-serving weasel words of those the press refers to as 'leaders' and make the riposte which demands re-evaluation or lays bare the cheeks being kissed. Sardonic speakers. Poetic and insightful speakers with a gift for populist common sense.

Fuck the fuckin facts, someone has to put heart into these people or they'll bleat again and knuckle under again. The sheep do not wish to look up. A strong voice with a few good ringing things to tell folks in their own language might turn the tide.

Forty some-odd Senators actually stood on their hind legs in opposition to the funding of the Iraq mess if there wasn't any kind of plan. They were counted, by name, voting fucking no. Nobody was crazy enough to squeak over the last three years. So that's a change.

Even Louis Braille could see that one party having a majority of both houses and the presidency is a bad idea. It does seem that they might lose their majority in the off term elections, that the opposition isn't just going to roll over, not every time. There are hopeful signs, but without some expression from their constituents of support for the use of their spines, no one will betray any backbone.