First off, I know I'm not the most experienced poster on here. But I've been reading the D&D for a long time and have posted in here for a couple of years if I recall (although my post count doesnt even come close to rivaling the most prolific of you). BUT... I'd just like to know why the D&D, once an arena of rather intelligent debate from both sides, has degenerated to a "Who can be the first to call the republicans idiots?" forum. If you go through most of the threads most of the posts are simply internet nerds proclaiming their intellectual superiority to all those in power who identify with a certain political party. I know I'm not the only one who has noticed a decline in the quality of this board and I know that one side isn't the only one to blame. The name calling from both sides is just beyond belief. Most of the time it isn't even accompanied by reasoning. Far too often we see posts such as "That's what you get when you have idiots in power" or other quotes of the like. The board was at one point one of the first places I'd go when political news broke because you'd get well reasoned perspectives from both sides without the high frequency of name-calling we get often today. Once again, I'm not saying only the liberal posters are to blame because there have been many downright disgusting things said by conservative posters as well. But due to what I would think I could safely assume is a liberal majority on this board it looks like there is more name calling from that side. Then again...I could be wrong.
You obviously don't read posts from bigtexxx, Trader_Jorge, Giddyup or basso. Living is easy with eyes closed.....
I think there IS an imbalance on the board in terms of political perspective. That's probably the biggest hinderance to reasoned debate. Not that I blame one side or the other. Classifications really don't tell the story anyway - most liberals are not glynch and most conservatives are not traderjorge.
People got tired of trying to convince others, just a waste of time. It used to have intelligent conversation, with Treehouse, Hayes Street, Batman Jones, and a few others....a good read, and enlightening, now it is just good ole political mud slinging. DD
I know I'm not the only one who has noticed a decline in the quality of this board and I know that one side isn't the only one to blame. Look at Bush's current poll numbers. They are deep in the sh*tter, since Iraq did not work out like he pimped it. Now with Katrina and the run up in gas prices, Bush's poll numbers took another dip. Polls are not the end all, but they do represent a quick acid test on what people think of Bush. In an environment where the people are not pleased with the job a President is doing, there is likely going to be many negative articles documenting his f*ckups. I can see how these articles can be bitter pills for the Bush hard core supporters.
Very much like the political climate of today. It used to be that mud slinging would deter some from voting, but given last year's election it seems now whatever candidate that can do it best has the best chance of winning. Sad, but almost an unnecessary evil.
We have reached a point where most of the posters with real thought and quality have subconsciously agreed to disagree. Political slogans now litter the landscape from all types of political ideologues. With that being said, it might only have been inevitable due to the nature of debate. There are only so many things we will debate before we get tired of it.
That's not true of me. I've neither agreed to disagree nor tired of debating. I just got sick of being called unpatriotic, un-American, a traitor and a terrorist sympathizer for registering dissent. Even more, I got sick of answering challenges and then having the challenger disappear. I loved debating with Refman, MadMax, treeman, HayesStreet, mrpaige, Cohen and other conservatives/sometimes conservatives. I also loved reading Mango's posts though I rarely answered them -- on the foreign affairs stuff he was just out of my league. I loved reading a lot of liberals/sometimes liberals that used to post here and don't anymore too. halfbreed, I totally agree with you that this forum's not what it used to be. I doubt I'm one of the posters you miss, but the above is why I personally don't post here anymore. I still lurk, though. And I'll post again if someone reasonable shows up to debate with.
Actually I have found some good convo of late esp TheCabbage's post among others very enlightening Rocket River - I don't look to have my mind changed. . i look to be enlightened to have my knowledge increased. . .
So much for Hayes, the reasoned moderate. Good try to lump me in with traderjorge. Stick to the issues. What is your latest reason for the Iraqi war? I think alleged concern for Iraqi feminism isn't going to work anymore, given the New Constitution. How about the faux concern for the bad aspects of the sanctions that you supported wholeheartedly at the time.
To echo glynch above, I think this comparison is way out of line. The only thing shared by glynch and Jorge is steadfastness of opinion. glynch is an ideologue (I am too, frankly); Jorge is a partisan. And glynch isn't a troll. There are more of us lefties here, you're right. But not one of them (at least the ones left) practices the bad behavior Jorge, texxx and basso do.
what's so bad about Basso? I think jorge and texx may go overboard at times - I don't think Basso is in their league. This stuff is nothing compared to the YOF/anti-YOF stuff from last year. Things had gotten so bad that anyone who suggested a certain player shoot the ball more, or that a certain player gets screwed by refs, or that certain player deserves a max contract - was to be flamed and bashed to no end. I don't think supporting Bush is as much a taboo yet as supporting Yao was (back then at least - everyone seems prettymuch on board with Yao now. i suppose winning cures everything, i'm rambling)
Really? That is the point? I, personally, prefer to talk (or, "talk") to people with different views. I know what I think and don't need people to re-affirm my beliefs or have more people "on my side" to feel happy about it. I guess respect has changed around here? In the past even when things got "nasty" it was never so shrill as it can get today.
Agreed. But, again, in the past nobody from either side accused the other of wanting Americans to die. That was the end of civility for me here and pretty much the end of my posting here too.
That was meant to be included in my umbrella of "lack of respect" and "shrill" so no need for a "but" in this instance. Word.
Hmmm, to be honest I don't read a lot of TJ so I guess I'm guilty of assuming he was far right. My bad. My point was that not all people on the left are glynch (THAT far left) and not all on the right are (insert whoever you think fits that description). Are you accusing me of being on the right! j/k ('cause I know you can't read my mind ) I guess. Maybe I just get tired of glynch's redirection of EVERY thread to his opinion about Iraq (see above to prove the point). Who wants to have the SAME conversation over and over and over again? (especially when he's so wrong ) It one of the reasons I haven't posted as much or when I do I try and post on something that hasn't been developed like Islam or China (or Yakuza weather machines).
I think what Batman meant was that while glynch and Jorge are at equal lengths at opposing ends of the spectrum, glynch certainly isn't a troll and isn't disrespectful. It would be in the forum's best interests if new topics were introduced.
