Conquer Club

owenshooter wrote:

mpjh wrote:No problem, so long as any other member discussed in such a "private" forum has a full opportunity to read the discussion and participate. It is the first rule of civil discussion, never talk behind a person's back, up front, direct discussion is always the best remedy.

Sounds like a forum version of "singing to the choir." More power to yuh.

wow, this is the same guy that disagrees with me in a thread about avatars and posted this:

I block owenshooter and don't read his posts or pms, so I have no idea what he is saying. Yes, America is the land controlled by white people, at least for the time being. However, more importantly, our dominant culture is white and encourages the kind of jingoistic sentiment that is implied in these avatars. I do understand the the Muslim avatar was a reaction to the refusal to ban the black face avatar. I am glad you live here, never meant to imply otherwise.

i haven't called him names, ridiculed him, or violated any forum rules. i responded to each of his posts in a calm and rational way.. yet, since i disagree with him, he has me blocked? he is a WONDERFUL fit for your group... good luck with this... i was very interested, but if this is the type of discussion that is going to occur, no thanks.-0

Oh, so you're discrediting the entire clan based on a totally unrelated post from one single person who requested membership?

You better hook up your oxygen. Owen and I have had a private discussion and worked it out. Come down in altitude and see real people at work using discourse and direct conversation.

Besides I never talked behind his back he could see everything I wrote.

Ray Rider wrote:Oh, so you're discrediting the entire clan based on a totally unrelated post from one single person who requested membership?

it appears so...-0

(and with that quip, i have sealed my fate for ever hoping to be a member... some things
are too good to pass up!!)

Snorri1234 wrote: That said, I think you guys are just pussying out. The sarcastic one-liners and images are usually a result of a particularly ignorant post by someone else. I don't take the time to respond by a post from THORNHEART or Jay or whatever with: "Dear friend, while I respect your opinion and think you bring up an excellent point, I must disagree with you on the smallest of issues concerning your post." That is just futile.

I disagree completely (it might be your sciency and my liberal artsy educations ). An ad Hominem fallacy is a fallacy specifically because it takes the focus off of the argument and on to the speaker. If you want to show that someone is wrong in their thinking, then you look at what they've said and show the flaws. Nothing futile at all about that. All too often, however, I've seen people (regardless of their side in any argument) use generalizations, ad hominem, omniscience, and other rhetorical dirty tricks to escape the heat of a good argument from their opposition.

Snorri1234 wrote:The problem is not the sarcastic remarks, it's the idiots who draw them. I have no idea why I would respond to the more reasonable people on this forum with sarcastic remarks, but some people just provoke that rage in me that says "I can't believe he just said something so profoundly stupid! It hurts my brain reading it! I'm sure it killed of a few braincells."

How many times have you, or others, lumped (perhaps unintentionally) some very intelligent and lucid people under a common label with these "idiots"? A common indicator that this has occurred is having to come back with something like "Oh I didn't mean you ..... I meant....." which can be tantamount to "My stereotype is still valid, but you seem to be an exception".

Snorri1234 wrote:

Juanbottom wrote:I can't believe everyone is jumping without a concise description of what this is.

A fine point. If you want to start a discussion-group with reasonable civil debate I'm telling you right now that it will never work. The civil debaters on this forum already either agree or agree-to-disagree on most things, group would be dead within a month.

The concise description as far as I can see was:

protectedbygold wrote:

steelerfan24 wrote:I don't think that he is getting together a new religious clan. Sounds more like a clan (or off-site forum) dedicated to good, clean debating. Kind of a place where different viewpoints can be discussed civilly, and perhaps following actual debate rules, and the ad hominem and name calling and swearing are left at the doorstep. Sounds good to me!

You articulated my thoughts probably the best of anyone so far.

It's curious that you would think that the conversation would die without the sarcastic remarks. When, in general, sarcasm is used to intimidate others and stop conversation. That's why teachers are repeatedly told not to use it. It stops the conversation very effectively, but at the expense of your reputation with that student.

CrazyAnglican wrote:I've seen people (regardless of their side in any argument) use generalizations, ad hominem, omniscience, and other rhetorical dirty tricks to escape the heat of a good argument from their opposition.

It's those damn Angelicans.... everytime.... always using omniscience...

CrazyAnglican wrote:How many times have you, or others, lumped (perhaps unintentionally) some very intelligent and lucid people under a common label with these "idiots"?

I can't think of a single time that I've seen this, exactly...
Anyway, for the record, when someone does tell me that they are Christian, Muslim, or a lot of things(religious), I automatically deduct 50 IQ points. That's without exception.

CrazyAnglican wrote:The concise description as far as I can see was:
protectedbygold wrote:
steelerfan24 wrote:
I don't think that he is getting together a new religious clan. Sounds more like a clan (or off-site forum) dedicated to good, clean debating. Kind of a place where different viewpoints can be discussed civilly, and perhaps following actual debate rules, and the ad hominem and name calling and swearing are left at the doorstep. Sounds good to me!

You articulated my thoughts probably the best of anyone so far.

That's an awful description. Alls that was said was what PROTECTEDBYGOLD said in his first post. I still don't know what the crap this is. All you monkeys are all like "this is an amazin' idea!!! I need to be a part of this!!!"
All I know is is that if you are a lucky member of whatever this is you need to be polite to other members.

WHOOPIDY-DOO!!!!!

Is it a clan, forum, off-site debate thingy? Who has written the rules? What are the rules? Just be nice? Who is running this debate place? How do they come to power? WTF is going on? And why have all of you signed up for something when you have no idea what it really is?

CrazyAnglican wrote:It's curious that you would think that the conversation would die without the sarcastic remarks. When, in general, sarcasm is used to intimidate others and stop conversation.

Look, this idea is not without merit, but there is no substance to it. It's like PROTECTEDBYGOLD just got upset and made a post. Then all you monkeys climbed aboard without actually thinking. You all need to ask a question or two every once in a while.

Juan_Bottom wrote: And why have all of you signed up for something when you have no idea what it really is?

I`ll just answer this, you can sort out the rest with whoever is organizing this thing.

Because there is a chance that this might work and the effort on my part to write: "sign me up" and then if it doesn`t work click on "quit usergroup" is quite small.

Doesn`t seem like I`m risking a whole lot here

Haggis_McMutton wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote: And why have all of you signed up for something when you have no idea what it really is?

I`ll just answer this, you can sort out the rest with whoever is organizing this thing.

Because there is a chance that this might work and the effort on my part to write: "sign me up" and then if it doesn`t work click on "quit usergroup" is quite small.

Doesn`t seem like I`m risking a whole lot here

True.

CrazyAnglican wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote: That said, I think you guys are just pussying out. The sarcastic one-liners and images are usually a result of a particularly ignorant post by someone else. I don't take the time to respond by a post from THORNHEART or Jay or whatever with: "Dear friend, while I respect your opinion and think you bring up an excellent point, I must disagree with you on the smallest of issues concerning your post." That is just futile.

I disagree completely (it might be your sciency and my liberal artsy educations ). An ad Hominem fallacy is a fallacy specifically because it takes the focus off of the argument and on to the speaker. If you want to show that someone is wrong in their thinking, then you look at what they've said and show the flaws. Nothing futile at all about that. All too often, however, I've seen people (regardless of their side in any argument) use generalizations, ad hominem, omniscience, and other rhetorical dirty tricks to escape the heat of a good argument from their opposition.

Let's look up a fine example of what I'm talking about:

THORNHEART wrote:look seriously if you believe in evlotuion you cant honestly say you think your right...your just looking for an excuse to say that there is no god and therefore excuse yourself from having to be accountable for you actions.

How would you propose I respond to this? Point out, again, that thorny here is talking out of his ass? He said that after about 100 pages in the Evolution-debate, making it clear he had not read the thread or had any knowledge of the issue.

Sarcasm is the only way to respond to people like Thornheart, DangerBoy or any of these utterly ignorant who, pardon my metaphor, show all the reasoning skill of a dead chimp.

I mean, check out this gem:

umm i know excatly what evolution means dude u think we magically appeared one day in the form of microscopes and we slowly got bigger and bigger...it just happened every circumstance was right for the rise of humans and now we live to day and discuscuss how we actually evolved and by which of the 9000 ways dinosaures died and we disregard the most easy and logical explination that is we were created.ever notice that creation has never changed its story but that evolution has changed thousands of times to suppport new and newer evidence...the truth doesnt change sorry but if evo was true it would have one provable explination but it doesnt making it a theroy (a false one) and it has no real proof its all speculation ...second i just felt like making a humuor point since im sure everything to be said about it vs creation has been said already a million times on this and other threads..second what i said makes perfect sense about consciences evolving higher than others

Snorri1234 wrote:The problem is not the sarcastic remarks, it's the idiots who draw them. I have no idea why I would respond to the more reasonable people on this forum with sarcastic remarks, but some people just provoke that rage in me that says "I can't believe he just said something so profoundly stupid! It hurts my brain reading it! I'm sure it killed of a few braincells."

How many times have you, or others, lumped (perhaps unintentionally) some very intelligent and lucid people under a common label with these "idiots"? A common indicator that this has occurred is having to come back with something like "Oh I didn't mean you ..... I meant....." which can be tantamount to "My stereotype is still valid, but you seem to be an exception".

I don't think I have ever. When I lump people together it's not because of their beliefs per se, but their complete inability to see the reason of the other side.

It's curious that you would think that the conversation would die without the sarcastic remarks. When, in general, sarcasm is used to intimidate others and stop conversation. That's why teachers are repeatedly told not to use it. It stops the conversation very effectively, but at the expense of your reputation with that student.

It stops because the ones who keep the debate unresolved are not participating, and also because debates won't get brought up again. After a few weeks there is nothing much left to talk about.


Also, it's not like I don't want to join btw. I just think it won't work anyway.

mpjh wrote:You better hook up your oxygen. Owen and I have had a private discussion and worked it out. Come down in altitude and see real people at work using discourse and direct conversation.

Besides I never talked behind his back he could see everything I wrote.

If this is actually the case then this proves that civil discourse can take place. I haven't been the best example of how to do that but I applaud anyone who takes the time to work something out or hear out another person's argument.

When this thing does take place gold, I hope that you will consider me as part of the group. Heck, even listening to some other people argue some valid points would be a good thing. And yes, gasoline prices and how that market works would be an interesting thing to learn more about. Even beyond that, I'd like to consider civil arguments about traditional and alternative energy.

Juan_Bottom wrote:Then all you monkeys climbed aboard without actually thinking. You all need to ask a question or two every once in a while.

I just joined in because I like reading the debates on here, and occasionally commenting, if I find something that interests me.
I'm just not interested in the debates where the same people say the same things over and over again with only an increasing level of anger/frustration to make one post appear different from another.
I'm hoping this group will be a bit easier to read, and more entertaining.

And like Haggis said, if this group isn't what I want to be in, "quit usergroup" is just a few clicks away.

I know my first thread would be about the Olympic scoring system for boxing.

You're all a bunch or dorks, and followers.

This isn't a group. This isn't anything. It's "lets all make a place where we can be nice to each other."

THERE IS NO PLACE OR IDEA OR ANYTHING!!!!! THIS IS NOTHING BUT A CONCEPT!!!! AND ALL OF YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT IDEA OF WHAT THAT CONCEPT IS!!!!! EVEN THE OP HASN'T SAID WTF THIS IS!!!!!!!!

luns101 wrote:I know my first thread would be about the Olympic scoring system for boxing.

Now THAT would be a difficult topic to be civil on

I watched a Russian boxer against someone from Poland. Both guys were really hitting each other with the white portion of the glove and still not getting credit or points. There's probably some other boxers that got jipped as well. We'll have to remember that one once this gets started.

Juan_Bottom wrote:You're all a bunch or dorks, and followers.

SHEEPLE!!!!!!!!

i was very interested, but if this is the type of discussion that is going to occur, no thanks.-0

if owen is in this group somehow, then i dont wanna join anymore.

Yeah, I hear Owen is organizing the whole thing.

So much irony in this thread.

It seems to me this would eventually degenerate into a situation where everyone was agreeing with each other. I'm hesitant to even try, but I'll offer my attendance, if it would be appreciated. I fairly regularly offer to cut debates down to the basics, but get a whole lot of shit in return. So, whatever, if we all decide to abide by these rules, I'll participate in my fair share. However, I fear my reputation might precede me...

Go ahead, trivialze.

xerro wrote:

i was very interested, but if this is the type of discussion that is going to occur, no thanks.-0

if owen is in this group somehow, then i dont wanna join anymore.

What you cant go up against Owen? Will he put you in your place and make you cry? But thinking on it I like the fighting and trolling and being a dick in the forums pull my name out too. I have to much fun in the public forums I don't really want to have to hold back on what I say and its only the internet atleast when you get put in your place they cant laugh at you in your face. Thanks anyway

I want to be in.

xerro wrote:

i was very interested, but if this is the type of discussion that is going to occur, no thanks.-0

if owen is in this group somehow, then i dont wanna join anymore.

xerro, i would challenge anyone in this thread to go find ONE POST of merit that you have ever put up in any thread in any section of the forum. aside from you thread about your quest to be the best, and your posts in your Men In Tights clan, you have had nothing of merit to say, ever. go in the gd, and pull up the last thread i was in, and i put forth more than enough civil discussion and rational thought to be able to be in this group, if i were lucky enough to be chosen. i doubt this group would suffer without your presence. i, on the other hand, actually have something to offer. for instance, look at what i have laid out as a counter argument to your one sentence post. you make a bold statement, laying out an ultimatum. declaring it is either YOU or ME, but they can't have both. why? give a reason. something rational. something of substance. you know, all the things you have yet to EVER exhibit in any discussion in your time here on CC... people like you are not leaders, you are followers, and you can not stand it when someone dares to poke holes in your silly threads. i doubt i'll get in, in the first place. so, i'm sure your amazing debating skills and unflawed logic will soon flow openly within the confines of this new private discussion group, when it comes into being... i anxiously await your one sentence reply.-0

owenshooter wrote:

xerro wrote:

i was very interested, but if this is the type of discussion that is going to occur, no thanks.-0

if owen is in this group somehow, then i dont wanna join anymore.

xerro, i would challenge anyone in this thread to go find ONE POST of merit that you have ever put up in any thread in any section of the forum. aside from you thread about your quest to be the best, and your posts in your Men In Tights clan, you have had nothing of merit to say, ever. go in the gd, and pull up the last thread i was in, and i put forth more than enough civil discussion and rational thought to be able to be in this group, if i were lucky enough to be chosen. i doubt this group would suffer without your presence. i, on the other hand, actually have something to offer. for instance, look at what i have laid out as a counter argument to your one sentence post. you make a bold statement, laying out an ultimatum. declaring it is either YOU or ME, but they can't have both. why? give a reason. something rational. something of substance. you know, all the things you have yet to EVER exhibit in any discussion in your time here on CC... people like you are not leaders, you are followers, and you can not stand it when someone dares to poke holes in your silly threads. i doubt i'll get in, in the first place. so, i'm sure your amazing debating skills and unflawed logic will soon flow openly within the confines of this new private discussion group, when it comes into being... i anxiously await your one sentence reply.-0

Bravo, sir.

You know what if Owen joins then I will come back and join. I love reading his posts they brighten my day . Also Owen I like the sig blue looks better then that ugly green you had and what happened to the avatar? I haven't been checking the forums very much so I didn't see if the mods told you to take it down but I liked it what happened to it?

mpjh wrote:Yeah, I hear Owen is organizing the whole thing.

actually, i was just told i'm not welcome... guess xerro was right.. that guy is
the bomb in the forums... well, at least some of you have seen me openly debate
more than one person while remaining civil:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59020

perhaps the subject matter offended the creator of this group, due to his religious
beliefs.. going to be hard to have a discussion group if you can't offend someone by
having views they don't agree with (if that is the case). however, i dare the OP to
find me one post from xerro that even touches what i posted in that thread, and i'll
accept that i am simply not the right type of person for such a discussion group.
otherwise, this seems as if you are trying to create a place where you can edit, lock,
delete any post that you don't like, and toss the offending members. xerro is a joke
and has never posted anything other than "i am going to be the best on cc" in 3
seperate clans... i think my mind is a bit sharper than that.-0

Even when you are stoned, huh?