Mods could do a better job with threads/posters

[flycy]

Especially when the definition of "serial violators" is concerned. Most of the issues were created by "positive posters" who decided to inject personal views into their posts rather than just posting links and information. This in turn led, not surprisingly to anyone, to those who Bob would undoubtedly consider serial violators to do things. To his credit, Bob didn't generally engage in that , unlike some of his brethren, who undoubtedly would not be considered violators by old postive Bob. You reap what you sow, Bob. And yes, I think the Mods do know who "they" (the true violators) are.

Hey look, the other serial violators call you a winner!!!!!!! You know when you read something on the internet you don't agree with you don't have to answer. Just walk away. Instead that thread was eventually dominated by the same handful of internet bullies who have totally politicized "science".

 

[bsaltyman]

Yeah but you messed up
Mafia still won it though
Thanks @bsaltyman

Yes I screwed that game up pretty hard for the innos. In my defense, it was the first time I had ever played.

The innos were up by a FG with about a minute remaining when instead of kneeling on it I fumbled to Cy$. I then decided to tackle my teammate srjclone and let the mafia score the game winner.

 

[simply1]

Yes I screwed that game up pretty hard for the innos. In my defense, it was the first time I had ever played.

The innos were up by a FG with about a minute remaining when instead of kneeling on it I fumbled to Cy$. I then decided to tackle my teammate srjclone and let the mafia score the game winner.

This is why I won't play for the first time.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

Yes I screwed that game up pretty hard for the innos. In my defense, it was the first time I had ever played.

The innos were up by a FG with about a minute remaining when instead of kneeling on it I fumbled to Cy$. I then decided to tackle my teammate srjclone and let the mafia score the game winner.

Accurate.
Sad.
But accurate.

 

[CloneLawman]

Hey look, the other serial violators call you a winner!!!!!!!

You were the biggest ass in the whole shooting match, Tex. Still proving it. The funny part is you aren't "owning a Lib" when you address me so. I'm not a progressive. I am far to the right of @alarson, for example. I just got sick of you and your ilk twisting a thread I initially supported. @madguy30 is a class act and was fair and even-handed. Maybe you could learn to be a bit classier and not adress people as "your kind". Just a thought.

 

[ArgentCy]

Bragging about not being able or wanting to read 500 words -- roughly 2-3 paragraphs in an academic text, maybe two pages depending on the printing style -- is a good way to make yourself look really foolish on a website of (at least notional) college graduates. It is a stupid point, too. I doubt I have posted anything over 200-300 words on here in years.

I don't know about you, but I don't like to brag about my ignorance or use bluster instead of reason to address complex topics.

That is true but just not going to fly in today's world. We truly are living in a dumbed down society. I mean, look at almost all of the major "news" websites. They all changed to remove almost all text from their main pages and now use short videos and a caption. People have an attention span of a gnat these days. And the major way of breaking news is Twitter which specifically has a limit of no more than what 140, characters? There is no way to make a coherent argument in so few words and it looks horrible when they try with 14 parts or something stupid. This is all on purpose as it makes people resort to meme's, name calling, source trashing, and the like. No subtilty or grey area's can be allowed. This is PURPOSEFUL.

 

[ArgentCy]

It’s not that difficult to read your concepts and understand where they go wrong. The problem is you try to hide and dodge from the logic failings you present by being verbose and either intentionally, or intentionally not understanding the counter argument.

After a couple of honest engagements, it becomes clear to every other college educated poster on the board it’s not worth engaging you and trying to work around such a banal approach.

It's really easy to tell the difference between word vomit and a well reasoned and succinct argument. Many academic articles these days do qualify as word vomit but not all.

 

[BryceC]

Bragging about not being able or wanting to read 500 words -- roughly 2-3 paragraphs in an academic text, maybe two pages depending on the printing style -- is a good way to make yourself look really foolish on a website of (at least notional) college graduates. It is a stupid point, too. I doubt I have posted anything over 200-300 words on here in years.

I don't know about you, but I don't like to brag about my ignorance or use bluster instead of reason to address complex topics.

It's also a sports talk message board and droning on and on when you can say something much quicker is a waste of people's time.

Like I said, you're hiding. Just telling yourself it is the post length.

I agree with you a lot, but I skip a lot of your posts if I'm being honest.

As a writer of an actual dissertation, you should know the yawning gap in complexity and length between academic writing and anything I put up on here. If you can handle the reactor being at 100%, and the average CF post is more like 2%, then how hard is it to uptake one of mine at maybe 3% of your capacity? Even your average undergrad should have routinely grappled with far more complex and lengthy stuff than anything on here.

What you seem to be failing to grasp is it's not a matter of whether I can. It's a matter of whether I want to.

 

[Cy$]

Yes I screwed that game up pretty hard for the innos. In my defense, it was the first time I had ever played.

The innos were up by a FG with about a minute remaining when instead of kneeling on it I fumbled to Cy$. I then decided to tackle my teammate srjclone and let the mafia score the game winner.

No worries, not the first time it’s happened.

 

[Sigmapolis]

It's also a sports talk message board and droning on and on when you can say something much quicker is a waste of people's time.



I agree with you a lot, but I skip a lot of your posts if I'm being honest.



What you seem to be failing to grasp is it's not a matter of whether I can. It's a matter of whether I want to.

Is it really just a sports talk board? Not like sports talk makes up probably even a plurality of content here. There's lots more lately about U.S. and Iowa politics, pop culture, and the management of the university.

What you seem to fail to grasp is bragging that being unable to handle posts that would be, roughly, ten Tweets (assumed 250 words * 5 characters per word = 1,250 / 144 = 8.68 rounded up to 10) doesn't reflect well on yourself. If you want the world to be that short and simple, then you are requesting that it be that stupid, too.

Plus, it is an obsolete complaint. I took the kinder versions of "tone it down" under advisement years ago. You might as well complain the ISU marching band doesn't have women as members... which it fixed in 1972.

Get with the times.

 

[ArgentCy]

Man, I'm really going to enjoy the next few months.

 

[ArgentCy]

It's also a sports talk message board and droning on and on when you can say something much quicker is a waste of people's time.


What you seem to be failing to grasp is it's not a matter of whether I can. It's a matter of whether I want to.

Thusly proving his point. But I digress. You can skim the posts or speed read them.

 

[ImJustKCClone]

Get with the times.

You've spent the better part of that latter half of the thread making condescending posts toward everyone who is too simple-minded to want to be "blessed" by your vast knowledge.

Physician, heal thyself.

 

[Angie]

Is it really just a sports talk board? Not like sports talk makes up probably even a plurality of content here. There's lots more lately about U.S. and Iowa politics, pop culture, and the management of the university.

What you seem to fail to grasp is bragging that being unable to handle posts that would be, roughly, ten Tweets (assumed 250 words * 5 characters per word = 1,250 / 144 = 8.68 rounded up to 10) doesn't reflect well on yourself. If you want the world to be that short and simple, then you are requesting that it be that stupid, too.

Plus, it is an obsolete complaint. I took the kinder versions of "tone it down" under advisement years ago. You might as well complain the ISU marching band doesn't have women as members... which it fixed in 1972.

Get with the times.

Sig, I think you're great and enjoy your posts. But your posit that short posts are inherently stupid, and long posts are inherently more intelligent, is just patently incorrect. We have over fifteen years' worth of posts in our CF microcosm that can disprove your argument as well as they can prove it. (53 words)

 

[Sigmapolis]

You've spent the better part of that latter half of the thread making condescending posts toward everyone who is too simple-minded to want to be "blessed" by your vast knowledge.

Physician, heal thyself.

Okay. I just won't defend myself against defaming comments (ones that once had a kernel of truth to them, I will agree, but most of that has gone the way of the dodo). I doubt you'd turn the other cheek.

Sig, I think you're great and enjoy your posts. But your posit that short posts are inherently stupid, and long posts are inherently more intelligent, is just patently incorrect. We have over fifteen years' worth of posts in our CF microcosm that can disprove your argument as well as they can prove it. (53 words)

That is a nice paragraph, @Angie.

I never said short posts are inherently stupid. Heck, I had one just now that was five characters.

But we deal with some complex and heady stuff on here. If you think you don't lose anything in terms of dealing with nuance and complexity by limiting discourse to only a single short paragraph, then we just disagree.

Length fluctuates with need.

People on here are smart and well-educated. Nothing I do should intimidate them.

It's just a shortcut much the time. A slightly more polite way of saying "shut up, nerd."

 

[Angie]

That is a nice paragraph, @Angie.

I never said short posts are inherently stupid. Heck, I had one just now that was five characters.

But we deal with some complex and heady stuff on here. If you think you don't lose anything in terms of dealing with nuance and complexity by limiting discourse to only a single short paragraph, then we just disagree.

Length fluctuates with need.

People on here are smart and well-educated. Nothing I do should intimidate them.

It's just a shortcut much the time. A slightly more polite way of saying "shut up, nerd."

I was mostly replying to this sentence: "If you want the world to be that short and simple, then you are requesting that it be that stupid, too." The implication there is that short and simple = stupid.

I think the bolded should be the crux of your argument. Because it is true. And I think that need varies in the eyes of each poster - so nobody is really right or wrong here. I don't think anyone should bash you for the length of your posts, but I also don't think there is anything wrong with people who appreciate brevity.

I will say, there is the old adage attributed alternately to either Twain or Abe Lincoln (or possibly neither, but definitely has Biblical history) about "It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt." We certainly have both long and short posts that could prove the rule.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I was mostly replying to this sentence: "If you want the world to be that short and simple, then you are requesting that it be that stupid, too." The implication there is that short and simple = stupid.

I think the bolded should be the crux of your argument. Because it is true. And I think that need varies in the eyes of each poster - so nobody is really right or wrong here. I don't think anyone should bash you for the length of your posts, but I also don't think there is anything wrong with people who appreciate brevity.

I will say, there is the old adage attributed alternately to either Twain or Abe Lincoln (or possibly neither, but definitely has Biblical history) about "It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt." We certainly have both long and short posts that could prove the rule.

I will add a quote to your "quiver" on this topic --

"Brevity is the soul of wit."
~Polonius, Act 2 Scene 2 Line 92
Hamlet, William Shakespeare

 

[ArgentCy]

An intelligent person can make long well supported arguments of complex topics. It takes a certain amount of genius to simplify the arguments and allow the common person to understand them quickly.

 

[Angie]

I will add a quote to your "quiver" on this topic --

"Brevity is the soul of wit."
~Polonius, Act 2 Scene 2 Line 92
Hamlet, William Shakespeare

Absolutely, I'd forgotten about that! And another Shakespeare quote - "Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice."

 

[aauummm]

Absolutely, I'd forgotten about that! And another Shakespeare quote - "Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice."

The International Listening Association loves that quote!

https://listen.org/