-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
Just ignore the trolls.
Poodlestrike
Banned
He's not wrong, tho. Doesn't matter how right you are, dismissing the other side accomplishing nothing aside from fostering a sense of self-superiority.
Well I havent been here long but im sure the others can feel you in on this but apparently the reason Republican GAF except for Benji and Metamorphus dont post here is that they either have been banned or refuse to post/debate because of their postage igniting conspiracy theories etc.
JesseEwiak
Member
Eh, I don't mind reasonable conservative arguments. The same ole' arguments I've heard against food stamps since I was ten are kind of old at this point.
Both sides do it though, there's been plenty of conservatives on the forum who have done the same. There's been a few drive-by conservative posters in PoliGAF's long history. The only difference is there's more liberals, in part due to the moderation policy.
If someone wants to have a real conversation about a candidate then they should have it, and people will take part, but to expect that to happen without someone starting it is just dumb. A bunch of liberals aren't going to have a long discussion about Ted Cruz if only because they all will generally agree with each other on him, you need two sides for a conversation. Just complaining that a conversation isn't taking place is lazy, especially if you're not willing to try and start one.
The gay marriage debate ate a lot of Conserva-GAF alive. It's a hard thing to oppose without breaking the TOS, as a result many conservatives feel being conservative is against the TOS when it isn't. Being a bigot is. There's a few posters that have managed to be against gay marriage over the years without eating a ban, mostly the type that are against the institution as a whole.
Poodlestrike
Banned
And a lot of it is about the dogpiling. Even the more reserved conservative sentiments get treated with the same industrial-grade scorn that the over-the-top stuff does.
Ah, but are the people making those arguments the same?
And yet, courtesy costs nothing. We might have more varied conversations, rather than the echo chamber a lot of threads turn into, if the first response was "Lol, what a fuckwit," or words to that effect.
True, but this is an anonymous forum. There are going to be drive-by posters, that's just part of it. It's gonna happen no matter what the issue is. If you want to start a debate then just start it, don't expect someone to do it for you.
eBay Huckster
Member
at the same time, "the other side" outside of Benji and Metaphoreus is breathtakingly piss-poor at actually setting up coherent arguments whenever I've read them (and that food stamps thread is a pretty great example of this)
Poodlestrike
Banned
That just makes it easier to dismantle them. I get why people get pissed off, but acting aggressive just pushes people further into their shells. Once the tone changes from "having a discussion" to "fighting the good fight..." well, that's that.
True enough. But when the entire first page (or first 2-3 pages) is comprised entirely of that sort of thing... why would you stick around?
It's why I avoid Israel threads. I'm not even pro-Israel, just nowhere near as anti-Israel as the average Gaffer seems to be, but the tone feels toxic all the same.
Black Mamba
Member
I doubt there's many examples of someone coming in here with a different opinion and trying to start up a healthy debate while everyone here just mocks them rather than engage them in healthy debate.
If someone wants a debate in this thread, it will happen.
If someone wants a debate in this thread, it will happen.
Part of the problem is that moderate conservatives are badly marginalized within their own party (see Jon Huntsman), and that many so-called liberal policies are actually conservative ideas in their origin (see Obamacare). So it's really hard to take even a reserved conservative all that seriously. Such a person would be very even handed in supporting the both the policies of the two parties to be credible at all. The dog piling is occasionally going too far, but really it's the totally expected thing to happen in a lot of cases.
eBay Huckster
Member
yeah I see where you're coming from now; sometimes I see dogpiling on OT that oversteps what would constitute a reasonable response by a mile, though I feel like a lot of this general "echo chamber" tendency is also related to what B-Dubs brought up in that edit to #3229
(in my defense alone, particularly in the latest thread and in here I've been going out of my way to keep my posts civil, if snarky)
PhoenixDark
Banned
I've certainly been treated like a slave on GAF's liberal plantation. Benji as well.
That's because you troll a lot, it's impossible to know when you're being serious. Also, since when are you conservative?
Son of a--you're trolling right now aren't you?!
Poodlestrike
Banned
Define "wanting a debate." Sometimes people just disagree with the tone taken in the OP, or they say how they think it's wrong, but without enough... I guess "contrition" is the best way to put it. People don't jump on you if you act submissive enough, I suppose.
Now, that's not to say that some people don't just come out swinging for the stands like a real asshole, but not always.
That's an interesting point. I'd say that it ties in to my first post: it almost doesn't matter about the positions, the tone is the issue here. If we accept that being sufficiently wrong or hypocritical is enough to justify discarding somebody, we run the very real risk of not knowing when we ourselves are on the wrong side of an issue.
Black Mamba
Member
When I said "here," I meant Poli-Gaf, not Neo-Gaf OT.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Oh, yeah, that's fair. If you go into a dedicated community for this sort of thing, go for bear. I just meant in your average OT thread.
Avon Barksdale
Member
PoliGAF 2015 |OT2| The worst place on this site
Coriolanus
Banned
You're assuming that a change in tone would cause a different result.
If memory serves, there has been research done that shows that tone is quite irrelevant, and people will simply dig in when presented with proof that they are wrong.
-
Consergaf is alive and well on the British PoliGaf, btw. Gods, it's like you people only follow a coupla countries.
I find Benji and Meta tolerable even though I don't agree with most of what they say. Why? At least they are able to debate their point of view and have sources instead of come off simply as "no u".
The reason why most of Conserva-GAF might find PoliGAF intolerable is because Conserva-GAF has a rampant history of being more hateful and spiteful than actually having conservations and coherent debates with facts and reasoning. That goes for Liberal-GAF, too, but liberal-GAF I've noticed has a tendency to pick apart arguments simply because it's the same arguments from ConservaGAF over and over again and all it takes is copy and pasting to poke holes into a flawed argument.
Then you have PD who I just have to yawn at.
The reason why most of Conserva-GAF might find PoliGAF intolerable is because Conserva-GAF has a rampant history of being more hateful and spiteful than actually having conservations and coherent debates with facts and reasoning. That goes for Liberal-GAF, too, but liberal-GAF I've noticed has a tendency to pick apart arguments simply because it's the same arguments from ConservaGAF over and over again and all it takes is copy and pasting to poke holes into a flawed argument.
Then you have PD who I just have to yawn at.
Well, we are apparently terrible at POSTING THE SOURCES TO OUR QUOTES.
I think it's true to say that there's a certain amount of "hazing" a new poster to PoliGAF can run into in terms of aggressive challenges to their posts, and that the bar's a little higher for conservative posters. I can think of a few liberal posters who also don't come around to PoliGAF, though, for similar reasons -- we tend to engage with people's arguments and ask them to defend them. Some people are confused and upset by being asked to justify their posts. You will notice that they post in political threads in OT, but stay out of PoliGAF.
Metaphoreus is proof, I think, that if your posts come from solid arguments, people will get along with you and/or completely freak out and get banned, so we can't really be biased against conservatives. He serves a similar function to the one that Rubio, Jindal, etc., serve in the Republican Party.
Coriolanus
Banned
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I disagree with two of these things and I'm still here. I debate you guys all the time as well.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Ferguson MO is having its elections today
Chances are their city council will turn majority Democratic
Chances are their city council will turn majority Democratic
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Sigh. If it were any other president, I probably wouldn't believe it, but that's LBJ for you.
And oh man, the Clinton scandals.
Misandry!
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
It's possible, I agree. Though I feel a lot of liberal posters are actually conservative enough to serve that purpose.
Where is it from?
Are people writing reviews of GAF threads?
I really need to know what their opinion on this thread I started one time about Peanuts by Charles Bukowski.
You honestly dont need to know but if your curious, check the Rand Paul thread.
Giant Panda
Member
While it is clear that this thread has a fairly large liberal slant, at least compared to the average American, most of the regular posters here seem pretty reasonable. Considering the ideological slant of GAF as a whole, again compared to the average American, it's not surprising that liberals dominate here. I've been lurking and occasionally posting in this thread since 2012, and generally it seems like rationally defended conservative arguments are respected, even if most posters don't personally agree with them. Also, I don't think that is only conservative arguments that have to be well defended to avoid ridicule here, as I believe Empty Vessel was also chased out for his supposedly leftish views (I don't think I'd call his views liberal though) that he was unable to rationally defend.
Coriolanus
Banned
That was due to the Russia-Crimea thingie. In theory
Nah, he was good at backing up his economic views. He got skewered in some other thread for who knows what anymore.
Not gonna name names, but there have been a few liberal leaning posters who don't post in here anymore because they got called out for posting B.S. without data to back it up. One of the reasons I like this thread. The expectations for backing up your factual arguments is much higher here than typical political news threads in the OT.
I like this thread, but I don't "like" like this thread.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah like that Aaron Strife asshole.
I would like to see how many months/years we can get out of PDs ridiculous comment
Avon Barksdale
Member
What ever happened to Angry Fork?
Avon Barksdale
Member
Rahm Emanuel won the runoff election for Chicago mayor.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Ferguson's city council is now 50% black and Democratic majority (4-2 on the council, but the mayor who is a Republican also has a council vote)
Didn't he go all in defend the Venezuelan economic system? I wonder if he left so he can rethink his worldview or something. Some of the stuff he said were pretty nuts.
Avon Barksdale
Member
I didn't even know Tampa had a mayoral election last month.
Guy ran un-opposed. LOL.
Guy ran un-opposed. LOL.
That I wouldn't know, but his views on US monetary policy in here were generally well researched.
Tampa, Florida?! How does a city that big have only 1 guy running?
Avon Barksdale
Member
Nobody pays attention to local politics, especially when the election is held as early as March instead of November.
http://enr.electionsfl.org/HIL/Summary/1246
It's mind-boggling to me that you would post a quote in this thread and then say "you don't need to know" where it's from. How else are we supposed to know the context of the comment?
I originally thought you didn't post your sources because you were embarrassed that they were always Politico, but now I just don't even know.
Abinash117
Member
That's good it seems; the dems might be more willing to do the suggestions the DOJ proposes or might be more willing capable of changing things instead of keeping the status quo.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Wonder how many signatures are needed. The Denver elections for next month only need 300, and so we have 3 independents running against the incumbent. So we get our pick between two different woodstock hippies, a community organizer wanting a revolution on standard letter casing, or a Democrat that has the experience and backing to run a city.
It's so nice to have choices.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked