Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Right Wing Extremist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (10286)	6/19/2001 8:36:16 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 59480

Absolutely agree. He is welcome to stay and post as long as he can stand it. <g> JLA

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (10286)	6/19/2001 9:09:59 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 59480

Well said, the interesting thing is, most of the time flap is the one who brings the rudeness to himself. Most people (including myself), would be glad to debate him point-by-point if he was able to stick to the points instead of diverging into the personal abusive realm. Additionally, if he's come here to enlighten us, you don't persuade people by being rude and nasty. It simply doesn't work that way. Most people are persuaded through kindness, respect, trust, and decency. Traits Flap has been seriously remiss in utilizing. He enjoys throwing the dog poop on the neighbors grass far more than he enjoys serious dialogue. So it's not surprising to see some of the neighbors tossing it back. And on occasion, picking up a little extra from their yard and throwing it in his face.

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (10286)	6/19/2001 12:10:32 PM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 59480

Actually, Ground Zero, you are the third person who has offered me a helping hand off the ground after the scurrilous "Lord of the Flies" attack yesterday. Interestingly enough, most of the hard-core bashers on this particular thread justify such "Lord of the Flies" attacks (as you did) because similar happened to them on the LWP or similar threads. In other words, they say, "If such happened to me, then I am indeed justified in attacking others who are different on this thread." That's a real mature way of looking at things. In fact, yesterday's "gang bash" was and is a study in communication theory group gang tactics ... bully bashing ... hooliganism ... where one participant holds the victim and the others hammer away with rocks and fists. However, it was predictable, since threads of this type build up steam over time, like a volcano, and said steam must be released lest members of the same political persuasion start fighting each other, as happened to some extent last week. The underemployed Neocon ... who was co-point man in the attack ... confesses he did enjoy this gang bash, but instead of admitting that it possibly went too far, he smugly asserts that the problem lies with me ... that it is I who is at fault ... for being humorless. I suspect the reason for your "aw-shucks" post is that you are now a bit embarrassed by the episode, even though it was quite amusing to you at the time. My time on this board is limited, and then the McGowans of the board shall have their way when this becomes a members-only right-wing clubhouse, with every other post saying: "You're right on that one, pal!!" Yesterday's attack illustrates the fine line between humor and bad taste.