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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (19713)	8/23/2002 1:04:43 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

I think moderated threads are a necessary evil. I have likened it before to the difference between a caveman community with only public places and a more advanced community where there are still public gathering places (unmoderated threads), but you can also build a house (moderated threads) where you have the ability to invite or exclude based on your own personal wishes. Caveman societies (except Afghanistan and Western Pakistan) eventually evolved and built houses so that everyone wouldn't be forced to press together and tolerate everything no matter how heinous. Once you build a house, the question becomes....who do you let in? If the idea is to be as inclusive as possible, to throw large parties where stimulating discussion can flourish, the better approach IMO is to invite as many people as possible and only throw out those who are criminal, disgusting, completely prevent the carrying on of normal or intelligent conversation, or have intolerable body odor. TP isn't a criminal (I define "treason" a bit more narrowly than jla I guess <g>); he is a bit of a nitwit when he gets so reflexively partisan, but that is hardly disgusting (at least not to me); and his body odor is no worse than many of the rest of us as far as I know. That leaves me with considering whether he completely prevents the carrying on of intelligent conversation. I don't think he adds much, but I also don't think he subtracts by preventing us from having intelligent discussion. In a way conservatives might do well to view him the way many liberals view Pat Buchanan: as an extremist buffoon who can mostly be ignored but who, once in a blue moon, says something worth thinking about. Just as Buchanan often tends to make liberal causes seem more palatable, TP to me makes the conservative point of view seem more powerful by the very ineptitude of his statements and positions. Kick him off? Hell, jla ought to thank him. <g>

To: Bill who wrote (19713)	8/23/2002 3:08:10 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

<<TP is not here to discuss issues, bat around ideas, debate politics, share recipes, or hang out with buddies.>> He can't debate very well with 1/2 of SI on ignore. His hate of the whole Bush clan goes way beyond politics and comes off as very personal.

To: Bill who wrote (19713)	8/23/2002 3:15:32 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

TP is a good candidate for at least temporary banishment. Not a bad idea. We could call it a demonstration blast. :-) I'd like to add that those links you provided are just from this thread. His best work is in other places.

To: Bill who wrote (19713)	8/23/2002 3:15:32 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 21057

TP is a good candidate for at least temporary banishment. Not a bad idea. We could call it a demonstration blast. :-) I'd like to add that those links you provided are just from this thread. His best work is in other places.

To: Bill who wrote (19713)	8/24/2002 11:20:16 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

He's here to snipe away with his pet issues He and who else, Bill? And often he makes things up as he goes along... Many of his posts contain "information" which turns out not to have been true Check out this quite typical post of yours. It's on the subject of the death penalty: Since when? The liberal position has always been that it is better to let a killer back on the street to kill again than to allow the state the power to extinguish him. Victims be damned. Message 17850977 You know that's untrue. It is mere sniping, and is irresponsible. I challenge you to find a single post of any anti-dp poster on SI taking that position. I challenge you to find any anti-dp advocate anyplace on the planet taking that position. I've posted thousands of words on the subject, and read many books on the subject, and I have neither said such a bizarre thing nor read any author or commentator on the subject whose position is what you claim has "always" been the "liberal" position. Many liberals and conservatives of decency and conscience oppose the state killing its citizens given the lack of statistical evidence that it deters crime; the draining of funds that could be used to demonstrably deter crime; the disgust with which it is perceived (and therefore our system is perceived) by most of the civilized world; the refusal of many countries to extradite defendants to ours; the dramatic racial bias, gender bias, age bias, educational level bias and economic class bias with which it is applied; and the chance of killing innocents -- but the alternative proposed to capital punishment for heinous crimes has never been what you claim, and always been, in all my reading on the subject and all my arguing on the subject, "Life without the possibility of parole." Sincerely, I am repelled by that post of yours. I think it is deceitful, twisted, unresponsive to the many points made here on the topic by those who sincerely differ with you. IMO its claim that those who oppose state executions at this time are saying "victims be damned" is irresponsible and libelous and vile. What's more, it's personally insulting to me, since I'm the person on SI who has argued against the dp more than any other. I think it is as much "sniping" as anything TP posts, and it surely doesn't qualify as "debate." It is merely a knowing distortion of the arguments of those with whom you disagree, whom you inaccurately choose to call "liberals" -- I have known many Republicans who are against the death penalty -- a distortion made for effect. A motivation I suspect is very similar indeed to TP's. But I don't think you should be banned. I think you should be answered. That's the American way. So I answered you.