SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kevin Rose who wrote (433044)7/24/2003 7:20:33 PM
From: one_less  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 769667
 
I think we may be missing each other's point. There are many contexts in which people post here, that one might find annoying. Some people gang up on one point of view in opposition to it. Some people use innuendo and rumour as the basis for argument. Some people provoke others with personal jibes. Some people use unsubstantiated hearsay and conspiracy theory as a basis for discrediting one another and official government reports. Some people use euphamistic political correctness as the new ideology of political discussion. Some people post earnest queries about information and are met with agendized double speak. Some people post deliberate provocations that are neither logical or supported by fact. I find most of it annoying.

Some people post sincere and logical challenges, or viewpoints on political issues. That usually gets totally ignored while a personal provocation is met with stimulating rhetoric (name calling, jibing, bantering and such). If you want to test it out, follow the posts I have contributed to this thread on capital punishment (and others) over the last couple of days. Which ones were found worthy of discussion? Why do you think that is? No comment equals no benefit to an agenda. Comment equals advance an agenda. I find agendas annoying.

Name calling is just popcorn. I don't through it but; hey, the atmosphere is a gas.