Dad on the Election thread

[cr47t]

The election thread will re-open Monday 10/24/2016, shortly after 7:00 AM Central Time.  I'd previously warned the entirety of the thread (more than once) that continued flaming among participants would result in a lock.  Now, seeing as how this thread has generated most if not all of the discussion among the section, naturally I don't want it to stay locked.  So I will be re-opening it.

 

After such a time after the election has ended, the thread will be closed again and a new thread promoting the newly elected President will be open for discussion, as well as events that led up to and that are occurring because of said President's election (basically a fresh thread).

 

So rest assured, this is not permanent.  This is just me doing what I said I would.

 

(Concerning the thread after the election) The thread will mostly be focused on the President him/herself, their policies that they are attempting to put into action, debating those policies, the effects of those policies, actions taken in office, the direction of the country as a whole, etc.  There's much to discuss when you're talking about a new President.  So we can expect a lot of information once the thread is made.

 

I think I'll try to be the one to make it, but being seeing as how hotly debated and how often conflict results around some members, I may get one of them to open and host it while I monitor.

[Dad]

Smh, I've been called out.  So much shade being thrown that I blend in.

 

And yes I did say this, and yes it will occur.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Dad giving us a time-out.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yeh this is not OK.

 

Let's go over what happened. Giga made a post about Trump's debate performance. I told him I didn't like Trump's performance (though likely for different reasons). He pressed me on specifics that he felt demonstrated Trump lying. I refuted to the best of my ability on the claims that Trump was lying

 

After that, Cow Cow makes the post which basically boils down to "so Trump's lying"

 

It was a low energy bullshit post that made a mockery of me responding to Giga. And it certainly wasn't any form of "debate"

 

My mistake was being passive/aggressive about it, when we made debates we agreed that it would be more heated and aggressive. That's why a schism from general was needed. So allow me to rectify my mistake. 

 

CowCow you're being blind af. Either address my post, or don't plagiarize Giga. I'm fine with you disagreeing with me. IDK how many time I have to tell you guys this. I see HRC as much worse than Trump. You don't? Solid. We can agree to disagree. IDC who you vote for tbh. I've made a case for the person I think it better, you've made a case against him. It's fine when you post stuff with Substance like giga, but what you did was rank bullshit

 

I'm not gonna apologize to you, I think you were being a jackass, and I still do. Dad felt I was being too aggressive. Fine, I got my WP (which goes against the original point of debates of less mod intervention, but debates has been steadily invaded by mod powers so might as well accept reality). What cannot be accepted is debates was meant to be more heated and aggressive. If you can't deal with it get out. And the mods sure as hell shouldn't be locking topics in debates for aggression. 

 

@Dad don't make debates a general clone 

 

Edit:

 

It's even more bullshit because Wikileaks is dropping the Obama emails in the next few days, and regardless of what you think of o'keffe, the WH tapes are dropping in the next 2-3 days. Silencing the thread now is political tampering

[Jord200]

......How the ACTUAL HELL is it political tampering....

 

 

This is a YUGIOH FORUM.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

......How the ACTUAL HELL is it political tampering....

 

 

This is a YUGIOH FORUM.

Because some of the best stuff is dropping the next 3 days and nobody can respond for 4 days?

 

That's like locking the thread in the middle of pussygate

[Aerion Brightflame]

Winter, you call CowCow out on making 'a low effort post' when your third to last post in that thread if you posting a photo of glass to infer that Cowcow is blind. You made a low effort personal attack. Or are you just going to side-step past that?

 

It isn't an issue of aggression. It's an issue of personal attacks and shitty post quality. Stuff that I don't think will change even after the thread gets reopened. 

 

As hilarious as it is to point out given how I opened this post, but what is the point of trying to have debates if it just boils down to low effort sheet, incoherent posts, or personal attacks? (I am guilty of this sheet as well I will point out) I can't recall a serious discussion of policy that's occurred in that thread, or an objective discussion about the candidates. It's all just the same selection of pointless sheet over and over and over. 

 

Either the thread stays open, or the thread stays locked because I don't feel that there is going to be any level of improvement in quality as things go on in terms of quality. We would have seen it by now if it was going to happen. 

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

While I agree on the "if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen" point, the thread's opening on the 24th so we can always have a look at whatever's dropped then. If the thread were locked permanently that'd suck, but as is it's not going anywhere.  

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I got a wp for that

 

What'd cowcow get?

 

I'll deliver a more passionate rebuke next time if you'd like. It was low energy and it wasn't nearly as harsh on him as it should have been. 

[Tourmaline]

Yeah CowCow gets away with a lot, just like Hillary.

[Dad]

Yeh this is not OK.

 

Let's go over what happened. Giga made a post about Trump's debate performance. I told him I didn't like Trump's performance (though likely for different reasons). He pressed me on specifics that he felt demonstrated Trump lying. I refuted to the best of my ability on the claims that Trump was lying

 

After that, Cow Cow makes the post which basically boils down to "so Trump's lying"

 

It was a low energy bullshit post that made a mockery of me responding to Giga. And it certainly wasn't any form of "debate"

 

My mistake was being passive/aggressive about it, when we made debates we agreed that it would be more heated and aggressive. That's why a schism from general was needed. So allow me to rectify my mistake. 

 

CowCow you're being blind af. Either address my post, or don't plagiarize Giga. I'm fine with you disagreeing with me. IDK how many time I have to tell you guys this. I see HRC as much worse than Trump. You don't? Solid. We can agree to disagree. IDC who you vote for tbh. I've made a case for the person I think it better, you've made a case against him. It's fine when you post stuff with Substance like giga, but what you did was rank bullshit

 

I'm not gonna apologize to you, I think you were being a jackass, and I still do. Dad felt I was being too aggressive. Fine, I got my WP (which goes against the original point of debates of less mod intervention, but debates has been steadily invaded by mod powers so might as well accept reality). What cannot be accepted is debates was meant to be more heated and aggressive. If you can't deal with it get out. And the mods sure as hell shouldn't be locking topics in debates for aggression. 

 

@Dad don't make debates a general clone 

 

Edit:

 

It's even more bullshit because Wikileaks is dropping the Obama emails in the next few days, and regardless of what you think of o'keffe, the WH tapes are dropping in the next 2-3 days. Silencing the thread now is political tampering

 

So you want me to turn Debates into a section where you can witchhunt and bash whoever you please when they disagree with your argument.  That ain't gonna happen.  If you can't debate without turning the subject to "oh you're an idiot", then maybe you're the one who shouldn't be debating.

 

And just because the Wikileaks are dropping shortly, doesn't mean they're going anywhere.  The content is available and will be available for discussion regardless of when the thread is open.  Debates is meant to be aggressive.  But it's not meant for you to berate someone because they disagree with you.  You're making baseless accusations and you're acting childish.

 

There are clear rules in place that prohibit personal attacks or flaming of any kind.  I asked you guys to cut back on it, and you couldn't help but turn it into a Misc. thread.

 

If you wanna post memes or sheet post, do it there.  Not in debates.

 

 

Yeah CowCow gets away with a lot, just like Hillary.

 

 

I got a wp for that

 

What'd cowcow get?

 

I'll deliver a more passionate rebuke next time if you'd like. It was low energy and it wasn't nearly as harsh on him as it should have been. 

 

Nothing.  Because he didn't attack you. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So you want me to turn Debates into a section where you can witchhunt and bash whoever you please when they disagree with your argument.  That ain't gonna happen.  If you can't debate without turning the subject to "oh you're an idiot", then maybe you're the one who shouldn't be debating.

 

And just because the Wikileaks are dropping shortly, doesn't mean they're going anywhere.  The content is available and will be available for discussion regardless of when the thread is open.  Debates is meant to be aggressive.  But it's not meant for you to berate someone because they disagree with you.  You're making baseless accusations and you're acting childish.

 

There are clear rules in place that prohibit personal attacks or flaming of any kind.  I asked you guys to cut back on it, and you couldn't help but turn it into a Misc. thread.

 

If you wanna post memes or sheet post, do it there.  Not in debates.

That's just it, if I was attacking people for disagreeing with me, Giga would have got the brunt of it, not cowcow.

 

I'm fine with cowcow saying w/e the hell he wants about Trump or whomever. My problem is that a long winded counter post was made JUST. 1. POST. above his. And he took the the handwave method. 

 

A witchhunt is me going after people I disagree with, this is me calling a person who posted sheet out as posting sheet. Just like Tom did to me a min ago. I won't defend my post. I'd like to see cowcow defend his substantial post

 

News cycles dude, in 4 days a LOT will happen? Like did you know Trump and HRC were at a roast today and they roasted each other? We're missing the best part of this election because some kids can't grow a thicker skin

[Aerion Brightflame]

How about you take the 4 days to collate the important news that happens, and construct a really high quality post for when the thread reopens instead of posting every minute detail the moment it's revealed within those 4 days? 

 

Because if the discussion is worth having, it will be just as worthwhile in 4 days time. In fact, it might be a little better even because there will be time to scope the full scale of events instead. 

 

That way you even set a good example by which others in the thread can hopefully follow on from, and debates could potentially prosper. 

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

Just make a wikileaks thread when it happens and it can be merged when the lock is removed.

 

Personally I think this is an overreaction (actions of one having consequences for the group as a whole) but there is no need to be melodramatic over it.

 

As for cow being at fault here: No, his post was not high quality. But not all are, and if we punished people for that kind of thing it would just get out of hand. And Hina, you making such a comment is especially amusing, considering your absolute lack of contribution in the past, basically just calling people dumb in lieu of an argument.

[Dad]

That's just it, if I was attacking people for disagreeing with me, Giga would have got the brunt of it, not cowcow.

 

I'm fine with cowcow saying w/e the hell he wants about Trump or whomever.

 

---

 

My problem is that a long winded counter post was made JUST. 1. POST. above his. And he took the the handwave method. 

 

---

 

A witchhunt is me going after people I disagree with, this is me calling a person who posted sheet out as posting sheet. Just like Tom did to me a min ago. I won't defend my post. I'd like to see cowcow defend his substantial post

 

News cycles dude, in 4 days a LOT will happen? Like did you know Trump and HRC were at a roast today and they roasted each other? We're missing the best part of this election because some kids can't grow a thicker skin

 

News does cycle.  But it's also recorded.  Which means you can collect and find your information now, like someone typically does in a debate, and argue it when appropriate.

 

And let's look at the bolded points:

 

1.)  That's basically what debates overs.  It's not about whether or not you agree with what they say, but that you can argue their point and defend your own.  Hence not caring what Cow says about Trump.

 

2.)  First you don't care, now you care.  Okay.  Whatever.  But the fact that you thought it was appropriate to follow Cow's irrelevant point with a shitpost is what boggles me.  You don't want shitposting, but you shitpost.  You repeatedly do what you say you don't want, and then get defensive about it.  It was as simple as quoting your post (which I would have gladly accepted and laughed at) or pointing out that Cow missed your post and referring him to it.

 

What about that simple solution were you unable to do, that caused you to shitpost?

 

 

Just make a wikileaks thread when it happens and it can be merged when the lock is removed.

 

Personally I think this is an overreaction (actions of one having consequences for the group as a whole) but there is no need to be melodramatic over it.

 

As for cow being at fault here: No, his post was not high quality. But not all are, and if we punished people for that kind of thing it would just get out of hand. And Hina, you making such a comment is especially amusing, considering your absolute lack of contribution in the past, basically just calling people dumb in lieu of an argument.

 

 

Let me just respond to this.  The thread lock for the most part was because I had mentioned several days before that it would happen if there were more direct attacks (pun intended, this is a YGO forum, get over it) in the thread.  I do agree it is a bit harsh, and I shouldn't be punishing everyone with a lock for the behavior in question.

 

But I feel like I would also be equally reprimanded if I did not follow through with what I said was going to happen.  So, I locked the thread.  It's not permanent, and we can avoid future problems like this, I believe, by referring to this incident.

 

That just means punishments from me for single person behavior in debates will now be much worse.

Just make a wikileaks thread when it happens and it can be merged when the lock is removed.

 

Personally I think this is an overreaction (actions of one having consequences for the group as a whole) but there is no need to be melodramatic over it.

 

As for cow being at fault here: No, his post was not high quality. But not all are, and if we punished people for that kind of thing it would just get out of hand. And Hina, you making such a comment is especially amusing, considering your absolute lack of contribution in the past, basically just calling people dumb in lieu of an argument.

 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Attack isn't the problem. I deserved a WP for the mode of attack. It was weak and didn't hammer home what was the problem (his post)

News does cycle.  But it's also recorded.  Which means you can collect and find your information now, like someone typically does in a debate, and argue it when appropriate.

 

And let's look at the bolded points:

 

1.)  That's basically what debates overs.  It's not about whether or not you agree with what they say, but that you can argue their point and defend your own.  Hence not caring what Cow says about Trump.

 

2.)  First you don't care, now you care.  Okay.  Whatever.  But the fact that you thought it was appropriate to follow Cow's irrelevant point with a shitpost is what boggles me.  You don't want shitposting, but you shitpost.  You repeatedly do what you say you don't want, and then get defensive about it.  It was as simple as quoting your post (which I would have gladly accepted and laughed at) or pointing out that Cow missed your post and referring him to it.

 

What about that simple solution were you unable to do, that caused you to shitpost?

Nope, as I suggested in the PM, that would have been the smart thing to do

 

I'm not perfect and I happily accept the WP for it

 

You're conflating what I said there. I'm fine with Cowcow making a substantial attack on Trump like Giga did. I welcome it. I'm not ok with him ignoring pts and being blind effectively 

 

Yes I posted a passive-aggressive meme post, but do you really wanna be as bad as funking Winter?

 

Locking the thread sure a hell isn't productive. Telling both CowCow and me to add substance and giving me a WP for aggression (????) would the proper discourse 

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Winter attacked CowCow's reading comprehension, not his life points directly.

[Tourmaline]

I'm just contributing from the shadows Giga.

"You're stupid" is a valid conclusion by the way.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Winter attacked CowCow's reading comprehension, not his life points directly.

I believe we found the post of the year

 

/shitpost

 

Srsly 

 

I really think the thread should be re-opened dad

 

@brightfire

 

On an avg post you guys address maybe 0-2 pts out of 5 of mine, suddenly y'all will respond to 10-15 4 days from now? If it was gonna happen, it would have happened by now

[Aerion Brightflame]

I'm just contributing from the shadows Giga.

"You're stupid" is a valid conclusion by the way.

 

And a conclusion without the argument to support it is not a good post in a debate. 

 

Your conclusion can be valid and you can still make a low quality post. Which is half the issue. 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

That's just it, if I was attacking people for disagreeing with me, Giga would have got the brunt of it, not cowcow.

 

I'm fine with cowcow saying w/e the hell he wants about Trump or whomever. My problem is that a long winded counter post was made JUST. 1. POST. above his. And he took the the handwave method. 

 

A witchhunt is me going after people I disagree with, this is me calling a person who posted sheet out as posting sheet. Just like Tom did to me a min ago. I won't defend my post. I'd like to see cowcow defend his substantial post

This is just how I write. Ask RP, even my lengthy host posts that cover five different events generally are between 1-2000 words, which some people have done regular posts like that.

I go directly to what I'm thinking and the base idea of what I find wrong with a situation.

That's just how I write. I could fluff it up but the majority of my points are fairly simple to write briefly, and so that's what I do.

I don't write about every point because I don't see a reason to. If a specific point really needs to be addressed I can but for the most part I tend to try and be as non-long-winded as possible.

[Tourmaline]

And a conclusion without the argument to support it is not a good post in a debate. 

 

Your conclusion can be valid and you can still make a low quality post. Which is half the issue.

 

As long as I'm satisfied with the result.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm just contributing from the shadows Giga.

"You're stupid" is a valid conclusion by the way.

You conclusion isn't wrong, Cowcow gets away with a lot by virtue of being cowcow

 

You should elaborate though, like point out his debate style of poke and retreat into the void

[Dad]

I'm just contributing from the shadows Giga.

"You're stupid" is a valid conclusion by the way.

 

That's a valid summation of your last few posts, considering how little you say and how much you shitpost.  

 

 

Winter attacked CowCow's reading comprehension, not his life points directly.

 

Somebody gets it.

 

 

Attack isn't the problem. I deserved a WP for the mode of attack. It was weak and didn't hammer home what was the problem (his post)

Nope, as I suggested in the PM, that would have been the smart thing to do

 

I'm not perfect and I happily accept the WP for it

 

You're conflating what I said there. I'm fine with Cowcow making a substantial attack on Trump like Giga did. I welcome it. I'm not ok with him ignoring pts and being blind effectively 

 

Yes I posted a passive-aggressive meme post, but do you really wanna be as bad as funking Winter?

 

Locking the thread sure a hell isn't productive. Telling both CowCow and me to add substance and giving me a WP for aggression (????) would the proper discourse 

 

You're right.  I should address Cow here.  Let's.

 

 

So far what I'm seeing from this thread is.

Trump is an jabroni who keeps making sheet up

Hilary has some source who I still don't see any reason to actually believe claiming she's some vague monstrous person

 

What's wrong with this post?  

 

1.)  It's already been answered.  The poster however openly disputes the information and evidence presented, making this an automatic shitpost.

 

2.)  The user did not cite any evidence to prove his claim, or provide a factual argument.

 

This is problematic.  But there's a difference between shitposting, and memeing and attacking.  We're already clear about this, and I agree with you.  These types of posts are problematic and there should be a way to punish for it.  However, that would require me making more rules in debates.  Instead, I leave it to you, the other users, to call it out without being silly about it.  And while we agree that how you addressed it was wrong, I want to make sure we both understand that I did not ignore what Cow posted.  But I don't have a way to punish it because it doesn't directly brake any rules either.

 

It's not spam.  It's not flaming.  It's not inappropriate content.  But it is a shitpost.  I'm not ignoring it.  I'm letting debates "run itself". But not letting it run itself into the ground.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

This is just how I write. Ask RP, even my lengthy host posts that cover five different events generally are between 1-2000 words, which some people have done regular posts like that.

I go directly to what I'm thinking and the base idea of what I find wrong with a situation.

That's just how I write. I could fluff it up but the majority of my points are fairly simple to write briefly, and so that's what I do.

Curious then, can you explain why literally a post above was a counter point that you somehow failed to see?

 

There was no substance mate. Not critiquing wikileaks. Not against O'keffe. Not against me. Barely anything against Trump

 

I've mentioned this to you before too. You often make a small jab like that, and just vanish mate. That's not healthy for debates.

 

 

 

 

That's a valid summation of your last few posts, considering how little you say and how much you shitpost.  

 

 

 

Somebody gets it.

 

 

 

You're right.  I should address Cow here.  Let's.

 

 

 

What's wrong with this post?  

 

1.)  It's already been answered.  The poster however openly disputes the information and evidence presented, making this an automatic shitpost.

 

2.)  The user did not cite any evidence to prove his claim, or provide a factual argument.

 

This is problematic.  But there's a difference between shitposting, and memeing and attacking.  We're already clear about this, and I agree with you.  These types of posts are problematic and there should be a way to punish for it.  However, that would require me making more rules in debates.  Instead, I leave it to you, the other users, to call it out without being silly about it.  And while we agree that how you addressed it was wrong, I want to make sure we both understand that I did not ignore what Cow posted.  But I don't have a way to punish it because it doesn't directly brake any rules either.

 

It's not spam.  It's not flaming.  It's not inappropriate content.  But it is a shitpost.  I'm not ignoring it.  I'm letting debates "run itself". But not letting it run itself into the ground.

Sure, and I've gotten my punishment for the poor response I had? If you think I deserve more WP, I'll take that too. Not seeing the rational behind silencing the discussion though for the crimes of at most 2 people