Dad on the Election thread

[Tourmaline]

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

 

Isn't that what I said?

[Dad]

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

 

I'll make a deal with you.  Open a WikiLeaks thread, and you can leave it open for the duration of the lock.  I'll merge the threads on Monday.  If you decide you can be mature and not go into your dank meme stash for retorts, everything should be fine.  And we'll resume things as normal on Monday, without future full thread locks (unless absolutely necessary).

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

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.

There was substance. Just a different substance than you're looking for. I don't need to go into detail to get a point across.

Plus why would I just say the same things as Giga already did?

 

I'd also love to know how I'm getting away with things.

I just don't take it to the extent that I would be punished.

[Aerion Brightflame]

As long as I'm satisfied with the result.

 

And I assume you have no intention to change that to improve the quality of your input to the section? 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

There was substance. Just a different substance than you're looking for. I don't need to go into detail to get a point across.

Plus why would I just say the same things as Giga already did?

 

I'd also love to know how I'm getting away with things.

I just don't take it to the extent that I would be punished.

I don't see you post outside of general. So I can't attest to your RP writing style. In debate you've had a habit of this kinda post. 

 

I personally think that kinda post needs to be called out by the people in debates and I think you get away with that a fair bit since you often retreat after a post. 

 

Punishment? Porbs just more posts like the one I made in the start of this thread calling you out for it. But ideally from others as well. No I don't want you to get wps for it if that's what you're asking

 

Why would you say the same things giga already said is the question I'm tryna figure out.

 

You posted a waterdown'd version of his post, after my post responding to his post. I'm not seeing your logic train there.

[Tourmaline]

And I assume you have no intention to change that to improve the quality of your input to the section?

 

I'm doing what I think is best for myself just like everyone else.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'll make a deal with you.  Open a WikiLeaks thread, and you can leave it open for the duration of the lock.  I'll merge the threads on Monday.  If you decide you can be mature and not go into your dank meme stash for retorts, everything should be fine.  And we'll resume things as normal on Monday, without future full thread locks (unless absolutely necessary).

Yeh this sounds nice tbh

 

I'll get on it unless you wanna make the thread (given my political bias towards one candidate)

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

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.

I suppose I should defend or something?

Here's the thing. My post opened up an issue I was having and wanted to be addressed. The evidence given didn't seem to be really enough to actually make a point.

In my opinion a lengthy post with evidence that doesn't really say much of anything is worse than what I did.

If I'm being objective no one in that thread is good at Debates. There's no structure. There's no understanding. There's just facts, which are often contradictory, being flung and posts that, often, are more images and links than actual debating. It's repetitive and pedantic.

I don't bother calling this sheet out much but since the can of worms was opened up, sure.

That isn't a functional Debate section. It's a joke to try and say certain posts aren't substantial or good enough. Because they're mostly, objectively, sheet.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0ryocAv8Zw

 

meanwhile we're missing this roast

[Jord200]

.........Even when the freaking thread on politics is closed, he still rambles on about it in a thread where I don't even think that is the inanition......

 

Would it not make more sense to to just make a seperate thread? Nobody but you would care, but still.

[Dad]

There's just facts, which are often contradictory

 

Facts can't be contradictory dude.  That sounds weird.  If I tell you the sky is blue and you know this for a fact, what about that is contradictory?  

 

Here's the thing. My post opened up an issue I was having and wanted to be addressed. The evidence given didn't seem to be really enough to actually make a point.

In my opinion a lengthy post with evidence that doesn't really say much of anything is worse than what I did.

 

Not true.  Providing evidence in your post makes your claim a lot stronger.  If it's already been refuted and find a rebuttal to the opponent's counter argument, that is healthy debating.  You're creating discussion based on the presented evidence.  It's like being in court.

 

 

There's no structure. There's no understanding. It's repetitive and pedantic.

I don't bother calling this sheet out much but since the can of worms was opened up, sure.

That isn't a functional Debate section. It's a joke to try and say certain posts aren't substantial or good enough. Because they're mostly, objectively, sheet.

 

The section is fine.  But you're being "called out" so to speak because your post was of poor quality.  Your rp posts are much more filling, vivid, detailed, and tell a story.  Carrying that over to debates isn't hard.  You just have to do the work.  That means backing up your claims and not simply posting "X is a liar".

 

Cow, I've defended you.  But you need to know when you're in the wrong.  

 

 

Yeh this sounds nice tbh

 

I'll get on it unless you wanna make the thread (given my political bias towards one candidate)

 

You can make it.  In fact, I encourage you to do so.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0ryocAv8Zw

 

meanwhile we're missing this roast

 

And make sure this is in it.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

.........Even when the freaking thread on politics is closed, he still rambles on about it in a thread where I don't even think that is the inanition......

 

Would it not make more sense to to just make a seperate thread? Nobody but you would care, but still.

What's wrong. I'm laughing with HRC at Trump. How often do you see that happen.

 

It's not even politics, her joke about the 3rd grader following Trump's example and reusing to turn in HW because it was under audit was perfectly delivered 

 

 

Jeez

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Facts can't be contradictory dude.  That sounds weird.  If I tell you the sky is blue and you know this for a fact, what about that is contradictory?  

 

 

Not true.  Providing evidence in your post makes your claim a lot stronger.  If it's already been refuted and find a rebuttal to the opponent's counter argument, that is healthy debating.  You're creating discussion based on the presented evidence.  It's like being in court.

 

 

 

The section is fine.  But you're being "called out" so to speak because your post was of poor quality.  Your rp posts are much more filling, vivid, detailed, and tell a story.  Carrying that over to debates isn't hard.  You just have to do the work.  That means backing up your claims and not simply posting "X is a liar".

 

Cow, I've defended you.  But you need to know when you're in the wrong.  

"facts" then.

And did you not read fully what I said? Evidence that doesn't mean anything. Much of the evidence I see posed is just throw-away lines and conjecture.

The section is not fine. It's pretending to be something it's not. It's General with a skin of argumentativeness.

I know when I'm wrong. I should have been more specific in my posts. But I'm not alone in this. I refuse to be a scapegoat.

[Dad]

"facts" then.

And did you not read fully what I said? Evidence that doesn't mean anything. Much of the evidence I see posed is just throw-away lines and conjecture.

The section is not fine. It's pretending to be something it's not. It's General with a skin of argumentativeness.

I know when I'm wrong. I should have been more specific in my posts. But I'm not alone in this. I refuse to be a scapegoat.

 

You're not a scapegoat.  But I think in your best interest you should more carefully consider your posts.  You're very defensive over this and yes it is about you.  You're not a target.  You're not a scapegoat.  You're making this much more than it needs to be.  You made a terrible post that contributed very little.

 

You don't have to back that up by saying "the evidence I had was poor so I just made a poor post anyway."  With evidence, it would've been a lot cleaner, and there was less of a chance of you being called out on it.  You know that you made a mistake.  That's fine.  In fact, that in itself is healthy.  Now you need to move on and not be so worried about it.  Instead, present a better argument.  The section isn't going to change for you.  You need to adapt.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

 

It's General with a skin of argumentativeness.

 

Might be why it's called "Debates".

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

You're not a scapegoat.  But I think in your best interest you should more carefully consider your posts.  You're very defensive over this and yes it is about you.  You're not a target.  You're not a scapegoat.  You're making this much more than it needs to be.  You made a terrible post that contributed very little.

 

You don't have to back that up by saying "the evidence I had was poor so I just made a poor post anyway."  With evidence, it would've been a lot cleaner, and there was less of a chance of you being called out on it.  You know that you made a mistake.  That's fine.  In fact, that in itself is healthy.  Now you need to move on and not be so worried about it.  Instead, present a better argument.  The section isn't going to change for you.  You need to adapt.

You miss my point. From what I've read of that thread, most of the posts don't really contribute much. And constantly just go in circles. 100 pages and barely anything was TRULY said or done.

I didn't say anything about evidence I had. I am saying the evidence that people in the thread have been posting, often, seem poor and didn't really contribute.

I have yet to see much in Debates that justifies my post being bad with them being good.

I don't need to adapt. I did adapt. I adapted to the general feel of the thread. My post was reflective of what I saw. I posted it because it was similar quality to the others.

Just because I didn't have the bells and whistles doesn't mean much. If the lengthy, evidence "filled" posts, are shallow and pedantic (god it's weird using that not as a joke) then that's kind of a huge problem.

I'm fine with my post having been considered bad. I'm not fine with people acting like their's are different.

 

 

Might be why it's called "Debates".

But that's not what a Debate is. Except at the basest level. If they want it to be different, they need to make it so.

[Dad]

I'm fine with my post having been considered bad. I'm not fine with people acting like their's are different.

 

Winter--being the troll that he is--has posted his arguments with sources.  Links to articles from respected journalist websites (except the ones that are satire which we call him out on and he has corrected) and provides basis and evidence for his claims.

 

That is the sole difference in your posts.  However, if you're creating argument (linking a new story and arguing for your party) then it is up to those who refute your evidence to provide evidence against it with their claims.  You did refute Winter's claims for Trump.  But you did not argue them.  Your posts are different.  That doesn't mean Winter doesn't shitpost (today is a great example).  The difference is his shitposts often break rules and result in him being warned because HE DOESN'T LISTEN GOD DAMN IT WINTER YOU'RE MAKING MY JOB DIFFICULT.

 

Cow, if anything, the only thing I'm asking for you to do is act like evidence isn't needed.  If you call Trump a liar, provide one--maybe two links--source on where he may have lied.  If your evidence is that bad, refrain from posting for a while and gather more information.  So far, I've seen well thought arguments from most everyone (including you once or twice).  Shitposts will happen.  Yours just happened to be caught in the middle of something more volatile.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

I suppose I disagree with the idea of what a shitpost is. I don't see my posts not contributing, despite not being as high quality as some. I see them getting a point out, and being able to be discussed.

If I felt there was more to say about it I would have said it. I wrote what I felt was adequate for explaining my point of view. Something that I saw many times before in Debates.

I'm just not a super verbose person. I will stay out of the section if it's that much of a problem. No skin off my teeth. I just enjoy sharing what I'm thinking.

I'd just like everyone to take a long look at themselves and realize we're all in similar boats with this. We're not better than the other.

 

Also I suppose I should address Winter's thing about me posting and running. I am not going to keep up with the often long stream of posts happening there. I post and vanish for a while because otherwise I would get jackshit done and I have a lot to get done all the time. I respond when I feel I can but, often, what I would say is already said and doesn't need reinforcement.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

I could say what I feel about the Election thread but honestly CowCow's initial post summed it up pretty well without going off the rails. Which if I were to would. <-<

Oh and Winter, if you reply to this I'm going to ignore it. Simple as that.

[cr47t]

Bump to see if anyone else who has something to say can do so.

 

Also, Election Thread posters; if you are reading this hurry up and get some real info for your next post(s).

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

What's there to say, HRC accepted 12 Million from another king, Huma implicated and says HRC funked up

 

More corruption, more scandals

 

 

My fav one was the current DNC chair shredding Obama on the economy tho

[ihop]

Winter you'ee a funking dumb

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Winter you'ee a funking dumb

And I'd say you're out of touch

 

But ye, we both have our flaws

[Aerion Brightflame]

Even if you think the conclusion is foregone, you can use the time to create a post of higher quality than your usual affair. 

 

A debate is more than just what you say, the manner in which you present it matters a lot. 

 

If the stories in the time of the debate downtime are the same old, same old, give us a magnificent presentation of the argument instead. Hell, I'd settle for competent. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Even if you think the conclusion is foregone, you can use the time to create a post of higher quality than your usual affair. 

 

A debate is more than just what you say, the manner in which you present it matters a lot. 

 

If the stories in the time of the debate downtime are the same old, same old, give us a magnificent presentation of the argument instead. Hell, I'd settle for competent. 

I mean that's a summary of the two I've seen so far today. I haven't had the time to read through all 2k emails dropped today

 

1) More "pay for play" in larger amounts, followed by even HRC's number 2 saying HRC funked up

2) DNC chair ripping party standard barer on the shitty economy

 

Edit:

 

TBH, Trump is finally using his Twitter the proper way, putting out the stories from the media highlighting the emails. What do you need me for when Trump is doing my work and getting it out to 12 million people.