Battle of Madison

#301
#301
utgibbs said:
I've stated (often) I use the bravado and dogmatism because it is a sports board - something akin to sports radio machismo.

I almost always only bust out Game, Set, and Match on the Gang of Five (kpt, VolDad, SGM, Hat, VKA - BPV is GoF emeritus) and their closest acolytes (e.g. utvolpj).

I think I'm very good about not descending to using "idiot" with anybody, although I'm endlessly assailed with names.

I'm not sure how I google "800 lbs gorilla" to find "troll". What exactly is the problem though? It seems, the way it is now often used by everybody but me, it must have been good fun.

Perhaps you should just lighten up? :hi:
Click to expand...

But this isn't the sports board part. This is the politics forum. Everyone in here is in here because they are looking for a friendly, adult debate. Whenever names and your so called Bravado are used it changes the adult debate into name calling.

I myself have been at fault in this regard and have tried to work on it when I am in here. It doesn't do any of us any good when we call each other childish or stupid or ignorant. We could actually try to rise above that and made we could all actually begin seeing each other's point and add to them and come up with even better ideas. Just a thought.
 
#302
#302
I'm starting to believe UTgibbs doesn't believe half of what he says. I know he will point out very quickly that he does though.

Just too much bravado as he states.
 
#303
#303
sjt18 said:
A troll is someone who makes antagonistic statements for no other reason then to get a response. Usually they don't even reflect the opinion or at least the extreme of the opinion of the troll.

Don't want one. I knew what you were talking about... simply don't want it. If I work hard and save then it is not "equitable" for my kids to have the same starting point of someone who doesn't work as hard as I do.

Further, I would NEVER want to sacrifice my legitimate property rights to this "meritocracy". What I earn is mine to give to whoever I choose. It is not yours. Not the gov't's.

Again I ask you, how did you miss the lesson about things that belong to others don't belong to you?



No. Period. Your ideals do not trump my rights. My property is not yours. It is mine. I will give it to my children because that is a BIG reason for my having worked and saved and avoided the excessive materialism that has sunk many other families... Families by the way that your side now insists that I subsidize.
Click to expand...

That's fair enough, sjt. We could go into a lot of detail on "property rights" (sorta like the pensions of the teachers, for instance), and we could debate on whether you could have accessed those rights without the government, and, by extention, the responsibilities you have to that government and citizenry.

However, on this issue, I think we only differ by degrees. I am not for a pure meritocracy either, although I find much attraction in Rawls' method and conclusions (which, just to be clear, does not lead to a pure meritocracy). So much impressed, in fact, it is hard for me to believe Rawls was a modern thinker.
 
#304
#304
NEOCON said:
I'm starting to believe UTgibbs doesn't believe half of what he says. I know he will point out very quickly that he does though.

Just too much bravado as he states.
Click to expand...

that he pretended to not know what a troll was in regards to an internet message board should tell you all you need to know about him.

so far, the best working theories are:

gibbs and gsvol are the same person

gibbs is a political science/philosophy major conducting an experiment

gibbs really does think Castro and Che are swell guys and is thus deserving of all the ridicule he receives.
 
#305
#305
utgibbs said:
That's fair enough, sjt. We could go into a lot of detail on "property rights" (sorta like the pensions of the teachers, for instance), and we could debate on whether you could have accessed those rights without the government, and, by extention, the responsibilities you have to that government and citizenry.
Click to expand...
I believe gov't is needed. Gov't has a singular purpose however and it is not to assure anyone a "fair" outcome. Its purpose is to protect the rights of the individual. Any other type of gov't is oppressive to rights.

Teachers have a right to what they've earned. The do not have a right to extort money from their employers. I have no problem with honest negotiation so long as either side can say, "No deal. I'm taking another option".

However, on this issue, I think we only differ by degrees. I am not for a pure meritocracy either, although I find much attraction in Rawls' method and conclusions (which, just to be clear, does not lead to a pure meritocracy). So much impressed, in fact, it is hard for me to believe Rawls was a modern thinker.
Click to expand...

I wish I could say it is by degrees but it is not. Until you acknowledge my sovereign property rights, we have no basis for agreement.
 
#306
#306
utgibbs said:
I've stated (often) I use the bravado and dogmatism because it is a sports board - something akin to sports radio machismo.

I almost always only bust out Game, Set, and Match on the Gang of Five (kpt, VolDad, SGM, Hat, VKA - BPV is GoF emeritus) and their closest acolytes (e.g. utvolpj).

I think I'm very good about not descending to using "idiot" with anybody, although I'm endlessly assailed with names.

I'm not sure how I google "800 lbs gorilla" to find "troll". What exactly is the problem though? It seems, the way it is now often used by everybody but me, it must have been good fun.

Perhaps you should just lighten up? :hi:
Click to expand...

Could you tell my acolyte, utvolpj, to quit deleting all those posts in which I call you an idiot? He's probably dropped my post count by 300.
 
#307
#307
NEOCON said:
But this isn't the sports board part. This is the politics forum. Everyone in here is in here because they are looking for a friendly, adult debate. Whenever names and your so called Bravado are used it changes the adult debate into name calling.

I myself have been at fault in this regard and have tried to work on it when I am in here. It doesn't do any of us any good when we call each other childish or stupid or ignorant. We could actually try to rise above that and made we could all actually begin seeing each other's point and add to them and come up with even better ideas. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Good post. I am guilty to. I do strive to be better.


Edit: just think, you received a compliment from a mortal enemy: a coca-cola man ;-)
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#309
#309
MG1968 said:
that he pretended to not know what a troll was in regards to an internet message board should tell you all you need to know about him.

so far, the best working theories are:

gibbs and gsvol are the same person

gibbs is a political science/philosophy major conducting an experiment

gibbs really does think Castro and Che are swell guys and is thus deserving of all the ridicule he receives.
Click to expand...

My theory has been that he is actually a conservative, playing Devil's advocate to the extreme. He takes the most radical stances of liberals and acts like he is championing their cause in an attempt to highlight how ridiculous some liberals ideas and thoughts actually are.
 
#310
#310
I dont understand how people think calling people names and being derogatory is furthering the debate. If anything it makes them look juvenile and weakens their case.
 
#311
#311
I knew Gibbs from another board, he's genuinely on the left, I think he ran for political office in South Carolina for I believe the Green Party at one time. I know his full name but won't use it here out of respect, but he was open about that on the other board.
 
Last edited:
#312
#312
oklavol said:
I knew Gibbs from another board, he's genuinely on the left, I think he ran for political office in South Carolina for I believe the Green Party at one time. I know his full name but won't use it here out of respect, but he was open about that on the other board.
Click to expand...

ov comes with specifics. :hi:
 
#313
#313
oklavol said:
I dont understand how people think calling people names and being derogatory is furthering the debate. If anything it makes them look juvenile and weakens their case.
Click to expand...

if you are referring to our treatment of gibbs, he gives as well as he gets. he may not resort to name calling, but his smug, condescending attitude more than makes up for it.
 
#314
#314
MG1968 said:
if you are referring to our treatment of gibbs, he gives as well as he gets. he may not resort to name calling, but his smug, condescending attitude more than makes up for it.
Click to expand...

I like to think of it as bravado and sports board machismo. And who else is going to come up with zingy one-liners like "Big-pimpin' Super-Keynes?"
 
#315
#315
utgibbs said:
I like to think of it as bravado and sports board machismo. And who else is going to come up with zingy one-liners like "Big-pimpin' Super-Keynes?"
Click to expand...

bravado and machismo are for 40 year olds who live with their parents and professional wrestlers named "Razor".
 
#317
#317
BeecherVol said:
ov comes with specifics. :hi:
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'll let Gibbs discuss it if he chooses.

MG1968 said:
if you are referring to our treatment of gibbs, he gives as well as he gets. he may not resort to name calling, but his smug, condescending attitude more than makes up for it.
Click to expand...

I don't see a place for it. It makes it look like your case is being made by a teenager.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top