The Arguement thread

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:29 pm

I, as well as several others, have personally been greatly dismayed by the spreading argumentativeness and hostility that seems to have gripped this forum in the past month or so. It seems like as soon as one nasty little debate or argument ends a new one starts up. The last straw was when the garfield movie started a @#%^ing 10 page thread of debate. So lets see if we can try and restrict the nastiness a bit. This is a thread for argument and debate. if you have an opinion you want to argue about, post here. If you and someone else begin a debate on another thread, move it over here.

That being said here are the rules of argument thread.

1) What happens here stays here. If someone says something here that pisses you off then we don't care. This place is meant to piss people off. Do not allow anything in argument thread to color your attitude outside of the thread.

2) You don't need to make sense. your arguments do not have to be meaningful, mature, intelligent, or well thought out. If you want to use logic feel free, if you want to be insulting then go ahead and do it. if you can't think of a rebuttal start calling people names and call their opinions stupid. hell make up facts and statistics, go ahead we know you want to.

3) remember your opponent doesn't know what the hell they're talking about. No matter what they say, they're wrong. And they should be treated as lesser beings.

4) ending an argument: there is only one way officially end an argument, unconditional agreement. If you want to end the argument then just say you're wrong, you don't have to believe it, but until you actually admit you're wrong and your opponent is right then you are still a target, you may be ridiculed, spat upon, or used as a burnt offering to pagan gods. Once you end the argument like this though it. is. over. You are no longer a target and you may not even be quoted to make a point in the argument. Of course if you restart the argument then you're fair game again. After the argument ends the winner may get a few posts for a victory dance but after that let it go, unless you want to keep the argument going with someone else.

Here I'll start the first argument: We definitely need an argument thread to help bleed off some of the silliness, hostility, and immaturity that infests this place.

Jops · Post by **Jops** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:53 pm

orion wrote:We definitely need an argument thread to help bleed off some of the silliness, hostility, and immaturity that infests this place.

No, i don't think so. It's just dumb.
You suck!!
(just to be safe, i explicitly tell that i wasn't serious here)

[seriously]
Most arguements and flaming in thelast month were Van's responsability, now that he's gone (for good?), i don't think it will happen again. Not so often anyway!

Besides i don't think it would be of any use: If you noticed the little flame war in the garfield thread started when rk proved Van wrong. He didn't actually insult him, but just explained why he was wrong.
Too bad that Van was too proud to admit it and started what he've seen.
Do you think he would reply to rkolter in this thread if it was happenin' now?

Joel Fagin · Post by **Joel Fagin** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:57 pm

I usually debate. I enjoy a good debate. I enjoy the problem solving that comes with it, the dissection and deconstruction of arguments. More, as I said recently when I was critiquing a webpage, the more I try and work out what I mean in debate, the more I learn about things and the more revelations and ideas I have. My most popular online story - a novel called The Other Side - has a big thank you to the person whom I debated a minor point with and who indirectly inspired and refined the story through that debate. Of course, he was debating against me but he forced me to refine, justify, support and explain my own ideas.

That's why I jump on any websites that want critiquing. I learn more about graphic design when I try to explain my feelings about the sites to others.

The problem, of course, is that other people tend to argue.

Not that this is terribly relevant but I felt like writing it. I generally stay out of the warzones.

- Joel Fagin

Melody · Post by **Melody** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:00 am

I think this thread is an overreaction. Competition is human nature. I have not read the Garfield thread, but why would someone start one?

"Garfield is coming to theatres soon."
"That is amazing."
"I agree."
"When was the first Garfield strip released?"
"1923"
"Wow, that was a long time ago."
"Yes, the artist is old."
"Ah, I see. How old is the artist?"
"About 65."
"Ah, I see."
"When is it coming to theatres?"
"This Friday."
"Interesting. I will go see it."
"So will I."
"Me too."

I guess you are disgruntled about people who are unable to accept different opinions. Ignoring them works greatly.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:02 am

Jops wrote:
[seriously]
Most arguements and flaming in thelast month were Van's responsability, now that he's gone (for good?), i don't think it will happen again. Not so often anyway!

After an arguement goes into full force I mostly ignore the thread. However from what I've seen Van is not the one solely responsible , although after he gets involved it defenitely goes from arguement to full on firezone. But I was reffereing to the proliferation of arguements in general, from what I've seen most aren't friendly intellectual debates, even the ones that remain polite seem to really just go nowhere and in the end seem to be frustrating and unsatisfying to those involved.

Melody · Post by **Melody** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:19 am

It sounds to me like you are only talking about the "Webcomics Examiner now on display" thread.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:32 am

thats one of them, however there are more:

viewtopic.php?t=58014

this rather harmless thread even got a little arguable but fortunately it didn't really get unpleasant.

viewtopic.php?t=58052&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60

I'm limiting myself to those that remained pretty strictly civil, and those within about 6 pages back since I'm only willing to do so much work. I'm pretty cetrain there are more.

theres also the infamous pirates vs. ninjas thread.

Mr.Bob · Post by **Mr.Bob** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:24 am

u R all idots who think Adam Sandler is funy!!1!

JexKerome · Post by **JexKerome** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:27 am

D00d! Adam Sandler is THE shiait, and if ya think otherwise, then to *****ing heck with ya and yer crummy comic!!!!!!

Um... are you allowed to say "heck" in the forums?

EMH · Post by **EMH** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:42 am

orion wrote:I'm pretty cetrain there are more.

Well, I'm pretty certain that all of the threads I found unpleasant involved Van.

But it might be just me, I think a bit of everything is fine and fun, flamewars included (as long as the bit is small enough).

Could you state your reasons for starting this thread? Becasue it seems that either:
a) it's a really poor joke.
b) you want to flame, but you want an official excuse not to get banned, hence the "rules".

Either way, let's forget about this.
Maybe create the same thread in ForumGames, it might work better there.

EDIT: And who the #@%^ is that Adam Sandler???

Joel Fagin · Post by **Joel Fagin** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:43 am

Mr.Bob wrote:u R all idots who think Adam Sandler is funy!!1!

No, silly. The idea is to say something contencious.

- Joel Fagin

Rkolter · Post by **Rkolter** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:21 am

There haven't been that many flame wars in the last couple months; they're just memorable because it's been a while since we've had any.

This thread's funny - kind of a parody of a flame war. It'll be fun.

RPin · Post by **RPin** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:25 am

Aw, what's wrong with a good debate? Not every thread in this forum needs to descend into off-topicness, you know.

JPSloan · Post by **JPSloan** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:41 am

I was a member of a Yahoo group dedicated to the local pagans in my hometown. There were about 150 active members. Primarily the list was for the exchange of ideas and concepts, and secondarily to announce and coordinate pagan events in the area.

Then there were some disagreements in philosophy, which generated some truly thought-provoking debate. Then certain groups with certain grudges against certain groups and individuals began to steamline the debates into flaming. The moderators reacted by overcompensating. They malleted anyone "perceived to be instigating invective", or some phrase like that.

The culprits were weeded out, but the mods kept up their harsh rule. Soon, people were banned for simply disagreeing, and discussion of personal religion ended.

End result, last time I checked, only the mods were posting on the list, and all they posted was cut-and-paste articles from industry publications. It was so sad.

I believe in debate, as a fundamental and necessary extension of the freedom of speech. For without the exchange of ideas, people begin to rely on their authorities to form their opinions. I just think that people need to learn how to disagree with each other more than they need to learn how to agree.

And Adam Sandler is the hizzle shizzle mo fizzly-ass spizzles!

Warren · Post by **Warren** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:09 am

That's it! I'M LOCKING THIS THREAD!

JexKerome · Post by **JexKerome** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:11 am

Phear Warren's Mad almost-but-not-quite-Captain Ninja skillz!!!

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:21 am

EMH wrote: Could you state your reasons for starting this thread? Becasue it seems that either:
a) it's a really poor joke.
b) you want to flame, but you want an official excuse not to get banned, hence the "rules".

Nope no real desire to flame. Actually I was hoping to kind of shame people into being nicer to one another.

And its an incredibley good joke

it doesn't matter what you think anyway, you've got what? 60 posts

go away newb

Warren · Post by **Warren** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:24 am

orion wrote:
EMH wrote: Could you state your reasons for starting this thread? Becasue it seems that either:
a) it's a really poor joke.
b) you want to flame, but you want an official excuse not to get banned, hence the "rules".
Nope no real desire to flame. Actually I was hoping to kind of shame people into being nicer to one another.

And its an incredibley good joke

it doesn't matter what you think anyway, you've got what? 60 posts go away newb

*hides before the storm is unleashed*

JexKerome · Post by **JexKerome** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:24 am

orion wrote: it doesn't matter what you think anyway

That's kinda funny coming from a sad, pathetic Third Edition player.

Rkolter · Post by **Rkolter** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 5:29 am

JexKerome wrote:
orion wrote: it doesn't matter what you think anyway
That's kinda funny coming from a sad, pathetic Third Edition player.

Don't insult the third edition players; it's not their fault they can't handle a little basic math.

Comic Genesis Forums

The Arguement thread

How yah doing

The Arguement thread

Re: The Arguement thread

>>

Re: The Arguement thread

>>