moderators editing members posts

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

it seems inane to have a comedy as my favorite movie ever and not one that has, say, acheived the rare ability to articulate a sense or truth that people dont/cant say in words...

but it's just better than anything i've seen. it gets better over time. theatres have retro night for it and im always there. i dont know another movie like that.

where were we.
oh right. ok even though i've been the most insistent one about not letting go for the sake of letting go, i've said the same thing 4, 5, 6 different ways and said how i was holding back off the moderating 3 different ways. each time has tried to be a bit clearer and less opaque than last time, but the last one was as clear as i can make it. it was a fundamental difference in perspective and of who has legitimate ground, and it wasnt going to progress into anything that sounded cohesive to either party. the mod-lock is, to me, an entirely seperate judgemnt that was not done out of spite but out of genral boarding experience in these things. and the editing of posts wasnt classy (albeit harmless) and obviously isnt taken as lightly as it is elsewhere on the forum. i've got my opinion how how that fell through as you do, but really, it's deconstructed enough where it feels like, again, the same things are being said.

Aaaand lock thread...

[dubman]

dammit, i almost made that joke but you cant joke about these things it's just inappropriate dammit

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by Sean

Aaaand lock thread...

That should be this year's "Don't taze me bro".

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Sean

I would agree that it was equally insulting....and I even freely admit that it was meant to be. But there's still a difference between insulting the arguments he's presented and insulting his personality.

eh. i think it's splitting hairs. we all weigh our words and put something of ourselves into our posts. insulting the words is, in a way, insulting the person. telling someone they're out of their depth is still a bit of an ad hominem attack.

whatever, i'm only weighing on this because i think dubman was neither out of his depth nor the first to go for the jugular in that thread.

we're still going around and around so i won't belabor the point. but essentially from where you stand your position was "logical" and "clear" and no one was playing by what you felt were the rules of the discussion. even here you fixated on dubman's opinion that pro-lifers are retarded rather than conceding your debatable point that they're actually motivated by concern for the fetus. i wouldn't disagree with you 100%, but i will disagree strongly if your assertion is that no other motivation exists in that community.

you're still looking at those who disagreed with you in that thread from the standpoint of being "correct." it skews your ability to try to clarify your point in this thread or make any valuable inroads in the resolution of the debate.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by dubman

nothing you were doing was particularly critical or insightful. it sounded like you were trying to masquerade your perspective as logic in regards to what misogyny is and what isnt.

precisely.

[holden]

World forum reality imitates reality...
Two of the most divisive and hotly-debated issues facing the world stage:

pro-choice vs. pro-life
&
post editing.

In the "real world" or dirtyworld, neither side can see eye to eye.
But you've made some real steps in these threads.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by cacophony

precisely.

oh for christ sakes.

Do you honestly think george bush looks at his wife and his daughters and says to himself "god I fucking hate your kind".

that's what fell out of *your* logic, the obvious refutation of which was what sean pointed out. see, he's actually your best friend, because he keeps the energy against misogyny pointed in the right direction, the gratitude received, of course, is further condemnation of misogyny.

seriously, women need to understand religion hates everyone equally, the victims as well as the willing executioners.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

oh for christ sakes.

Do you honestly think george bush looks at his wife and his daughters and says to himself "god I fucking hate your kind".

don't be stupid. you're either being deliberately obtuse for the sake of argument or you're beyond meaningful discussion because you're incapable of comprehending anything i've said.

Originally Posted by Strangelet

that's what fell out of *your* logic, the obvious refutation of which was what sean pointed out. see, he's actually your best friend, because he keeps the energy against misogyny pointed in the right direction, the gratitude received, of course, is further condemnation of misogyny.

i dare you to make less sense.

Originally Posted by Strangelet

seriously, women need to understand religion hates everyone equally, the victims as well as the willing executioners.

i'll take it a step further and assert that the world would be a better place with a cock in every woman's mouth.

shut up, chicks! everything is fine!

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by cacophony

i'll take it a step further and assert that the world would be a better place with a cock in every woman's mouth.

shut up, chicks! everything is fine!

I'm not going to be bullied by your vitriol or your comically misguided sense of offense. I'm going to calmly reiterate my point.

GWB does not hate women. He has a wife, daughters, and a mother, like 90% of all men. But he happens to be a drunk and a man child who found God to help his issues with his father. That same religious belief has instilled in him priorities for which he has surrendered his personal judgment and temporal self-interest. That means he is acting out of a learned "value of life" that is diametrically opposed to the well being of his wife, daughters and mother. Just like all pious men have done. Because the system is such that the only ones who benefit are the people on top.

In the mormon tradition, the number of wives are a symbol of religious power. That is indicative of the fact that its not so much men versus women in the dynamics of religion. Its between those who have power and those who do not. Those who must give up their daughters and those who hold sway over them.

And so before you respond with another inventive literary device involving felatio, bear in mind its already going to be a while before I can begin to take anything you say seriously.

[chuck]

Can I just interrupt this flow for a bit - to state that I am a moderator.

To that end I've mainly removed porn links - have attempted poorly to stir up some debate in technique - and try to keep up here in world.

For the record - I wasn't involved in the thread locking/post editing - and don't really have the time to go back and read it all. Not sure I'd really be able to keep up.

So - yeah - like Deckard - don't think I've added much to this particular thread - but wanted to front up with the Mod status.

And no-one ever PM's me....