It's time to vote for your favourite story and author in this year's clitoridesawards. [ X Dismiss ]
Home « Forum « Author Hangout

Forum: Author Hangout

I'm out

Geek of Ages

Much as I already have with posting stories, I'm now taking my leave of these forums.

Some people probably will think it's because of recent threads I've been in. It's not; I've been planning this for a while.

I would say it's been fun...but it really hasn't. These forums—more than any others I've been a part of—are dominated by a small cadre of people who—wittingly or not—create an environment that does not feel inviting or welcoming. On the whole, it feels like a group of old white men with too much time on their hands ranting and raving about minor details that don't matter, or things they don't even know anything about. It reminds me of the conversations and arguments I've overheard old men having when I've volunteered at soup kitchens and nursing homes: insular and disassociated with reality, and unwilling to accept anything outside of their bubble.

I've tried. I really have. Some of the people on here don't seem to be all that bad, but that number dwindles more and more as conversations continue. It's become tiresome, having to read screed after screed. I've nothing to learn from the constant bickering over The One True Grammar (hint: there is none). And ultimately, I have far better things to do with my time, even in the realm of bettering my craft and interacting with writer peers. I choose those welcoming, curious, and thoughtful communities over this one—which appears to me to be none of those things.

I have seen statements from people about the insular nature of the community here, and I agree with it. I can only imagine the number of people who could have made this a vibrant, interesting community; but left for greener pastures. I'm sure I'm not the only one. And even if I am, so be it; I'll do what's best for my happiness.

Being here doesn't make me a better person. It doesn't make me happier, even in a long-term perspective. It doesn't further my career. There's no benefit. I may as well leave.

I don't expect that this explanation will lead to any changes; in fact, based on my experiences here, this thread will probably lead to people calling me what they think are insulting names; or telling me I'm wrong; or arguing over some grammatical mistake I've made here. Perhaps also some combination of "good riddance", or "don't let the door hit you on the way out" or something of that nature; or just terrible puns. There's a sliver of a chance this thread'll garner no real responses and slide into the void.

I really don't care. I've better and more interesting things to think about and talk with others.

So, I'm out.

👋🏻

Ernest Bywater

One thing I've learned with the grammar discussions is the answer on what's good grammar can vary according to the region of the poster. Thus I've learned to not let the discussion get to me and to keep most of the post I make on them, and some other subjects, to the minimum while continuing to read what is posted by others.

Anyway, each chooses what they choose, so good luck with whatever you do.

Capt. Zapp

@Geek of Ages

As much as I enjoyed your stories, I feel you are acting like a spoiled brat who does not get his way. There are a LOT of posts and 'discussions' going on that I do not care for, but I am not 'taking my ball and going home'. When I see topics or discussions I don't like, I IGNORE THEM. It takes two or more to have disagreement. Just because someone is spouting things you don't agree with doesn't mean you have to partake in the conversation. Just ignore it. If you feel you MUST read their diatribe, just laugh at their ideas and shake your head and move on.

Opinions are like anus', everyone has one.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
Crumbly Writer
Updated:

@Capt. Zapp

Opinions are like anus', everyone has one.

And a few people seem to have quite a few, rather than just the one you'd expect them to have. And even then, they don't seem to be able to squeeze it closed to stop the shit from dribbling out.

Sorry, even though this post was largely directed at me, I couldn't resist that wonderful opening line.

Replies:   StarFleet Carl
KinkyWinks

@Geek of Ages

I believe you are right Mr. Geek, and they are a rude bunch. Can't you just tell them to kiss your ass and post stories anyway? You don't have to comply with what these crazy assholes think is right. I don't and they don't bother me because I have read their stories and seen their scores.

Replies:   Vlad_Inhaler
Vlad_Inhaler

@KinkyWinks

Now *that* is pretty much the ultimate Trolling post.

StarFleet Carl

@Crumbly Writer

I couldn't resist that wonderful opening


And you were talking about an anus?

oyster50

@Geek of Ages

The forums are "interesting". Read, just to see what'g going on. If you think a few loud-mouthed, opinionated blowhards and ONLY found on this forum, I suggest that you look at others elsewhere.

Those personalities abound. Two things happen. Either they start irritating others so that conversations shut down, or a moderator pulls the plug on them.

Since the second option doesn't seem to be happening here, it's apparent that the first is taking place. Some, like you, will say so. Others will just shut up and go on with life.

Me? Maybe if somebody comments on MY stories, I will respond, but I'll NOT get into the minutiae over grammar and vocabulary.

Life's too short, and I ain't got THAT much of it left.

Oyster.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  StarFleet Carl
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@oyster50


The forums are "interesting". Read, just to see what'g going on. If you think a few loud-mouthed, opinionated blowhards and ONLY found on this forum, I suggest that you look at others elsewhere.

Those personalities abound. Two things happen. Either they start irritating others so that conversations shut down, or a moderator pulls the plug on them.


Thing is, he was one of the "blowhards" as well. I've seen forums split in different directions with regards to political issues. It doesn't matter which side "wins" and remains behind, the forums become less because of it and they eventually wither away as a result.

StarFleet Carl

@oyster50

Maybe if somebody comments on MY stories, I will respond, but I'll NOT get into the minutiae over grammar and vocabulary.


Pretty much the only comment about your stories I'd make is ... damned good stuff.

Replies:   oyster50
Darian Wolfe

I rather enjoy it here, An honest question gets an honest answer and a match gets a pretty explosion. Telling the difference between the match and the question can be a trick.

I like my acquaintances to have character. It adds colour and flavour to the generic garbage I call modern society.

As rough and sometimes childish as it gets in here there is a wealth of knowledge and a willingness to share it. Here it's real. For better or worse, so have a seat or take a powder. Me, I'll be over by the fire nursing my Mountain Dew and plotting a story.

Replies:   Crumbly Writer
oyster50

@StarFleet Carl

Thanks! I try...

Crumbly Writer

@Darian Wolfe

As rough and sometimes childish as it gets in here there is a wealth of knowledge and a willingness to share it. Here it's real. For better or worse, so have a seat or take a powder. Me, I'll be over by the fire nursing my Mountain Dew and plotting a story.

I agree. From time to time, we each need to take a step back, rather than issuing ultimatums, but after everything is said and done, the forum IS a powerful tool. If it takes someone a while to get their emotions under control, we'll still be here when they're ready to return (and I DON'T mean 'ready for a fight').

Generally each of the Forum topics answer each question before they degenerate into largely meaningless fights. The wise thing to do is to jump ship before they turn nasty of petty, but it's difficult to judge when it's time to leap.

The key is to separate the helpful knowledge from the useless trivia which upsets everyone.

Capt. Zapp

@Crumbly Writer

...but it's difficult to judge when it's time to leap.


Generally, I find that if the discussion seems to be getting a little heated and someone starts throwing out things in BOLD CAPS, it's time to jump.

richardshagrin

@Crumbly Writer

degenerate into largely meaningless fights

Or Puns.

Ernest Bywater
Updated:

@richardshagrin


Or Puns.


Nah, still OK when the puns are good, but you need to jump fast when they become puny puns.

awnlee jawking

@richardshagrin

Pungent - a man who makes respectful puns.

AJ

Jim S

@Geek of Ages

So, I'm out.


Guess he is looking for a site with safe rooms.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Ernest Bywater

@Jim S

Guess he is looking for a site with safe rooms.


Maybe the Evergreen College website can help him out.

Replies:   Jim S
Jim S
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater

GoA's initial post reminds me of my childhood when baseball ruled my summers. We didn't have organized teams and leagues back then, just showed up at the park and chose up teams. Every once in a while one of the guys (no girls back then) would get in a snit and threaten to take his ball and go home. Now since about half a dozen had baseballs also, we'd all say "okay. See ya." Maybe GoA doesn't realize that that threat only has a chance to work under monopolistic conditions, i.e. where he has the only baseball. Maybe he'll realize one day that he doesn't have the best one of the many available here, and maybe not even the 2nd or 3rd best. Not by a long shot.

Replies:   Zom  PotomacBob
Zom

@Jim S

Maybe GoA doesn't realize that that threat only has a chance to work under monopolistic conditions

Maybe GoA didn't make a threat, and just said what he was doing. Maybe he has gone and doesn't care at all what opinions follow his departure. Maybe he became disillusioned at the tone he found here and just went away. Wouldn't that make your speculation specious?

Replies:   Jim S
PotomacBob
Updated:

@Jim S


Maybe GoA doesn't realize that that threat only has a chance to work under monopolistic conditions,


What threat? I didn't see no stinkin' threat.

Jim S

@Zom

Wouldn't that make your speculation specious?


Ah, yup. But thats not how I interpreted his entire parting shot. I guess different people see things differently, Zom.

Replies:   Zom
REP

From my experience, if you aren't happy somewhere, you can work to improve your current location or leave. If you leave, you will find that your new place has the same or similar problems.

Ernest Bywater

I've seen this I'm leaving response come up a few times over the years, and it's often after a hot political issue comes up and the person can't convince anyone to agree with their point of view, so they complain about the others and leave.

Replies:   Jim S
PotomacBob

@REP

In the present context, what could be done to "improve your current location"?

Replies:   REP
Safe_Bet

Being here doesn't make me a better person.


I don't have a dog in this fight (at least under this pen name), but this DID make me laugh pretty hard. You do realize that is is predominately a porn story site, right? LOL

StarFleet Carl

@REP

If you leave, you will find that your new place has the same or similar problems.


That reminds me of the old story. An old guy is sitting on his porch. A young couple pulls up, asking directions to the closest town. He gives them the directions, then asks why they need them. We just got a new job here and are moving to town, they say. Oh, what were the people in your old town like?, the old guy asks. Oh, they were wonderful people, always friendly, helpful, and so nice. "Well, I've been here a long time, and you'll find the people in your new town just like that."

Shortly thereafter another couple pulls up, asking directions to the same town. The old man gives it to them and then asks them why they're asking. They have the same reason as the previous couple, they've a new job in the town ahead. The old man asks them about their old town. The couple replies, "Oh, the people there were so unfriendly, not helpful, and none of them were trustworthy at all." The old man says, "Well, I've been here a long time, and you'll find the people in your new town just like that."

Do I really need to explain to anyone here the moral of that story?

Replies:   PotomacBob
StarFleet Carl

@Safe_Bet

You do realize that is is predominately a porn story site, right?


What? I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, to find there is adult pornography at Storiesonline.

Replies:   Dominions Son
PotomacBob

@StarFleet Carl

Never trust an old guy sitting on his porch giving directions?

Dominions Son

@StarFleet Carl

What? I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, to find there is adult pornography at Storiesonline.


Would you find child pornography more acceptable?

Replies:   StarFleet Carl
Zom
Updated:

@Jim S


But thats not how I interpreted his entire parting shot.


I get that, which is why I read it again before I posted, and could not find any sign of a 'threat' or 'parting shot'. Perhaps I am blind to that, or perhaps I don't go looking for such, or perhaps it just isn't there.

Replies:   Ross at Play
REP

@PotomacBob

Several things. The one I'll mention is we all have strong opinions and defend them. If we were more willing to accept that the other person isn't going to change and drop the argument after a few exchanges regardless of who has the last word, the arguments wouldn't be as polarizing.

Replies:   PotomacBob  sejintenej
PotomacBob

@REP

And Geek of Ages should have somehow compelled all of us to do that before he left?

Replies:   REP
sejintenej

@REP

Several things. The one I'll mention is we all have strong opinions and defend them. If we were more willing to accept that the other person isn't going to change and drop the argument after a few exchanges regardless of who has the last word, the arguments wouldn't be as polarizing

A newsgroup I was on had this same problem and decided that if Hilter's name was posted with correct spelling then that thread died, never to be resurrected.
The subject here which seems to get the most heat is grammar; there are different schools, different cultures, different ideas so agreement will never be reached so ban that subject

(dons flameproof armour and flees)

Ross at Play

@Zom

which is why I read it again before I posted, and could not find any sign of a 'threat' or 'parting shot'.

I just re-read it too, and the most pertinent comments I found were:

It doesn't make me happier ... There's no benefit ... So, I'm out.

That doesn't sound like a 'threat' or 'parting shot' to me, either.

I will genuinely miss the contributions Geek of Ages has been making to these forums; I have considered him amongst the most consistently constructive contributors here. I wish him well in whatever he chooses to do.

I think his description of these forums is accurate enough and he has every right to say why he has chosen to leave - without being criticised for that decision.

Replies:   robberhands
Ernest Bywater

@Safe_Bet

You do realize that is is predominately a porn story site, right? LOL


This comes up quite often - storiesonline is a story site that allows porn, and did so from the start in an era when few would. You don't have to have porn to post a story, but it does have to be a story.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
robberhands

@Ross at Play

Not all of it and not a threat, but of course a lot of it was a 'parting shot'. Since he was exposed to some pretty vile abuse - at least during the last thread he participated in - I'd say it was an excusable one, though.

Zom
Updated:

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
- Salvor Hardin

I suspect abuse is as violent as one can get on a web forum. Even threats are just a promise of abuse. A form of virtual bullying.

It should be treated with the disdain that such ignorance deserves, but it is harder to practice the "water off a duck's back" philosophy than it is to espouse it, as exampled by GoA's departure.

Jim S
Updated:

@Ernest Bywater


I've seen this I'm leaving response come up a few times over the years, and it's often after a hot political issue comes up and the person can't convince anyone to agree with their point of view, so they complain about the others and leave.


I think we get that type of thing more often on the internet with the anonymity it provides. But concommitant with the rise of the net has been the polarization of political belief, followed by the intolerance (read: lack of respect for the views of others) that is now the new reality. If media reports are to be believed, opposing political views are now being banned where such actions are possible, e.g. institutes of higher learning.

Concurrent with all that has been the rise of a school of thought of refusal to deal with opposition as well as dealing with failure or losing. In other words, refusing to deal with real life, where such things are routinely experienced (know that there is only one winner in pyramidal organizations). Ergo, the rise of "safe rooms" at colleges where traumatized students, triggered (love that word) by seeing something opposed to their views, where said student can retreat to avoid said reality instead of learning how to deal with it.

Its analagous to the "picking up your ball and going home" example of my earlier post. It happens a lot more today. Even here at SOL.

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Switch Blayde
Not_a_ID

@Jim S

But concommitant with the rise of the net has been the polarization of political belief, followed by the intolerance (read: lack of respect for the views of others) that is now the new reality. If media reports are to be believed, opposing political views are now being banned where such actions are possible, e.g. institutes of higher learning.


A large part of that is the "personal information bubble" is much more of a thing today than it was 20 years ago, or even going back to the introduction of the first newspapers after the printing press was invented.

Although in some respects, early 19th Century America and the phase where it seemed like almost every other person had a printing press is potentially relevant.

Only unlike the 19th Century where "finding an audience" could be very difficult, the internet makes it amazingly simple.

Which then opens things up to group-think particularly when surrounded by "like-minded individuals."

"The information bubble" is perhaps the biggest social issue of this era with respect to how people interact with others who threaten their respective bubbles. The historical solution(and ongoing trend) is to self-segregate in order to protect and reinforce their favored traits within their "bubble."

It just happens that not all bubbles are created equally and some groups are more resilient/adaptive to coping with other ideas than others are. It just doesn't seem to be ones many like to think they are. (See: Liberal retreat from "rural areas" that isn't the Conservatives driving them out deliberately. That's Liberals removing themselves from environments they deem "hostile" but I guess that's potato vs potatoe to them)

Replies:   PotomacBob
StarFleet Carl

@Dominions Son

Seriously? Have you ever seen Casablanca?

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Dominions Son
Not_a_ID

@StarFleet Carl

Seriously? Have you ever seen Casablanca?


Evidently not in his case.

Dominions Son

@StarFleet Carl

Have you ever seen Casablanca?


No, and I have no desire to see it either.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
PotomacBob

@Not_a_ID

(See: Liberal retreat from "rural areas" that isn't the Conservatives driving them out deliberately. That's Liberals removing themselves from environments they deem "hostile" but I guess that's potato vs potatoe to them)


My recollection of what happened is somewhat different. It wasn't liberals that left rural areas - rural areas were never liberal. After the Civil Rights Act in the mid 1960s pushed by Lyndon Johnson, conservative Democrats began leaving the Democratic Party and switching to become Republicans. Nixon came along in 1968 and launched his "Southern strategy," and that brought even more former Democrats to the Republicans. Today, Democrats are usually associated with liberalism and Republicans are usually associated with conservatism. I dislike the "liberal" and "conservative" labels, because they no longer really fit the classic definitions. I prefer to simply label politicians by the party they choose, regardless of ideology.

Replies:   sunkuwan  Jim S  Not_a_ID
sunkuwan

@PotomacBob

even with that, the Democrats would be the equivalent of Europe's center-right party.

Replies:   Switch Blayde
Jim S
Updated:

@PotomacBob


....rural areas were never liberal. After the Civil Rights Act in the mid 1960s pushed by Lyndon Johnson, conservative Democrats began leaving the Democratic Party and switching to become Republicans.


With all due respect, that canard doesn't survive scrutiny. Maybe "Sheets" Byrd could have helped out here if he were still alive. Democrats started the KKK and have never stopped promoting segregation. A large scale shift never happened. Support of this fact is readily available on the net, but falls low in searches. Guess why.

Anyhow, I'll provide one link that sketches a broad outline:

http://blackrepublican.blogspot.com/2012/06/republicans-and-democrats-did-not.html

Replies:   Zom  BlacKnight  Switch Blayde
Zom

@Jim S

Democrats started the KKK

Oh dear. Truth free zone again.

BlacKnight

@Jim S

With all due respect, that canard doesn't survive scrutiny. Maybe "Sheets" Byrd could have helped out here if he were still alive. Democrats started the KKK and have never stopped promoting segregation. A large scale shift never happened. Support of this fact is readily available on the net, but falls low in searches. Guess why.


Because it's not true.

Compare, say, the 1908 electoral map to the 2008 map. (Or many other pairs of maps before and after Kennedy. I picked that pair because they're a neat hundred years apart, and neither of them is confused by third-party candidates or the Democratic candidate being from the South.) The shift is blatantly obvious from the actual historical data.

Replies:   Jim S  Vlad_Inhaler
Jim S

@BlacKnight

And that demonstrates what?

The Democrats have been running from their past for a long time. This canard of a massive party shift may assuage guilty modern day Democrat consciences (don't you find it odd that BOTH parties shifted instead of just one, especially given how early Southern Democrats hated the Republican Party for setting the Negro free?) but it doesn't do much more. The fact that it starts in those totally objective bastions of integrity, the modern press and liberal institutions of "higher" learning", is enough of an indictment for me, even if the absence of evidence to the contrary.

Switch Blayde

@Ernest Bywater

storiesonline is a story site that allows porn


I'd classify it as a sex story site that allows no-sex stories. Just look at the story codes.

Replies:   Ernest Bywater
Switch Blayde

@Jim S

I think we get that type of thing more often on the internet with the anonymity it provides.


Which is why Twitter is not much more than a bullying vehicle.

Switch Blayde

@Dominions Son

Have you ever seen Casablanca?

No, and I have no desire to see it either.


I happened to watch Casablanca the other day. For the umpteenth time. It may be one of the top-10 movies of all time. You should see it.

I have no idea what the reference was to your post, though.

Ernest Bywater

@Switch Blayde

I'd classify it as a sex story site that allows no-sex stories. Just look at the story codes.


Switch, we've had this discussion before. The original splash page had an emphasis on stories with a notation of allowing sex stories, and many years later it changed a little to put both types of stories on an equal footing because it got more hits then. That's why it's called storiesonline and not sexstoriesonline. In a past thread about this very subject Lazeez confirmed the site was originally set up to allow any stories because the options then were either all sex stories or no sex stories.

Switch Blayde

@sunkuwan

even with that, the Democrats would be the equivalent of Europe's center-right party.


Depends on the Democrat. Bernie Sanders is a socialist so he's more aligned with European socialism. So was Martin Luther King, btw.

Replies:   BlacKnight
Vlad_Inhaler

@BlacKnight

Or many other pairs of maps before and after Kennedy.

My impression was that it had more to do with LBJ than Kennedy. LBJ was the enforcer who broke racism within the Democrats, it took a while but when Reagan gave them a home, they changed sides.

Switch Blayde

@Jim S

Democrats started the KKK and have never stopped promoting segregation. A large scale shift never happened.


I believe it has. And the reason is ironic.

Nixon (a Republican) was a good friend of Martin Luther King. When MLK was thrown in jail, he asked Nixon for help. When Nixon failed, Nixon asked JFK to intervene. Bobby Kennedy was aghast that JFK did. He said they'd lose all the Southern (white) vote.

JFK got MLK out of jail and the Democratic party became the black party.

BlacKnight

No, it's really not odd. The Democratic shift was slow and happened over the course of decades, starting with FDR and ending only in recent years, as the Democratic old guard has died off, and included a series of revolts by Southern Democrats (Dixiecrats with Thurmond in '48 and Byrd in '60, and Wallace's American Independents in '68, plus a couple others that didn't gain much traction). The Republican shift was a reaction to it, as they picked up the Southern votes driven away by the Civil Rights Act, which was pushed through ahead of the 1964 election by the Democratic Johnson. (Nixon explicitly made a deliberate strategy of this.) Between 1956 and 1964, the electoral map practically inverts itself. This does not indicate that in that intervening period, all the racists moved north. There was a massive shift in party allegiance.

On a more individual scale, look at Strom Thurmond. He was first elected as a Democrat, ran as the Dixiecrat candidate for President in 1948, and died a hardcore Republican. Jesse Helms followed a similar pattern, though without the run for President.

On the other hand, there was Jim Jeffords, who after a lengthy career as a Republican Congressman and then Senator, in 2000 became an independent caucusing with the Democrats. In his words, he hadn't left the party; the party had left him. (Jeffords' successor as both Congressman and Senator was, incidentally, Bernie Sanders.) Lincoln Chafee made a similar move a few years later.

Replies:   Jim S
BlacKnight

@Switch Blayde

Depends on the Democrat. Bernie Sanders is a socialist so he's more aligned with European socialism. So was Martin Luther King, btw.

Bernie's not a Democrat. He ran in the Democratic presidential primary in 2016, and he caucuses with them, but he's been I-VT since his first election as Vermont's Congressman thirty years ago.

REP

@PotomacBob

And Geek of Ages should have somehow compelled all of us to do that before he left?


The point is none of us should be trying to compel others to do a specific something. The idea is to change their mind and have them do that something willingly. There is a point when it becomes apparent that the other person will not change their mind and that is the point the discussion/argument should end.

GoA said goodbye and explained why he didn't want to stay. There was no attempt to threaten or coheres anyone.

He may return, or not. He got fed-up with the website/forum and decided to leave rather than staying to do battle with those who disagreed with him.

Jim S

@BlacKnight

as they picked up the Southern votes driven away by the Civil Rights Act, which was pushed through ahead of the 1964 election by the Democratic Johnson.

The Republicans pushed the Civil Rights Act, not so much the Democrats. I'll drop a quote from the article that I linked in an earlier post

Little known by many today is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Johnson, who pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In fact, Dirksen was instrumental to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965 and 1968. Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.


We are all entitled to our alternate opinions. But there are no alternate facts. Just smokescreens trying to hide them.

Replies:   Zom  Not_a_ID  PotomacBob
Dominions Son

@Switch Blayde

I have no idea what the reference was to your post, though.


Yeah, I didn't get that either.

robberhands

@Switch Blayde

I have no idea what the reference was to your post, though.

Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money] Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Replies:   Dominions Son
Dominions Son

@robberhands

I'm familiar with that reference, even though I've never seen the movie.

That however, has almost nothing to do with the comment I made.

Starfleet Carl commented.

What? I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, to find there is adult pornography at Storiesonline.


To which I replied, asking if he would prefer child pornography as a way of making fun of the fact that he felt the need to qualify pornography as "adult".

robberhands

@Dominions Son

That however, has almost nothing to do with the comment I made.

I'm wasn't commenting, I only quoted the relevant scene from the movie 'Casablanca'.

Not_a_ID

@PotomacBob

I dislike the "liberal" and "conservative" labels, because they no longer really fit the classic definitions.


Whose "classic" definition though?

Conservatives meet all of the criteria for what they are for the most part. They would prefer to "conserve" or otherwise preserve the status quo for the most part. It is both the technical, and literal definition of "Conservative" to say that a conservative should oppose change.

Now a "Conservative" sitting on the right hand of the French king while holding court prior to the First Republic. As opposed to those "Liberals" who sat on his left. That is another matter.

I do openly agree the "Liberal" moniker is greatly misused and mis-understood. But the "Conservative" variant is mainly true to form. Only the specifics of the right/left axis as it relates to the United States is inverted in relation to "The Crown" being a Republic centered on individual rights which puts most of those 18th Century "Liberals" to the right (being "favored by the Government") rather than left. While many of those 18th Century Conservatives now belong on the left side of things as they're "out of favor" and prefer enhancing Government Power instead of reducing it(which is the entire founding premise of the United States--taking power from the government, and giving it to the citizen instead).

JohnBobMead

@Dominions Son

as a way of making fun of the fact that he felt the need to qualify pornography as "adult".


I had a whole post written in response to you saying you hadn't seen Casablanca, about quotes indemic to segments of society.

Then I thought a minute, and said to myself, "What if Dominion's Son is making a joke himself, about qualifying "Pornography" by placing "Adult" before it? And we're just not catching on? After all, I haven't seen Casablanca, and I'm familier with the quote, could be true in his case as well."

So I canceled the post.

Now I see that my thought was correct.

We're not always very good at spotting when someone is making a joke, are we? I distinctly recall other cases where this has occured. Including times when I made the post, and times where I didn't spot the humor.

Even though I know this is why emojis were developed, I'm not comfortable using them, a lot of the time. They make me feel like I'm shouting, "This is a joke, dammit!"; they aren't subtle.

I'm not the only one who looks at them that way, I guess.

Replies:   Darian Wolfe
Darian Wolfe

@JohnBobMead

Hmmm. my meds are kicking in well and good and my thinking is rather fuzzy so this post ought to be rather fun or infuriating if not both.

To me the more the story focuses on sex the more pornographic it is. The older the characters engaging in the sex are the more adult the pornography itself is.

Now, if the story itself is pornographic is it written to be read by a child? This would indeed make it child pornography. Or is it intended to be read by an adult?

I really don't see the confusion here.

Replies:   JohnBobMead
Zom
Updated:

@Jim S


But there are no alternate facts


I am genuinely curious about what you would accept as a fact. It looks like you are defining a fact as something which happens to support your current opinion. Surely that can't be right! So what does a 'fact' have to be to gain your acceptance?

Not_a_ID

@Jim S

We are all entitled to our alternate opinions. But there are no alternate facts. Just smokescreens trying to hide them.


But there are larger, or smaller, contexts that can be applied. The 2012 presidential debates had one of the best(worst?) examples of that, and what some of the fact checkers did during that time.....

Now keeping in mind that was some 6 years ago at this point, but from memory it went something like this:

Romney claims domestic oil production on government owned lands was at the lowest level seen in ___ years. (Statement was true)

Obama refutes the claim by saying that domestic oil production was at the highest level seen in decades. (Statement was also true, as oil production on privately owned land was going gangbusters)

Now depending on the slant of the "fact checkers" being used, one candidate or the other had their statement labeled as false. IIRC, CNN and NBC both had their fact checkers flunk Romney and side with Obama(can't speak for the other networks).

Replies:   REP
REP

@Not_a_ID

Now depending on the slant of the "fact checkers" being used, one candidate or the other had their statement labeled as false.


The obvious question that comes to my mind is - what was the question they were responding to with their answer. Was the question oil production on government land or production in general?

Replies:   Not_a_ID
JohnBobMead

@Darian Wolfe

Valid.

As Children's Literature is literature to be read by children, and the same with Young Adult Literatue, Chick Flicks are movies to be watched by women, etc., the modern usage of the term "child pornography" is in conflict with how such phrases have traditionally been interpreted, where standardly the modifier indicates the target audience, not the subject matter.

Except, of course, that Military SF is science fiction concerning the military, Paranormal Romance is romances of the paranormal, etc., with the preceeding term indicating the sub-genre subject focus of the work.

So the reality is that there are two competing models for interpreting such phrases, with the actual interpretation being that which society as a whole has agreed upon.

This, of course, is one reason English is such a tricky language to master; it's so bloody inconsistent!

Gotta say, didn't find your post funny or infuriating, just logically sound in pointing out the inconsistency in how English uses terms to modify subjects, and the dangers this presents to those unfamilier with society's conventions for specific phrases.

Not_a_ID

@REP

Was the question oil production on government land or production in general?


I think the question had to do with energy, and Romney cited that number as something he'd work to change once in office to help work towards "North American Energy Independence."

Obama's citation was in rebuttal to Romney's claim regarding oil production on government land...

Both sides were being deceptive. Romney made it sound like domestic production in total was down, when it wasn't, which Obama did rebut. However, the problem was Romney did stipulate "on government land" which Obama failed to address. (Because Romney was right about that)

But many of the fact checkers sided with Obama.

The issue there was they didn't even bother with "partly true" for Romney, they simply said the claim was false, even though it was factually correct.

I actually looked at documentation for both claims. The remarkable part was that in one instance, they both correctly cited the same study to make their point. Just different pages within it.

Replies:   REP
REP

@Not_a_ID

Sounds like the question was about energy in general. Thus Romney's statement was intentionally misleading by basing his statement on government lands when he knew the topic was energy in general. It also sounds like Obama's rebuttal statement refuted Romney's statement by directly addressing the original question without explaining why Romney's response was wrong.

Sounds like the fact checkers verified the two responses against the question and said Obama was right.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Not_a_ID

@REP

Thus Romney's statement was intentionally misleading by basing his statement on government lands when he knew the topic was energy in general.


Yes and No, as President, Romney can do things to make public lands more, or less, available for "energy exploration." Just as the Obama Administration had done things to make them less available. As such, citing the historic low regarding public lands was relevant and topical.

So he was factually correct that he could do something about further expanding domestic energy production on government land.

Presidential influence on energy production happening on private land is far more convoluted and circuitous. (And mostly involved the EPA and only the EPA)

So actually Obama dodged the question with basically "Doesn't matter, domestic production has been increasing without regard to anything happening on public lands."

Replies:   REP
REP

@Not_a_ID

I would call your response 'ignoring the facts'.

The first fact, based on your post, is a question regarding energy production in the US was asked, and the person presenting the question was evidently looking for a response that included private generation of energy.

Fact two is Romney chose to not respond to the topic in question and limited his response to energy production on government land.

Fact three is Obama apparently addressed the question that was asked as a means of rebutting Romney.

That means Romney gave a factually correct response, but evaded the question asked. Obama gave a factually correct response to the question that was asked.

Once again it goes back to what was the intent of the question Romney was asked and the wording of his response. I didn't listen to that debate, but according to you, the fact checkers said Obama's rebuttal was proper and Romney's response wasn't, even though what they both said was accurate.

Replies:   Not_a_ID
Not_a_ID

@REP

That means Romney gave a factually correct response, but evaded the question asked. Obama gave a factually correct response to the question that was asked.

Once again it goes back to what was the intent of the question Romney was asked and the wording of his response. I didn't listen to that debate, but according to you, the fact checkers said Obama's rebuttal was proper and Romney's response wasn't, even though what they both said was accurate.


Which would take us to how the fact checkers presented their own true/false analysis. Which didn't look at "larger context" it only cited their statement directly.

They directly quoted Romney saying production on Federal Land was at the lowest level seen in years. They then quoted Obama on National Production being at an all time high. They rated Romney's statement false, and Obama's true.

They weren't doing meta-analysis on who "best answered the question." Or at least, they weren't supposed to be doing so. Both answers were true, and each answer completely ignored what the other one was talking about.

Replies:   REP  Ross at Play
REP
Updated:

@Not_a_ID


Both answers were true, and each answer completely ignored what the other one was talking about.


But which response addressed the question that was asked. Evidently Romney's response did not address the question he was asked. So even though the response was true, it was labeled false for it did not address the question asked.

Assume you and I were to be asked the question "What is your favorite color?

If one of us were to reply, "New York City is in the state of New York" and the other said "Blue", which response would be considered proper.

ETA: For fact checkers an appropriate response would be rated true while an inappropriate response would be rated false.

Ross at Play

@Not_a_ID

Both answers were true

No. Romney's answer was definitely misleading - one of those "lies, damn lies, and statistics" kind of untruths.

Romney cherry-picked a statistic to claim production was down. It was down for the latest year, but over the three years Obama had been president that figure (limited to public lands) had actually risen.

Ross at Play
Updated:

Does anyone else consider it a bit ironic that the current exchange has ended up on Geek of Ages' "I'm Out" thread?

Seriously, has there ever been a bone of contention on these forums that is so completely irrelevant to life, the universe, and everything? Well, yeah. There's certainly been many and much worse, but this one at least deserves an honourable mention.

Could there be any better example of why Geek of Ages finally decided he'd had enough, so he took his bat and went off searching for somewhere with people actually interested in "playing ball"?

awnlee jawking

@JohnBobMead

Don't forget gun porn.

Writing about my Bull & Shit 3.14159 calibre handgun firing dinner-jacketed circonflex rounds will result in a shooting off somewhere in the world.

AJ

Replies:   Not_a_ID  Dominions Son
Not_a_ID
Updated:

@awnlee jawking


Writing about my Bull & Shit 3.14159 calibre handgun firing dinner-jacketed circonflex rounds will result in a shooting off somewhere in the world.


Of course it will.

Darian Wolfe

@JohnBobMead

Lol, the story of my life. Even when I'm medicated to the gills and can't see the next coherent thought coming. I still make sense. Oh, the agony of it all.

Dominions Son

@awnlee jawking

Writing about my Bull & Shit 3.14159 calibre handgun firing dinner-jacketed circonflex rounds will result in a shooting off somewhere in the world.


People will accept blatantly unreal fantasy in sex porn stories, but if you are going to do gun porn, or car porn, you damn well better get the details right.

PotomacBob

@Jim S

The Civil Rights Act was first proposed by JFK. Then, on Kennedy's death, Johnson pushed it through Congress with both Democratic and Republican votes, and input from both parties. Republicans now trying to claim they were the primary movers of the legislation is simply trying to remake history.

Replies:   REP
StarFleet Carl

@Dominions Son

That however, has almost nothing to do with the comment I made.


That's because I thought you were just being a smart ass with your comment, not actually seriously suggesting that I might find child pornography acceptable (which is now what your post sounds like).

REP

@PotomacBob

Republicans now trying to claim they were the primary movers of the legislation


Nah, that's just them being politicians. When the project starts, a politician handles it with a 10 foot pole so it won't contaminate him. If the project turns out to be good, he is in there claiming credit for doing the entire job. If it turns out bad, he say "Project X, what's that?" :)

Back to Top