Re: Is Beldin an idiot? - vote here


"johnny_t" <nobodyis@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:02ac13f2$0$26885$c3e8da3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
"johnny_t" <nobodyis@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:485ea1e7$0$31209$c3e8da3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XaQ Morphy wrote:
In another post, Beldin posted "Dutch, the whole group knows I'm not an
idiot." I of course think the opposite, and I'm pretty sure RGP as a
whole agrees with me.

So, please vote here. Do you think Beldin is an idiot? Reply yes/no
to
this thread.

---
Morphy
xaqmorphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.donkeymanifesto.com

____________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com


This sort of reminds of that story where the Kindergartner was brought
to the front of the class. His teacher asked his class mates to list
all the things that were wrong with this kid, and then eventually voted
out of the class, like a bad episode of survivor.

I am just so bored of "retard" and other useless nyms that make *him*
look stupid rather than any other way, total lack of content, thought
and bad beats, that it is pointless to read his stuff anymore. But this
is a rather annoying exercise as well.

This is stupidity on so many levels it's hysterical.
I never post "Jonny is a retard!" and end it.
I call you a retard, then go into detail as to why you are one on that
particular topic.
You are free, of course, to see the light and renounce your retard
status.
You're free to attempt to rip my argument to shreds, taking pot shots at
me along the way. Generally, you try and avoid the issue, which is odd.
Why take a stand on anything if you aren't prepared to debate, defend,
and battle over it?



Arguments on your terms that involve name calling by you, are not fun,
informative, edifying, or satisfying. They aren't. It seems to be pretty
universal, look around there is tons of arguing, debate, defense, and
everyone is pretty tired of your "routine". And you apparently think it's
*ALL* of ours fault. Oh well...
No, Jonny-boy, I don't think it's anyone's 'fault'.
I think most people don't come at political views logically. I think they
tend to come at them based on some emotional view, and then try and
rationalize it. Now, the best way to bring someone around is to find that
emotional view, then figure out how to disarm it. Often, that involves
getting the opposition pissed off, and perhaps insecure enough for them to
do self examination.
Sometimes that backfires, and they dig in, but those reading the thread for
amusement will still see that.

You take the wrong side of an argument, I fight with you. Are you likely to
randomly take a side in an argument the next time?

Are you going to take a side you can't defend vigorously and rationally?
Well, Dutch does, yes, but most people don't.

Pickle uses legal rules when we fight about gay marriage. He tries to keep
it within that context, because then he can 'win' the debate... within that
context, the law IS established. Within the 'civil rights' context, what the
law currently is is irrelevent, what the law should be becomes the issue,
and there he can't win. If we both say that and stop, however, the debate
stops and not much happens to change other people's opinions.

Dutch is convinced that socialized medicine is the way to go. He completely
ignores the changes that happen when you socialize medicine, and what that
does to prices.... and when prices are set as a function of costs of
manufacturing drugs, as they are, how it defacto kills long-shot investing
in medicine.

Now he's likely never going to get it. He probably doesn't care, he's
emotionally invested in helping the poor person struggling to get buy who
can't afford health insurance, but has a job and is self sufficient, so
isn't on medicaid. I'm not sure too many of them exist, to be honest. Health
insurance is cheaper than booze, cigs, and lotto tickets, and lots of poor
people buy them weekly. But I'm sure many people reading our sparring
sessions while chuckling to themselves DO get it, that investing in
possibilities involves risk, and the manufacturers need a reasonable chance
to recover that investment with "winning" drugs to offset the failures.

Dutch is now fairly obsessed with beating me up. It makes his thinking even
less clear, and makes it harder for him to foist his view on people. That's
not a bad thing.

Pickle, by contrast, is still fairly rational. He's seen my posts, and knows
I shoot at everyone I think is wrong, not some ideological view, like
popinfresh and orange, and I always have a defense of my view.

Mostly, I want people to think when deciding, rather than feel. Emotions are
great, with someone you care about in a warm bed. Emotions are less great in
the voting booth.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: annoying
    ... In a debate that has two sides ... forbid that you have any emotions such as sympathy for anyone else's ... enforces the custom of using spoiler space. ... Since when do I have no right to freedom of communication? ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Is Beldin an idiot? - vote here
    ... Arguments on your terms that involve name calling by you, are not fun, informative, edifying, or satisfying. ... But I'm sure many people reading our sparring sessions while chuckling to themselves DO get it, that investing in possibilities involves risk, and the manufacturers need a reasonable chance to recover that investment with "winning" drugs to offset the failures. ... Emotions are great, with someone you care about in a warm bed. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Intelligence - one of degree?
    ... >>> into a debate over words instead of a debate about human bahavior or a ... >> without emotions if the word cannot be defined in a clear way. ... some odd reason, but that seems to happen to your posts. ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)
  • Re: So..*virtually* all evidence for evolution is fake?
    ... emotions, and no mention of actual data. ... No, but you can "win" a debate with it and you can win an election with it, ...
    (talk.origins)