posted on Aug, 31 2008 @ 06:46 AM
Good thread Weedwhacker
Oftentimes, I go into a thread, lured by a scintillating title, and if I think that the material doesn't support the sensationalized title, then I
rarely post there. If the thread starts out by "begging the question" or similar form of logic fallacy, I'm likely to pass it by. I really
value the true (and somewhat rare) debate that engages the issue(s) and not the personalities.
It seems to me that many political threads exemplify this, i.e. "Bush and McCain forged secret pact with Illuminati" etc. etc. My guilty
pleasure is 2012 threads.
For myself, it's somewhat easy sometimes to get lazy..... I might see a thread posted by someone whom I've thought in the past wrote
sensationalized or intentionally inflammative threads, and I pass them by, all the while recognizing that we're all capable of changing our style.
As I said -- just laziness on my part.
I think part of the frequency of posting might be relative to where a person's "home base" on the internet is. yah, I know..... that sounded
pathetic and geeky to me as well.
There are four sites that I spend most of my internet time on, and, depending upon what my concerns are, might
dictate where I am. Right now, severe weather is a pressing concern -- we've just had ours with Gustav and now looking toward those still in its
As to points, I've been wanting to gain enough points to get into RATS. I wasn't willing to change my style in order to acquire the posts. Now
that I have sufficient points to get into RATS, I still won't be changing my style of posting. I appreciate the nod of the head given by Mods and
Amigos when they give applause; I've never been sure if it's appropriate to drop them a note of thanks, as the email says "do not respond to this
U2U". I suspect that means that the U2U itself shouldn't be responded to, not the sender.
Now I'm just babbling. Too much coffee