HI Everybody! (hears "Hi Mr Lynexon" in return lol)

Today we are going to learn about how to constructively Discuss topics.

1. Regardless of whatever pre-assumed Stance you might have against whoever is opening the discussion (or against any member of the discussion), you never sit there and attack the person. This leads to off Topic discussions, and possibly, derailment of the thread.

Ex. OP: I think all Nazis are bad. They are bad because of the bad things they did to people.

Member 1: You are just a nazi hater, all you ever do is spread your anti-nazism everywhere. If you don't like nazis, just go off to some random place and just forget about all of the things nazis did to you.

Member 2: YOu are just a big anti-nazi. You may make people who don't know you think you aren't, but all you are is a big Anti-Nazi.

Member 3: Just give up and quit posting. You contradict yourself all the time and are the dumbest poster on the board. People like you are dumb and need to face reality.

The above example is not constructive discussion.

To constructively discuss the OP, here is an example of what you COULD do:

OP: I think all Nazis are bad. They are bad because of the bad things they did to people.

Member 1: While the things they did to people are bad, not all nazis were evil. Some were just doing what the head nazi said. So i have to disagree that not ALL Nazis were bad.

See. Instead of attacking the person, calling them an anti-nazi or just not even mentioning the Topic, member 1 discussed the topic and disagreed respectfully.

Then, there is just the good old fashioned, time-proven method of:

If you can't say anything nice (or at least quazi-respectful), don't say anything at all.

Thanks for reading this brief course/alternative thread translation.

AND, Just to Grow on, Here is a little thing that should be taken into account every time you post. It is always there, right below the Reply Button:

(Minimal posts that contribute nothing to the thread are subject to immediate removal.)

Thanks and, in the words of Mick Foley, Have A Nice Day!

Oozi, care to respond to any of my posts?

I have remanied on topic the entire time, I assume that is why I was omitted from your lengthy response.

Also, I notice your signature. Take note readers, I told you that this thread would be used in such a manner.

(I really should head to the predicions area!)

Originally posted by Gnarly
Let's debate something oozy. I know too many people on here don't understand how to do so. Maybe a real example of a debate would be better? What are some topics that don't need hardcore knowledge are you passionate about? I'm being cereal.

The negatives of the prison system outweighs the positives.

OR

The positives of the prison system outweighs the negatives.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Oozi, care to respond to any of my posts?

I have remanied on topic the entire time, I assume that is why I was omitted from your lengthy response.

Also, I notice your signature. Take note readers, I told you that this thread would be used in such a manner.

(I really should head to the predicions area!)

Is this what you are talking about?

-Fake Topic Alert-
See what I mean, this threads intention is to "get back" at the people who disagree with the examples in the OP.

Your point is that this thread has intentions beyond its supposed intentions.

Your evidence is the choice of Example chosen.

Am I correct?

Originally posted by adigregorio
Oozi, care to respond to any of my posts?

I have remanied on topic the entire time, I assume that is why I was omitted from your lengthy response.

Also, I notice your signature. Take note readers, I told you that this thread would be used in such a manner.

(I really should head to the predicions area!)

Sure, the sig could be A theme for A topic, but it isn't this topic, other people made it this topic.

But still (and i quote) "Prediction:~2015 US complete collapse~" could be a debate in it's self. Unless it's already happend on here then i'd liked to see it and decide if THAT was "constructive discussion".

Having read the Op, and the statement, there are a few things that you forgot to add in Ozzy, that you yourself have done in some of your other postings:
1) Do not go down to name calling or insulting. It is childish and often leads to a lack of credibility on the part of the person making the insults. Debate and argue the posting, for or against, not the person.
2) Use more than one source for supporting those arguments, backing them up with valid proof and evidence. Too many times it has been seen where it is one source, or even a known bias source that will often lead to a lack of discussion.
3) Have an open mind to accept that sometimes, the definition of an accepted term is just not what you would like it to be, and just maybe it may be wrong.

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Having read the Op, and the statement, there are a few things that you forgot to add in Ozzy, that you yourself have done in some of your other postings:

I will ask you a simple question, who hasn't? Every human being have the ability to learn from the past, if they want to.

1) Do not go down to name calling or insulting. It is childish and often leads to a lack of credibility on the part of the person making the insults. Debate and argue the posting, for or against, not the person.

Agreed. See how I don't focus on you, but rather focus on your message ?

2) Use more than one source for supporting those arguments, backing them up with valid proof and evidence. Too many times it has been seen where it is one source, or even a known bias source that will often lead to a lack of discussion.

Agreed.

3) Have an open mind to accept that sometimes, the definition of an accepted term is just not what you would like it to be, and just maybe it may be wrong.

For example?

Originally posted by oozyism
If you want to, I don't mind.

Here you go blatently disregarding the OPost! That's okay, I don't really need to point it out anymore. I just thought I would for old time sake.

Originally posted by oozyism
Are you expecting me to deny that? I have broken many rules, I have even been banned, I for one move forward, learn from the past.

I am taking this as a:

YES I Oozyism break the rules I set forth in the OPost of this thread, and even in the same thread.

Unless you say otherwise.

Now that you have admitted that you break, and are currently breaking, the rules you are telling everyone else to follow; I have one question. Did you even read the opening post?

Yes, yes you did. And that is the evidence that shows the real intent behind this thread, which I have already described. I will be including my first post in here as well so the readers can see what I am talking about. (And so they don't have to hunt for it. I am a friend to the lazy!)

Originally posted by oozyism
Here is a fact, this thread has nothing to do with me. It is non-constructive to focus on the messenger rather than the message.

So you made a thread to "trick" the posters. Like I said. You knew what would happen, so you did this. Isn't hoaxing against the rules?

Originally posted by oozyism
A Honest question:
Should I create a thread about me?

That would be really interesting to read, all it would do is show more anger though. Why not try to figure out why you hate America, instead of the US Government. After you get that one, you should really stop doing things like this thread. It is something the US Government would do, trickery.

Originally posted by oozyism
Clarify.

Will do, in the first post I made in the thread. Adding it at the end of this response.

Originally posted by oozyism

Can you explain how this is "constructive discussion" since you are now the resident expert?

(Copy and pasted after this point)

(Posted Earlier, re-posted due to others laziness...)
Alright, I have been following this thread since its creation.

Let me see if I can raise the curtain as to what is going on.

First off, I am a lurker mostly. While I read daily I do not log in daily, nor post daily. For the last week or so a member has caught my eye, Oozism here.

It was the pure hatred of me that caused me to notice this person. I mean they really really hate me, and it is just because where I live! We have a word for that here in hell, we call it bigotry, but that is "off topic" isn't it Oozi?

Which is the whole point of this thread, the "real topic". The real topic is this: "Get my point in, and find a way to make dissenting opinions "off topic"".

Can no one see this but me? If that is so, maybe I AM crazy. Anyway, I better get to the "fake topic" or I am going to be dismissed as "ignorant" and "childlike" for not "reading the OP"

(Oh, by the way, when they ask "Did you read the OP?" That is a veiled insult at your comprehension skills, which doesn't seem very "constructive" to me...but what do I know...I may be crazy.)

--"Fake Topic Alert!"--

So let's see, how to stay on topic without looking like an ass...Well that is easy! Don't agree with the OPer!

Seriously, "constructive discussion"? Who gets to define constructive? I mean in every discussion (with opposing viewpoints) one of the talkers will feel that the other is "not constructive". Who is right?

Are we talking about a mutual understanding in a discussion? That is fine and dandy if the talkers are talking in a mature manner, and not making a one sided thread......... <--I wish I could capatilize those periods.

So, anyway, back to what I was saying. Who decides "constructive" and which decides "conversation"? I mean what if it is a debate? An argument?

Don't worry about answering any of the "fake topic" questions, because well it is a fake topic! You want me to point out that you hate me, so you can sit atop your turd mountain waving your scepter at my ignorance. After all, it's not the topic!

(Why not make a thread that is not designed to trick people, then call it constructive.)

-------
There is my first post, re-done so all can see it again. As noted, I know you were too busy or something to read and respond to it yourself. So here I re-posted it, and it is still valid as before.
Though I will say you may have to re-read my other posts so you can fully get my position. That one I copied is on the bottom of page 6, so I imagine start at the top of 7.
As you can see readers, this thread itself is unconstructive. Therefore it is futile for it to discuss how to be constructive. The motive or non-motive is moot.