I don't have a problem with ignorant people, after all, they are ignorant! Antagonizing? Please...go read him a bedtime story will you?
Or you wonder why you perceive Ooz as posting propaganda(really laughable)
I dare you ask that question to ALL ATS members?. it is propaganda to the extreme.Just like you! Claiming fake gods for wisdom! lol to you! What next?
Al he spews out is propaganda - read the original post. How many anti US statements are there I dare you to count them!
You need to READ THE OP instead of posting like a headless chicken for crying out loud.
Besides, Slayer, who you defend posted obvious propaganda about the Iranian youth in another thread and when he was outed for posting blog posts as evidence, he didn't reply anymore. As you can see, he makes petty excuses in this thread concerning the ''information'' in the other thread.
Besides that, fake gods? My, my...I just told you what I'd been told because you obviously lack said wisdom. If anything you're ridiculing yourself at this point.
My m,y Yes Fake gods but that is enough I have made my point. Nothing looks as stupid as mainstream religion. Good try but massive fail. lol at you!
A constructive deconstruction of
oozyisms guide to constructive discussion
A huge number of new members have joined ATS, I think it is important to set up a guide to constructive discussion.
Many threads have been trolled, spammed and completely diverted and have become useless considering objectivity.
To change that, I have created this thread to discuss how we can improve our discussion, to help us end threads with conclusions rather than uncertainty.
Point number1 (what is your point)
First you have to understand fully what your point is.
For example, "America is bad".
Point number2 (prove your point)
What do you have to support your point?
What evidence do you have which helped you come to this conclusion?
For example "America is bad because it invaded Iraq for no legitimate reasons (false reasons), and risked millions of lives in the process".
Point number3 (how to counter constructively)
How can you counter the above assertion constructively?
To help you differentiate between constructive and nonconstructive counter,
I will lay the un-constructive counter first.
An Example of un-constructive counter would be:
("Iraq was bad before US invaded and occupied it". ---->Choosing this one
"You are a terrorist sympathizer for making such points"
"You are anti-American and anti-Western not to mention anti-Semite"
"You are an idiot")
Why is the above nonconstructive counter? Because it takes the focus away from the original point, hence," US is bad".
Pointing out that Saddam was worse, is not constructive.
An example of a constructive counter would be to ask certain questions regarding the OP:
"Does US invading Iraq for illegitimate reasons, make US bad?"
"Is US defined by just one small portion of history"?
"Is US defined by just one action?"
"How can US be bad if it is also good?"
You are trying to counter his point, not his evidence which backs his point.
-If the evidence is clearly false, then it is understandable to concentrate on the evidence rather than the point.
-If the evidence is uncertain, tell him how the evidence is uncertain, and leave it at that, or ask him for other evidence which backs his point.
-If the evidence is true, concentrate on the point, rather than the evidence.
Originally posted by Zamini
reply to post by oozyism
The cooler heads always prevail. Just give these blowhards enough time to corner themselves and they will. Just as Slayer in the other thread and this one, just as phatpackage, dudebehindthemask, thecinic etc. etc.
I'd agree that ATS seems to have an issue with certain ignorant posters, paid-for-posters, a lot of in-fighting(due to ignorance again). Maybe ignoring them would be the best option but they make threads filled with logical fallacies, placing blame, assuming blogposters only post facts, etc...it's difficult. Ah well, I don't mind them posting that kind of stuff as the cooler heads always prevail. Besides, it only takes a single post to touch their nerves right at the base.