posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 11:53 PM
reply to post by Springer
I wonder, Mark,
if it would be interesting and maybe slightly worthwhile . . .
to ask them when you are setting it up . . . for them to guesstimate that out of 100 of all possible
ask me ANYTHING questions . . . what number would they likely candidly answer in good faith?
I think the annoying thing to many . . . as immature as it may or may not be . . .
is the ASK ANYTHING label.
Folks seem to like to pretend that
Obviously . . . it's not. . . . or at least very rarely is. So far, it seems, it's not.
So what, at some level. The guests are still interesting and some level of a real feather in your personal had and in ATS' hat.
And, what they do NOT answer is also somewhat informative in their avoidance. e.g. the last guest who was extra given to answering virtually
everything in sequence seemed to studiously avoid my globalism question with the attached globalist quote(s). Not a biggy . . . but interesting. He
certainly had studied enough to know things about globalism yet he claimed he didn't believe in it at all, more or less. So, there was an interesting
possible contradiction that he evidently didn't want to touch.
I don't know that we can ever expect to get around such things in this fairly real world.
Soooo change the title to ASK ME ALMOST ANYTHING? LOL.
Or just keep telling the members to DEAL WITH IT . . . they'll answer whatever they'll answer however they will and they will still be treated with
It seems to me that you are doing a great job of it so far.
But it is nice to see evidence that you understand where some are coming from with their mild to moderate angst about the ask ANYTHING not really
being the standard seen so far.