Would someone at least have the decency to pm me and please tell me what finally pushed it over the edge far enought to be deleted? I was trying to have an honest discussion about an important topic.

You most certainly were and the thread ultimately got off-topic in two different, but interconnected ways. First, as you know some folks did not feel constrained to honor your request that input be limited to those who don't object to same-sex marriage. That was unfortunate in my view since we had a 215 post thread on same-sex marriage only two weeks ago (and folks can start a new thread if they want to debate it). So, frustration boiled up around that and it got a little messy.

The thread took a further detour, then when folks tried to defend the right of those who posted their opposition to same-sex marriage and accused others of censorship and facism, yadda yadda. It got kinda nasty, kinda personal, and totally off your topic. It was still going when I went to bed (though not on topic) and gone when I got up.

Those are my observations, FWIW.

Check your PMs.

that got ruined by some crashers. too bad as it was a good discussion topic and if folks ahd honored your thread title it could have been interesting and informative

Check your PMs.

I missed the end, can ya PM me too? you antisemitic fascist ;0)

You posted in it late last night, right Ben?

I think it was cooked at that point, just a matter of time until Hoo spotted it.

I tried to offer some friendly advice and got told what I could do with it, so screw it, I won't be so friendly with certain individuals anymore.

You most certainly were and the thread ultimately got off-topic in two different, but interconnected ways. First, as you know some folks did not feel constrained to honor your request that input be limited to those who don't object to same-sex marriage. That was unfortunate in my view since we had a 215 post thread on same-sex marriage only two weeks ago (and folks can start a new thread if they want to debate it). So, frustration boiled up around that and it got a little messy.

The thread took a further detour, then when folks tried to defend the right of those who posted their opposition to same-sex marriage and accused others of censorship and facism, yadda yadda. It got kinda nasty, kinda personal, and totally off your topic. It was still going when I went to bed (though not on topic) and gone when I got up.

Those are my observations, FWIW.

Absent in your analysis is any reference to the nasty namecalling which preceded the blowout. And which prompted folks like me to speak up in defence of who you apparentely think trespassed onto the thread, but who in fact were not specifically told to stay out.

I missed the end, can ya PM me too? you antisemitic fascist ;0)

You saw all the ugliness. After that, Ben was trying to get the thread back on topic but it was late. I saved the thread but I don't think there's any merit in rehashing the nastiness.


I'd like to see the original topic reposted though. I thought it was a good discussion.

maybe have a poll that you have to mark or vote for before allowing you entrance. then anyone in there would have to understand the original intent of the discussion and anyone who would then have had to lie to gain entrance to flame would be thus subject to banishment or severe heckling.
I dunno folks, but the thread title was like an invite and I see those who showed up who were in obvious disagreement with the title as party crashers and deserved NO respect nor defense.
yeah it was getting ugly, it's why I went silly. Not to toot my own horn but Kosher Tsungas is frickin genius comedy if ya get the joke.

Not at all. That's what I meant about frustration boiling up and it getting "messy." The last thing I wanted to do was make a post here that names names, criticizes anyone, or otherwise reignites the conflict of yesterday. I chose my most neutral words of all to say "it got off topic, people starting fighting, it wasn't your fault."

I guess you would have preferred my description to be more accusatory and inflammatory but I'm just not gonna go there.

Not at all. That's what I meant about frustration boiling up and it getting "messy." The last thing I wanted to do was make a post here that names names, criticizes anyone, or otherwise reignites the conflict of yesterday. I chose my most neutral words of all to say "it got off topic, people starting fighting, it wasn't your fault."

I guess you would have preferred my description to be more accusatory and inflammatory but I'm just not gonna go there.

Your last sentence was a dig and just wasn't necessary unless your intention was to paint me a less than attractive color of your choice for the world to see and judge as you would want them to see and judge me. The fact is, you omitted any reference to what I felt was a very important element to that thread - the nasty namecalling - and you incorrectly stated that the original poster asked that input be 'limited' to those who are not in opposition to GM when in fact that was not done.

That's all. No expectations that you name names, make accusations or fan flames. Just that you be more complete and accurate.

and you incorrectly stated that the original poster asked that input be 'limited' to those who are not in opposition to GM when in fact that was not done.



um....i believe the title of the thread was something like "for those who support gay marriage....". if you don't support gay marriage, i guess the thread wasn't directed at you (the collective 'you', not you personally). i think we all know where those who are against gay marriage stand in regard to gay couples adopting. i understood immediatly that the thread wasn't asking for their opinions. obviously some people overlooked that detail.


no offense starliner. just calling it like a i see it, and this one seems pretty cut and dry. now as far as namecalling, yes, there was a lot of that, and it was unnecessary from both sides.

um....i believe the title of the thread was something like "for those who support gay marriage....". if you don't support gay marriage, i guess the thread wasn't directed at you (the collective 'you', not you personally). i think we all know where those who are against gay marriage stand in regard to gay couples adopting. i understood immediatly that the thread wasn't asking for their opinions. obviously some people overlooked that detail.


no offense starliner. just calling it like a i see it, and this one seems pretty cut and dry. now as far as namecalling, yes, there was a lot of that, and it was unnecessary from both sides.
your all a bunch of fascist anti-semites. :rolleyes:

um....i believe the title of the thread was something like "for those who support gay marriage....". if you don't support gay marriage, i guess the thread wasn't directed at you (the collective 'you', not you personally). i think we all know where those who are against gay marriage stand in regard to gay couples adopting. i understood immediatly that the thread wasn't asking for their opinions. obviously some people overlooked that detail.


no offense starliner. just calling it like a i see it, and this one seems pretty cut and dry. now as far as namecalling, yes, there was a lot of that, and it was unnecessary from both sides.

You're right in that the thread meant to get answers to the question from those who support GM, but it's not right to say it was "limited" to those who support GM, who BTW one might just as easily say would be as nearly predictable with their responses (+) to the question (excluding the original poster who was on the fence).

But you know, I'm not exactly for marriage itself, much less gay marriage because of reasons that have nothing to do with gay/straightness or religion, but because I think it is a broken institution that badly needs fixing. Am I then excluded from the conversation, even though I would have been able to speak to some of the issues BenWA was concerned with such as stigmas and such?

I'm sorry but this is the gddmn internet and if we cannot have discussions open to all, with an absence of namecalling, then things tend to decline into little more than a time wasting circle-jerk.

your all a bunch of fascist anti-semites. :rolleyes:

who want to steal Pedros Fork and Lawnmower.......:cool:

who want to steal Pedros Fork and Lawnmower.......:cool:

all that Pedro needs is some bootstraps and the will to pull himself up by them...:rolleyes::aureola:

um....i believe the title of the thread was something like "for those who support gay marriage....". if you don't support gay marriage, i guess the thread wasn't directed at you (the collective 'you', not you personally). i think we all know where those who are against gay marriage stand in regard to gay couples adopting. i understood immediatly that the thread wasn't asking for their opinions.

That was indeed the intention behind wording the thread title the way it was worded. It was assumed that those who do not support gay marriage also do not support gay adoption. What I was after was how those who support gay marriage feel about gay adoption. Full stop.

That was indeed the intention behind wording the thread title the way it was worded. It was assumed that those who do not support gay marriage also do not support gay adoption. What I was after was how those who support gay marriage feel about gay adoption. Full stop.

Yes, but intentions are intentions and are not always perceived, and boy didn't all hell break loose.

Yes, but intentions are intentions and are not always perceived, and boy didn't all hell break loose.

While that's true it came out pretty early in the thread that is was for people that supported gay marriage. So after it was made clear why did people keep picking at it?

Wow, reading is fundamental. The title of the thread was clear. There was a nice discussion going on until the haters showed up with their uninvited ugliness.

I liked the party crasher analogy a wise man here used.

The fact that they posted their uninvited comments in itself was offensive and disrespectful. What they posted was also offensive and disrespectful and they got called out on it. If you choose to defend such behavior, then birds of a feather...

If you want to start your own party start a new thread. Don't disrespect the OP and the board.

Who says the PO isn't fun???

Seriously, lets just try to get along and be respectful.

Your last sentence was a dig and just wasn't necessary unless your intention was to paint me a less than attractive color of your choice for the world to see and judge as you would want them to see and judge me. The fact is, you omitted any reference to what I felt was a very important element to that thread - the nasty namecalling - and you incorrectly stated that the original poster asked that input be 'limited' to those who are not in opposition to GM when in fact that was not done.

That's all. No expectations that you name names, make accusations or fan flames. Just that you be more complete and accurate.


Well, I'm sure your supplement can stand on its own two feet, rather than needing to tell others how to express themselves.. And yes, i did read your contribution as seeking to reignite flames better left snuffed out. I disagree that I "ignored" that there was name calling. I called it as I saw it. You could have called it as you saw it, but instead chose to just take shots at me as if I had some duty to say it differently.

We'll just have to agree to disagree about the best way to answer the OP's question. Cheers.

FOR CAMPY USERS ONLY (Chorus v Centaur)
and some guy comes in screaming Campy Sux, Dura Ace A=Baaaaaaaby

that is a thread crash deserving of a whupping

or a thread FOR CATHOLICS ONLY (discussing proper age for baptism say)
I may read it, but I won't come in screaming F' Catholics, they molest children!
that again is a thread crash and deserving of whuppin

If people want to discuss things with a certain agreed upon starting point, if you don't share that starting point don't join in

we'd already had a lengthy discussion on Gay Marriage, obviously some wanted to go beyond it
instead the discussion was crashed and dragged down the terlit.

for me, I gotta go battle anti-gentilism throughout the world.

Ben,

It was a good topic and I never even clicked on it, for the days that it existed. I avoid certain topics because I just don't feel I can add to the debate. I struggle with the topic of the thread you posted. If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have offered a staunch, black and white answer: No, gay marriage is wrong, illegal, immoral and adoption of children related to that is also immoral and illegal. Times have changed, tones have too and even I've moved away from a myopic view of all things related to the gay community.

If I recall, the first issue in America, about ten years ago was 'Should gay couples be able to share health insurance'...meaning, a gay couple considered themselves 'married' so therefore, Tom's health insurance should cover his mate, Dave, etc.

I could be wrong here, but I believe the initial thrust was related to health insurance. The next hot botton was adoption, Rosie O' Donnell put that front and center. Then the next issue was same-sex marriage (if I am incorrect in my timeline, please let me know).

Now here I am a Catholic and my faith pressures me to feel and act certain ways towards these issues, yet my faith also demands that I be accepting, understanding and compassionate. I often joke that I am on God's side and that I don't get along with his Son too well.

So, ten to fifteen years have passed and I've watched the questions, issues and debates which pertained to your initial thread. If you pin me down and place me in a high office, where my hand raised with a 'yeah' or 'nay' vote matters, I am against gay marriage, I am for a resolution which acknowledges same sex partnership, which enables a transparent, open, effective and seamless union of health insurance and I do approve of same-sex unions which allow adoption. I struggle the most with the last element regarding adoption, but Jesus is right on this one and I am wrong. I believe that open wide are the doors to Jesus' heart...and his home. Jesus Christ would bless any child who lived in a loving home and he'd sit at their table and share the food. So I take his lead on this and say yes, same-sex adoption is a 'yeah'.

-KP

It's an occasional gem like this post that keeps me coming back here.

I have a different view about gay marriage -- and a lot of other things -- than you do. But, I really respect and appreciate a post like yours. I often wonder whether a lot of us just parrot the same thing year after year, never listening to others and never reconsidering our positions. Thinking can be hard work and few people want to work very hard. My hat goes off to you on this one.

Word. And as one who is spending a lot of this year in intentional self-reflection, one of my own pledges is to try to remain open and thoughtful in dialogue about hard subjects.

I make no claim to success, but I pledge to keep trying. Nice that other folks do, too.

It's an occasional gem like this post that keeps me coming back here.

I have a different view about gay marriage -- and a lot of other things -- than you do. But, I really respect and appreciate a post like yours. I often wonder whether a lot of us just parrot the same thing year after year, never listening to others and never reconsidering our positions. Thinking can be hard work and few people want to work very hard. My hat goes off to you on this one.


The self-reflection and introspection in KP's post left me speechless. As many here know, that's not an easy task... IMO, KP's stock is going way up these days.

I forget who said it, but after I read KPs post this quote came to mind. "A sign of true intelligence is to be able to hold two opposing ideas in your head at the same time and still be able to function."

KP, that was inspired. It looks good on you.

Ben,

It was a good topic and I never even clicked on it, for the days that it existed. I avoid certain topics because I just don't feel I can add to the debate. I struggle with the topic of the thread you posted. If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have offered a staunch, black and white answer: No, gay marriage is wrong, illegal, immoral and adoption of children related to that is also immoral and illegal. Times have changed, tones have too and even I've moved away from a myopic view of all things related to the gay community.

If I recall, the first issue in America, about ten years ago was 'Should gay couples be able to share health insurance'...meaning, a gay couple considered themselves 'married' so therefore, Tom's health insurance should cover his mate, Dave, etc.

I could be wrong here, but I believe the initial thrust was related to health insurance. The next hot botton was adoption, Rosie O' Donnell put that front and center. Then the next issue was same-sex marriage (if I am incorrect in my timeline, please let me know).

Now here I am a Catholic and my faith pressures me to feel and act certain ways towards these issues, yet my faith also demands that I be accepting, understanding and compassionate. I often joke that I am on God's side and that I don't get along with his Son too well.

So, ten to fifteen years have passed and I've watched the questions, issues and debates which pertained to your initial thread. If you pin me down and place me in a high office, where my hand raised with a 'yeah' or 'nay' vote matters, I am against gay marriage, I am for a resolution which acknowledges same sex partnership, which enables a transparent, open, effective and seamless union of health insurance and I do approve of same-sex unions which allow adoption. I struggle the most with the last element regarding adoption, but Jesus is right on this one and I am wrong. I believe that open wide are the doors to Jesus' heart...and his home. Jesus Christ would bless any child who lived in a loving home and he'd sit at their table and share the food. So I take his lead on this and say yes, same-sex adoption is a 'yeah'.

-KP



KP's best post ever.......period, and one of the better posts in PO in quite some time.....

/the bar has been raised

KP, that was inspired. It looks good on you.


that was the post of the year so far in PO......Kudos buddy. It shows true integrity when you can admit that your steadfast opinions have changed. This board is useful in that light. I have to admit that some of my views and preconceptions have changed as well, which is what keeps me coming back here. I feel that I not only have something to share, but many things to learn as well.....Hats of to you...:thumbsup:

carefully and people will therefore respect your wishes on a topic so polarizing. At least in my case, these kinds of discussions go a smidge beyond Campy vs. Shimano, Titanium vs. Carbon, etc.

Some folks can slip on their smoking jackets, go to their home library with their Golden Retriever, pipe and slippers (yes, the fireplace is roaring in the corner) and discuss these types of issues is a sane, rational, deep thinking style. It's an intellectual exercise. "Here's what I think and why". Emotion has little to do with it.

For other's, it's emotional, it's "I believe", "I feel (to my bones)". On certain topics, I fall squarely into the hairy, knuckle dragging Neanderthal and make no appologies about it. Sometimes you do draw a line. I have no illusions of changing anyone's mind, but want to make it clear that neither do they.

Regardless of which you are in any particular conversation, spiraling down to where you make it personal should be the red flag that it's time to go to your own corner for a standing 10 (20, 30) count. It's just gonna get ugly.

This strikes me as one of those topics. I don't think all the "warning - do not enter unless specifically invited" disclaimers in the world are going to keep people who have a strong emotional opinion from crashing. It is a public forum.

Bill

carefully and people will therefore respect your wishes on a topic so polarizing. At least in my case, these kinds of discussions go a smidge beyond Campy vs. Shimano, Titanium vs. Carbon, etc.

This strikes me as one of those topics. I don't think all the "warning - do not enter unless specifically invited" disclaimers in the world are going to keep people who have a strong emotional opinion from crashing. It is a public forum.

Bill

Exactamundo. Campy/Shimano issues have nowhere near the gravitas as this issue does. Somebody down my street painted their house purple and it looks terrible, but nobody has vandalized it or burned it down as has been done countless times to homes across this country just because people of color, or a different sexual orientation happen to live there.

I love purple houses. Why do you think that purple houses should not have the same rights as other houses? Inside they are all the same. Have you no shame.

I forget who said it, but after I read KPs post this quote came to mind. "A sign of true intelligence is to be able to hold two opposing ideas in your head at the same time and still be able to function."

That is a great thing to meditate upon and internalize. It's not always easy to do though, and to understand that possibility just might help us be a little more forgiving with those who could stand to benefit from it.

but I ALSO understand those that are there 'for the right reasons' have a right to call them every nasty thing in the book.

not Campy v Shimano CAMPY ONLY and it ghets crashed by a Shimano user.

sure he has a right, it's a public forum, but i don't think those that were there for the INTENDED debate need to address such crashers with anything other than "F Off a-hole"

if I was a mod and I saw a crash like that I'd PM them a warning, and if they continued pull them. harsh? IMHO no. that could have been a GREAT topic and it was freakin derailed, ruined cause it was crashed.

and some Campy Shimano debates IMHO have had more Gravitas than this. some folks take that stuff dead serious.

and KP f'in' eh bro. good on ya, awesome, I'm frickin speechless. where has this fellow been hiding?

and KP f'in' eh bro. good on ya, awesome, I'm frickin speechless. where has this fellow been hiding?

Maybe it's connected with last week's election somehow....rejection aftermath....gut check time..... Sorry I couldn't resist trying to bring this lovefest crashing back down to PO normalcy. :devil:

The self-reflection and introspection in KP's post left me speechless. As many here know, that's not an easy task... IMO, KP's stock is going way up these days.

I forget who said it, but after I read KPs post this quote came to mind. "A sign of true intelligence is to be able to hold two opposing ideas in your head at the same time and still be able to function."

Thank you kpcw for a beautiful post.

A corollary to spyderman's quote came to mind: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." (Emerson)

This forum has gotten ridiculous to put it mildly, and by this forum, I don't mean PO, or the lounge, I mean the entire forum(s). Now, I'm sure that all of the mods and others will just think/say, "if you don't like it, then leave, blah, blah,blah", sure that is a option, and I'm sure that if things continue, that this forum will decline, I've seen it before, where a forum went from hundreds, to now, 4-7 posters, it took about a year, but yup, it can happen.

It's pretty obvious that people aren't happy with the way things are being run, perhaps that should be a clue. Bush got his mandate from the people when he didn't listen.

but I ALSO understand those that are there 'for the right reasons' have a right to call them every nasty thing in the book.

not Campy v Shimano CAMPY ONLY and it ghets crashed by a Shimano user.

sure he has a right, it's a public forum, but i don't think those that were there for the INTENDED debate need to address such crashers with anything other than "F Off a-hole"

if I was a mod and I saw a crash like that I'd PM them a warning, and if they continued pull them. harsh? IMHO no. that could have been a GREAT topic and it was freakin derailed, ruined cause it was crashed.

and some Campy Shimano debates IMHO have had more Gravitas than this. some folks take that stuff dead serious.

and KP f'in' eh bro. good on ya, awesome, I'm frickin speechless. where has this fellow been hiding?

it's about responsibilites. Should the unintended folks crashed, maybe not. But should you have seen it coming based on the topic? I can think of a half dozen exclusionary thread headings that would immediately accomplish the opposite, can't you? That was the point of my post.

I referred to the Campy vs. Shimano example as that, an example (as was the titanium vs. carbon comment). If that example doesn't work for you, feel free to substitute another that fits your mold of a button pusher topic vs. I've got 5 minutes to kill and a keyboard in front of me.

I'll concede the following:

1) I stumbled in to PO from another thread. I didn't see the original posts (now deleted) nor how ugly it got. Based on the topic and personalites involveded, I'll venture a guess.
2) I've been around since mid 2005 and have posted a total of 55 times, ie. I understand my opinions are just that.
3) The topic strikes me as an absolute button pusher.
4) Hell, the topic of nearly everything in PO strikes me as a button pusher, hence I don't come here.
5) I'm fuzzy on who gets to decide who is involved in a conversation "for the right reasons". Was the guy who asked "how much does a wife go for these days?" in the thread about a woman cyclist being run over and killed by a truck, posting for the right reasons? My example is irrelevant if it doesn't make my point, so feel free to substitute your own, as long as we end up at the same place in the end.

My original post and this follow up was for one reason. If you start a thread on a polarizing topic, regardless how you word it, you're gonna have (and IMO, INVITE) strong opposing views. I'm for all of that until it becomes personal.

Bill

you must have missed the Open Forum we had on Gay Marriage. quite lengthy and hotly debated and the trolls were welcome. here anyone was free to express and debate their opinion and it went quite long without getting pulled nor boring.

so this poster in honest intentions wanted to go BEYOND that topic. He wanted to enter a second phase with an established argumentative baseline. The OP was on the opposing side and wanted some honest questions answered and discussed. Instead of getting what he desired his honest quest for inquiry was reduced to the train wreck. It was all because a couple a-holes couldn't stay away. So what did it serve the original intent? nothing. it was reduced and debased to a name calling grudge match. So how were individuals enlightened to views of both sides? they weren't, the discussion was sabotaged.
Some people actually like to discuss such topics to possibly learn, possibly change their opinion on things or possibly just to get an honest debate in the open. the troll did nothing to help that, he dstroyed any honest inquiry and the exchange that would have incurred.

So again a 'campy only' inquiry. Is Chorus worth the extra money over Centaur?
A guy comes in screaming Dura Ace ALL the WAY> what does that serve? it is nothing more than a rude interuption and should be treated as such.

I believe I understand the intended purpose of the thread, that information was being exchanged that was helpful and then folks showed up who had no interest in any of that, straight into the crapper from there. No constructive differing opinions, just ugly. Am I getting it right?

OK, OK, I get it. Campy vs. CAMPY. I have no opinion on this topic because I ride a Japanese brand of components that shall remain nameless.

Bill

you must have missed the Open Forum we had on Gay Marriage. quite lengthy and hotly debated and the trolls were welcome. here anyone was free to express and debate their opinion and it went quite long without getting pulled nor boring.

IMO, recent Lounge events played a HUGE part in the civility of that thread. Right after the blowout everyone was walking on eggshells. That thread represents an almost conscious effort of all who participated to behave in a respectful manner because of those recent events. When it came over here to PO, different rules of conduct were applied to a different audience, some of whom do not regularly participate in the Lounge and/or missed the blowout. As you can see, the smoke in the Lounge still hasn't cleared all the way.

I think it is true that we tend to behave in a more civil manner here in PO -- the exchange of insults here has become a ritualized dance that is really cool to watch when it's being performed. We haven't had a blowout here in PO like the one in the Lounge since the last time Doug tried to lay down his code of conduct but I do think we, for the most part, do follow a certain code of conduct here if for no other reason than we come here specifically for the argument. We expect to be confronted and challenged. That is the whole point and purpose of PO as I see it. The Lounge is different.

So again a 'campy only' inquiry. Is Chorus worth the extra money over Centaur?
A guy comes in screaming Dura Ace ALL the WAY> what does that serve? it is nothing more than a rude interuption and should be treated as such.

Then learn to ignore those posts; responding to them with cruel vileness is only going to make things blow up.

I believe I understand the intended purpose of the thread, that information was being exchanged that was helpful and then folks showed up who had no interest in any of that, straight into the crapper from there. No constructive differing opinions, just ugly. Am I getting it right?

There's much more to the dynamic here than that.

If the thread was still visible, you'd see that it wasn't the trolling that spun it out. The ritual was disrupted by an agenda that ran completely off-topic to the thread.

Thank you kpcw for a beautiful post.

A corollary to spyderman's quote came to mind: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds." (Emerson)
plus one. kp I am impressed.

in check. otherwise I'd just keep ann eye on the 'supporters' thread postings annd then show up and drop absolute thread bombs on them to see how they liked it. I bet I could get them all to understand in about a day or so.

okay Shimano Thread
is Ultegra worth the Extra $$$$$'s over 105?
response. OMG, why would you even waste time with the biproducts of a fishing reel manufacturer? Why would you buy some piece of crap where you have to fix a 2 cent return spring by buying an entire $150 new set of shifters. what are you retarded or just really reallly stupid? I wouldn't let a guy I hated buy that Shimano crap with those ugly ass cables extending out of the shifters. No, I know, you just want to look like everyone else on their Madones in their frickin Postal kits you poseur!!!!

how's that?

There's much more to the dynamic here than that.

If the thread was still visible, you'd see that it wasn't the trolling that spun it out. The ritual was disrupted by an agenda that ran completely off-topic to the thread.

but nuance is completely lost on me. Is it possible to draw me a picture without starting WWIII. Specifically, being the dolt that I am, help me out with the ritual part as I'm clueless.

Bill

in check. otherwise I'd just keep ann eye on the 'supporters' thread postings annd then show up and drop absolute thread bombs on them to see how they liked it. I bet I could get them all to understand in about a day or so.

okay Shimano Thread
is Ultegra worth the Extra $$$$$'s over 105?
response. OMG, why would you even waste time with the biproducts of a fishing reel manufacturer? Why would you buy some piece of crap where you have to fix a 2 cent return spring by buying an entire $150 new set of shifters. what are you retarded or just really reallly stupid? I wouldn't let a guy I hated buy that Shimano crap with those ugly ass cables extending out of the shifters. No, I know, you just want to look like everyone else on their Madones in their frickin Postal kits you poseur!!!!

how's that?

because I want, no, I long for a podium girl jersey. Shooting my foot off while currently clinging to some tiny hope of that strikes me as..................somewhat counter productive.

Bill

folks having an on topic conversation
thread gets hit by bomb hijack
Hijackers are told to 'beat it loser' by a few folks
other folks start defending hijacker's right to free speech

one 'folk' who on certain topics is known to go absoluetly apesh!t at a hair trigger over other subjects tells folks whom this subject is their hair trigger 'lighten up it's only an opinion'

when folks use his hair trigger to illustrate his inconsistency he again explodes (thus proving the point) into name calling ad homs to folks whom 90% share his views

the fact that he also failed to acknowledge the suffering of his people was shared by the suffering of the other posters people and continued to say the topics were different did nothing but inflame the situation.

so it was a hijacking that then got hijacked and devolved inferno style in a slow spiral to madness

folks having an on topic conversation
thread gets hit by bomb hijack
Hijackers are told to 'beat it loser' by a few folks
other folks start defending hijacker's right to free speech

one 'folk' who on certain topics is known to go absoluetly apesh!t at a hair trigger over other subjects tells folks whom this subject is their hair trigger 'lighten up it's only an opinion'

when folks use his hair trigger to illustrate his inconsistency he again explodes (thus proving the point) into name calling ad homs to folks whom 90% share his views

the fact that he also failed to acknowledge the suffering of his people was shared by the suffering of the other posters people and continued to say the topics were different did nothing but inflame the situation.

so it was a hijacking that then got hijacked and devolved inferno style in a slow spiral to madness

No dancing around it, no PC.

I'm not conceding the point of my earlier posts, but it applies less in this case than all of my examples.

I'll get the lights and lock up on my way out. I'm not sticking around for the fallout.

Bill

Mimi is waiting for her coffee date on th Champs

the redhead is waiting at home

Mimi is waiting for her coffee date on th Champs

I'd hit it.

She's gonna be holding the TdF trophy walking down the cobbles with the Arc D ' Triomphe, trees, Eifel Tower

gonna be the pod gal jersey. billium is on ma tip about it ever since I posted the pool doozy

and then you go and post THE PG design again. I love that one. L-O-V-E. Yes, I know, it's copyrighted.

Screw counter productivity. Whatever frame you ride = crap, whatever components are on it = crap squared, wheelset................cubed..................... .

Ben,

It was a good topic and I never even clicked on it, for the days that it existed. I avoid certain topics because I just don't feel I can add to the debate. I struggle with the topic of the thread you posted. If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have offered a staunch, black and white answer: No, gay marriage is wrong, illegal, immoral and adoption of children related to that is also immoral and illegal. Times have changed, tones have too and even I've moved away from a myopic view of all things related to the gay community.

If I recall, the first issue in America, about ten years ago was 'Should gay couples be able to share health insurance'...meaning, a gay couple considered themselves 'married' so therefore, Tom's health insurance should cover his mate, Dave, etc.

I could be wrong here, but I believe the initial thrust was related to health insurance. The next hot botton was adoption, Rosie O' Donnell put that front and center. Then the next issue was same-sex marriage (if I am incorrect in my timeline, please let me know).

Now here I am a Catholic and my faith pressures me to feel and act certain ways towards these issues, yet my faith also demands that I be accepting, understanding and compassionate. I often joke that I am on God's side and that I don't get along with his Son too well.

So, ten to fifteen years have passed and I've watched the questions, issues and debates which pertained to your initial thread. If you pin me down and place me in a high office, where my hand raised with a 'yeah' or 'nay' vote matters, I am against gay marriage, I am for a resolution which acknowledges same sex partnership, which enables a transparent, open, effective and seamless union of health insurance and I do approve of same-sex unions which allow adoption. I struggle the most with the last element regarding adoption, but Jesus is right on this one and I am wrong. I believe that open wide are the doors to Jesus' heart...and his home. Jesus Christ would bless any child who lived in a loving home and he'd sit at their table and share the food. So I take his lead on this and say yes, same-sex adoption is a 'yeah'.

-KP

KP, there's not much more that I can say that hasn't already been said. My appreciation for your contribution is supreme. Thanks.

She's gonna be holding the TdF trophy walking down the cobbles with the Arc D ' Triomphe, trees, Eifel Tower

gonna be the pod gal jersey. billium is on ma tip about it ever since I posted the pool doozy

Quit it, you're going to get ANOTHER one of my threads deleted by posting those girls in bikinis and tight clothing :mad:


:wink5:

Quit it, you're going to get ANOTHER one of my threads deleted by posting those girls in bikinis and tight clothing :mad:


:wink5:

if they suppress that (art) then we really have a free speech issue

wink wink

This forum has truly "jumped the shark" when you guys spend this much energy debating who should and shouldn't post in the a thread because of the title. It's an open forum! PM each other if you want to keep it closed.

If you dug up a 4 day old thread to trash on the intent of the inquiry. we have to wonder who has really "jumped the shark" (not that I can really use that reference with a straight face). Looking for someone to trash?

Really? Only PMs if you want a focused inquiry? Thanks for enlightening us peons.

..... Thanks for enlightening us peons.

That's what I'm here for.

The trolling for in the moto forum has been slow so in a moment of desperation I wandered in here.

That said, the whole debate above (who should/shouldn't post) is the dumbest I've ever read here in PO and there have been some pretty stupid stuff in the past.

It amazes me how naive and cynical some of you are on this forum. First of all, this is a public forum. Any member can reply to and participate in any thread posted on this forum. Why, because it is a public forum about politics. Anytime politics is involved there is debate and squabble. It's just the nature of politics. This is not a private house party where everyone is an invited guest. There are forums and internet groups out there where like minded people can share like minded ideas to reinforce their beliefs. But, this is not that type of forum.

When I read your initial thread the first thing that came to my mind was that this was a cynical joke or a troller. It goes against any sense of human decency. The topic was so inappropriate that it warranted some balanced responses. To not respond to such a topic is equivalent to keeping silent when bad things are happening around you. We all have an obligation to speak up whenever something disturbing is happening around us. Not responding to such inappropriate topics shows a lack of integrity.

:rolleyes:

When I read (Litespeeders response to) the initial thread the first thing that came to my mind was that this was a cynical joke or a troller. It goes against any sense of human decency. (His response to) The topic was so inappropriate that it warranted some balanced responses. To not respond to such a (response to the) topic is equivalent to keeping silent when bad things are happening around you. We all have an obligation to speak up whenever something disturbing is happening around us. Not responding to such inappropriate topics shows a lack of integrity.