The Bloody Politic by dreamtrove

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

The Bloody Politic

POSTED BY: DREAMTROVE
UPDATED: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:18
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1882
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, January 23, 2006 8:02 PM

Okay,

First off, I want to apologize to Fletch, because I was being an a**hole, and I really don't have anything else to say about it, except that I think that a long time ago I was a dick to Citizen, to, so my apologies to him as well.

Next, I think maybe there should be some rules about politics to stop this from happening. I certainly am not about to suggest that certain topics should be avoided, or people censured, but maybe just a basic code of conduct.

1. We are all more or lesst right and left wing, republicans and democrats, and labor, libdem and tory. This means a lot of us have a lot of different ways of looking at the world that are in conflict, and this is a *good* thing. The fact that all of us are wrong about some things is inevitable.

2. I think I have distilled where the problem starts. It's been done *to* me by others, but it has also been done *by* me, to others. So here it is. Consider this example:

A guy, we'll call him Jack, comes to the forum and posts something:

Jack: Ladad dad dad did di da. ba bl blah blah black bah.

And a guy called Todd responds like so,

Todd: lalala - and btw, what Jack is really trying to say is that he doesn't like black people.

The problem here, is that this *forces* Jack to respond, or just let everyone assume that Todd's analysis is correct.

I don't think this sort of fighting helps the community grow, or accomplishes anything at all.

Maybe Todd's response would be better something like this: "Lalala, and Jack, what exactly are you saying? " or something, but if there has to be a question it shoudn't be one that insinuated a position of Jack which would force a defensive response from Jack.

Now Jack could say something like "Blitty Blah, I painted my house black today." But he wouldn't need to launch in to a diatribe on race because Todd didn't make an accusation.

Now it's always entirely possible that Jack might respond with "I don't like black people," in which case there's no saving it, and Jack is liable to be beaten over the virual head with a virtual shovel. But in large part, this is not the sort of thing I've seen on this forum. Much more it was misunderstandings by everyone, which were then stated as fact, and once done, needed to be refuted, and thus the the ever circling army of retribution began its march.

Anyway, if anyone else has some thoughts on ways we might avoid another nuclear flame war, please post it.

Thanks, and sorry for occassionally being a dick.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:55 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Hey DT, although we disagree on a few fundamental points I always look forward to your posts. You usually come at topics sideways (like the Operative) and I welcome thoughtful unpredictability. I enjoy posts from MANY people here: Fletch, Citizen, Rue, HK (where'e he been lately??), Sigmanunki, AJ, and a whole bunch of people whose names escape me right now.

I hope everyone realizes that occasional lapses will result from heated discussion. It the person who always plays rhetorical tricks who sticks out like a sore thumb, and I think we know who they are anyway.

So- are we all OKAY here on the board?

---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 9:07 AM

DREAMTROVE

Sig,

Speaking from a purely pragmatic perspective, while debate is healthy, rampant hostility undoubtedly drives away potential members.

I was struck by this when I went to work for the reform party USA, as a possible Bush alternative. We had some dealing there with the greens because we both were considering supporting Nader. The third party movement is a mess. It's awash in infighting and hostility. The stunning thing was that the right-wing RPUSA and it's left-wing counterpart, the Greens, were almost in the identical shape internally. Petty bickering and vicious personal attacks were the order of the day, and it was not astounding that neither one seemed capable of forwarding a political candidate to office.

Now, FFF isn't trying to forward a candidate to office, but it still would probably like to grow membership and discuss, somewhat civilly, the implications of things without resorting to this sort of stuff. Toward each other. I mean sure, we're going to disagree, sometimes vehemently. When I look at FEMA/Katrina or the reconstruction of Iraq, I think "And you want *these guys* in charge of healthcare?" which is sort of where I'm coming from on the whole anti-govt. thing, but I can see people are going to respond similarly to halliburton et al. (Which by the way hit a new high 76.5) Cheney's own personal profit from this war is $15M. :) Anyway, I think that some sort of set of rules could be developed which would foster maximum membership, and that is worth considering.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 10:07 AM

JHANCE11

I think it's important to remember, the party's in the early years of this nation were in many ways in the same boat as the green party and orther independent parties. Also many of those party's are representing people who already have A problem with authority or like to be seen as anti-heros. I personaly believe our system will not have room for another major party and that is not the goal to shoot for. If the Perot candidacy taught us anything it's that it can affect the political landscape. (Clinton owes his first election to ol Ross) They need A national platform, A charismatic individual and more money to fight the enevitable attacks on their creditibility. Finally A credible leader (Nader are you kidding me) One thing I do agree with that was posted on this subject. The individuals that constantly use childish antic',namecalling and plitical histeria, do nothing more then lose their own credibility,we know them for who and what they are.

jhance11

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 10:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Well, OK- more is better. But I see the discussion has dropped off a bit since Hero, AJ, and Geezer no longer frequent RWE. If this is to be a "discussion" board, then someone needs to take the opposing side. I volunteer to play the devil's advocate.

Or maybe I could be the dubious spectator and have people try to convince me of their positions? OTOH, maybe we COULD bend towards activism. Now, wouldn't THAT be a kick???

---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 12:06 PM

DREAMTROVE

Nader doesn't lack credibility, he just lacks viable ideas. He's one of those individuals who is very aware of what a lot of the problems are and has no solutions. Such a man shouldn't be president. He might be an addition to the house or senate.

I think that the political breakdown went to war, and the liberals outnumbered the conservatives, beat them over the head with a virtual shovel and chased them off. This is the sort of thing I want to avoid.

I'm afraid firefly activism would come awful close to terrorism.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:37 PM

LIMINALOSITY

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I'm afraid firefly activism would come awful close to terrorism.

So says the activist trying to find a way for everyone to work to find answers together.

Even though I mostly lurk, and occassionally post with completely unintelligible OT rants, I'm with you all on trying something new to keep the bashing to a minimum, because the discussion itself is spectacular.

Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 7:57 PM

DREAMTROVE

I'm actually a little worried. I know people in the left who are getting an undue amount of monitoring, and I think esp. with the sort of notions that firefly might lead one to, it could be misconstrued by our govt. and things could get ugly. I don't think they're actually shipping peaceniks off to gitmo, but I do think it's a good way to get yourself put on a list these days.

I would like to see something happen though. Hillary has a war with Iran planned, and it's going to be bloody. I think Bush is doing everything possible to throw the election for whoever is nominated republican. In my tinfoil hat universe, that is because Bush is really Clinton, or a trained monkey with a glamour working for Clinton, and that he is working hard to make his master's wife president again. Actually, that last was a freudian slip. I mean make here president, for the first time. Or do I?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:19 PM

LIMINALOSITY

There's no question in my mind that the Hillarious Ungoliant crouched behind that throne, and Iran does seem the next step into further madness in the ME.

It would be nice to have a strategy to avoid detection of the keywords that would get a person on the list of the outraged bound for Gitmo. Is there a way to post on the forum using a textfile attachment? Hee hee. A plan to evade detection always goes well with the stunning tinfoil hat.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:25 PM

DREAMTROVE

Unlike a tinfoil hat, the textfile attachment plan would work. Hmm. I think it would be theoretically possible to create a forum which posted the results in graphic form. But then the spies could read it. It does no use I think to worry about the govt. reading what you write. I still have to believe in a free society. The govt. has nothing to fear from us, and the more clear we make that, the more open we are, the less likely we are to end up in gitmo. BTW, read about those gitmo executions. No charges, no trial, no appeal, no stopping the decapitatin'. By executive order only. I have to say, there seems to be precious little difference between Bush and Al Zarqawi. Which brings up an interesting question. If there were an election held, and those were your choices... would you vote for Nader?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:57 PM

LIMINALOSITY

Hey, there's plenty of graphic availability on this forum, which might actually suit this discussion of computer hacking by the gvm't pretty well... if you don't mind a limited vocabulary...

Bush, Al Z or Ralph?

You couldn't have made it Ross Perot? He's apparently a better dealmaker than Nader, but he's maybe sick of this game. Voting for Ralph would just give the election to the more despicable of the other two. Hmmm, very bad choices. NO! I will go back on my promise not to vote for Ralph. Again. Out of desperation. There are many reasons to regret any of these choices, but I know Bush is the anti-christ, and Al Z doesn't look any better. Muppets! I won't vote for muppets! I hate the choice between death, death and cowardice. Give me back McCain please. I'm so sick of being an enraged pantomime voter.

Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 3:42 AM

MORTYMADMCFLINT

Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
Unlike a tinfoil hat, the textfile attachment plan would work.

Unfortunatly pretty much any search engine bot can follow links and read textfiles, so any automated scanning bot could read a textfile attachment easily.

Quote:
I think it would be theoretically possible to create a forum which posted the results in graphic form. But then the spies could read it.

That might work, but it would take an age to download, and would require a few gigabytes of server space. Most automated scanners couldn't read it, but it would still be possible to construct one.
Writing the script that would construct the images from text would be a nightmare though.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 5:02 AM

THATWEIRDGIRL

About the tinfoil hat....I have one. Wear it often. However, you should know that the tinfoil hat doesn't block signals, it actually amplifies them. Hehe. Here's hoping the aliens are more coherent than Rush.

And, I love reading the RWE rants and discussions. You guys keep me up to date on stuff. I get to hear all the sides to every issue in the world. It's neat! Thank you.

www.thatweirdgirl.com
---
"...turn right at the corner then skip two blocks...no, SKIP, the hopping-like thing kids do...Why? Why not?"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 5:11 AM

DREAMTROVE

Morty,

Ah, yes, it *could*. But the fact is, it doesn't. I know this because I never get ads based on information that was in text file attachments. Even if that plan failed, it could be upped to image file attachments.

On the image forum, gigabytes of server space are freely avaiable everywhere these days, and it wouldn't be that much of a bitch. You wouldn't have to create whole images. You could tile image files for each letter. If you made it an option, like.
[encode]This is the coded message[/encode] Then the govt. or whoever was spying would never think to look.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 5:20 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
If this is to be a "discussion" board, then someone needs to take the opposing side.

One guy in Gitmo gets out of line, and suddenly it's AN EVENT???
So we haven't gotten Osama yet, but we will, we're just waiting for the opportune moment...
Get off Bush's back!!! He needs to illegally tap Americans to protect the Constitution!!!YOU want 911 to happen again all over AMERICA????
We got Saddam, part of our mission statement, doesn't that count? The war in Iraq is going well, and civilian deaths are down.
And lastly, our economy is fine!! A little deficit is inspiring, it'll push us to do our...best, and...we can take what we need by force...oil is slipery...

I suck at this.

No AJ Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:54 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Actually Chriss, you did a pretty good imitation!

BTW- here's sumthin funny for you to do: Since Yahoo and Aol gave up their search records but Google hasn't (yet, that I know of) why don't we give the government monitors a cr*p in the pants and we ALL google "impeach Bush" at least three times a day. heh heh heh

---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:17 AM

DREAMTROVE

Chris,

all you need is the Luntz editor. You need to scan your post for negative phrases, and luntz them into somthing prettier.

For instance:
"illegally tap Americans"

No, not good, illegal, criminal president, sneaking around and spying? Let's lighten it up a little.

"We need an ear to the ground if we're going to prevent another 9/11"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, January 25, 2006 11:18 AM

DREAMTROVE

Sig,

you'd need a bot to do it. Best if the word George W. Bush produce ten matches all with teh word "Impeach" in the title.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE