Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/verif...FLYbbMWSAs

Thought this should go here somewhere. Pretty thoroughly debunks the ANTIFA claims on Capitol hill. I know conservatives want to think they are the party of law and order (and they are, comparatively), but they are not unsusceptible to mob mentality. People are angry. Angry people in large groups do dumb things. Would be nice for conservatives to own it, and liberals to not pretend like they are justified in their indignation.

(01-09-2021, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:08 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

There's no rule that says discussion or argument must be positive.

He didn't say there was or should be a rule to keep it positive.
He was very precise - he wants less name calling.  Let's not straw-man his request.

---

(01-09-2021, 12:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:08 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]That's one thing I would change about this message board.  I would stop the name calling.  I don't think it contributes to the discussion or argument in any sort of positive way.

I think maybe the moderators could step in occasionally and do something about it.  Calling liberals "the scum of the earth," or saying someone was "born a prick," if I was moderating the message board, I would delete those posts and issue some warnings.

You dont need to keep advertising you are an advocate of shutting down free speech. The forum has ignore features if you or anyone else are so inclined.

It is my personal feeling that the modern day liberal is pond scum, and that is sugar coating it. Sorry.

Oh, and for the record, a moderator just called me an idiot. Rules for thee but not for me.

He called you impressionable.
Not the same thing.

(01-09-2021, 01:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]There's no rule that says discussion or argument must be positive.

He didn't say there was or should be a rule to keep it positive.
He was very precise - he wants less name calling.  Let's not straw-man his request.

Line 4, begins with "I think maybe the Moderators..."

I know you are chief among the people who manipulate plain language, so I'm happy to help!

(01-09-2021, 12:46 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]You dont need to keep advertising you are an advocate of shutting down free speech. The forum has ignore features if you or anyone else are so inclined.

It is my personal feeling that the modern day liberal is pond scum, and that is sugar coating it. Sorry.

Oh, and for the record, a moderator just called me an idiot. Rules for thee but not for me.

The issue remains the same, scum absconded with the term Liberal much as they have so many other words. Claiming the language is part of their strategy to claim the culture and we permit it when we allow it. They are illiberals and it's past time we reclaimed the true meaning of the words.

Here you call a nebulous "they" first scum, then "illiberals".  Neither of these things are productive.  We don't know exactly who you are talking about, so how can we really engage with the statement.  You called them "scum" which is intentionally offensive and dehumanizing, but then you spout the word "illiberal" in a tone that has just as much venom as "scum".

So who is they?  Even PragerU put out a video describing how Liberals are actually good people that a conservative can have productive disagreements with. What "scum" is absconding with the word?

---

(01-09-2021, 01:31 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 01:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]He didn't say there was or should be a rule to keep it positive.
He was very precise - he wants less name calling.  Let's not straw-man his request.

Line 4, begins with "I think maybe the Moderators..."

I know you are chief among the people who manipulate plain language, so I'm happy to help!

He thinks the moderators should issue warnings for posts that cross into name calling.  He wants a post calling someone "scum" or "jerk" to result in a warning.  He did not say anything about any other type of "negative" post.

(01-09-2021, 01:36 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:46 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The issue remains the same, scum absconded with the term Liberal much as they have so many other words. Claiming the language is part of their strategy to claim the culture and we permit it when we allow it. They are illiberals and it's past time we reclaimed the true meaning of the words.

Here you call a nebulous "they" first scum, then "illiberals".  Neither of these things are productive.  We don't know exactly who you are talking about, so how can we really engage with the statement.  You called them "scum" which is intentionally offensive and dehumanizing, but then you spout the word "illiberal" in a tone that has just as much venom as "scum".

So who is they?  Even PragerU put out a video describing how Liberals are actually good people that a conservative can have productive disagreements with. What "scum" is absconding with the word?

Anti-American socialist, progressive, and communist elements who have been playing this game for over 100 years. Christ, read a damn history book.

(01-09-2021, 01:38 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 01:36 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Here you call a nebulous "they" first scum, then "illiberals".  Neither of these things are productive.  We don't know exactly who you are talking about, so how can we really engage with the statement.  You called them "scum" which is intentionally offensive and dehumanizing, but then you spout the word "illiberal" in a tone that has just as much venom as "scum".

So who is they?  Even PragerU put out a video describing how Liberals are actually good people that a conservative can have productive disagreements with. What "scum" is absconding with the word?

Anti-American socialist, progressive, and communist elements who have been playing this game for over 100 years. Christ, read a damn history book.

So is PragerU now part of these elements?

(01-09-2021, 01:39 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 01:38 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Anti-American socialist, progressive, and communist elements who have been playing this game for over 100 years. Christ, read a damn history book.

So is PragerU now part of these elements?

I dont know PragerU that well so I'm unsure who controls them.

You guys and gals are exhibiting exactly what the banksters want, arguing over an imaginary line of Republican or Democrat, when in fact, they sleep in the same bed. The pyscho sodomy these days is at threat level ten

(01-09-2021, 01:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:34 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]There's no rule that says discussion or argument must be positive.

He didn't say there was or should be a rule to keep it positive.
He was very precise - he wants less name calling.  Let's not straw-man his request.

---

(01-09-2021, 12:38 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]You dont need to keep advertising you are an advocate of shutting down free speech. The forum has ignore features if you or anyone else are so inclined.

It is my personal feeling that the modern day liberal is pond scum, and that is sugar coating it. Sorry.

Oh, and for the record, a moderator just called me an idiot. Rules for thee but not for me.

He called you impressionable.
Not the same thing.

Oh, I've called him an idiot many times. 
Not something I'm proud of, but I try to reserve it for the deserving at least.
I do however appreciate homebiscuit's thoughts on the matter (#280) and will make an effort to post more in that spirit moving forward.

Being called an idiot is so much more refreshing than being called a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, misogynist, and nazi by leftists, all for supporting our President.

Not to mention, we not only got called that by citizens, but also by some of these leftists in office..

Yet, some people can't handle being called "idiot"

lololololololololol

Knock of the name calling, or else:

(01-09-2021, 02:18 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Knock of the name calling, or else:

Where we you 4 years ago?

(01-09-2021, 12:41 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with Marty. Name calling is an expression of frustration. Take a minute to organize your thoughts and then return with a rebuttal. Making it personal is exactly what translates to the violence we see on TV.
We're fortunate to have this forum to discuss politics. There's no sense in having it if it devolves into personal attacks. Then nothing constructive is being achieved. Technology has created a whole generation of keyboard commandos who feel they are not accountable for their words. My tact has always been to not post things online I wouldn't say to someone's face. Political discourse before the advent of the internet was more polite because that's exactly what people had to do. Treat your written words as such.

Most people avoid face to face political discussions as a rule, at least people my age, and I'm in my 30s.

So, "say that to my face" isn't a helpful rubric.

My suggestion is, don't say, "you're a jerk".  
If you ever want to say that,
Try, "you're acting like a jerk."
Or, "You're coming across as a jerk right now."
Even better, "even if you're right about this, you're saying it in a rude way".

Each of these are more accurate to the situation than a dismissive "you're a jerk."

But name calling extends beyond actual rude names.  When you label someone, that is just as unproductive.
Calling someone "socialist" when you've previously said, "socialists are scum" is literally calling a person "scum".

Try, "that's something a socialist would say," or, even better "how is that different from what a socialist would do?" instead of short-circuiting all the way to "you're a socialist" or "I would never be a socialist like you."

(01-09-2021, 02:30 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 12:41 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with Marty. Name calling is an expression of frustration. Take a minute to organize your thoughts and then return with a rebuttal. Making it personal is exactly what translates to the violence we see on TV.
We're fortunate to have this forum to discuss politics. There's no sense in having it if it devolves into personal attacks. Then nothing constructive is being achieved. Technology has created a whole generation of keyboard commandos who feel they are not accountable for their words. My tact has always been to not post things online I wouldn't say to someone's face. Political discourse before the advent of the internet was more polite because that's exactly what people had to do. Treat your written words as such.

Most people avoid face to face political discussions as a rule, at least people my age, and I'm in my 30s.

So, "say that to my face" isn't a helpful rubric.

My suggestion is, don't say, "you're a jerk".  
If you ever want to say that,
Try, "you're acting like a jerk."
Or, "You're coming across as a jerk right now."
Even better, "even if you're right about this, you're saying it in a rude way".

Each of these are more accurate to the situation than a dismissive "you're a jerk."

But name calling extends beyond actual rude names.  When you label someone, that is just as unproductive.
Calling someone "socialist" when you've previously said, "socialists are scum" is literally calling a person "scum".

Try, "that's something a socialist would say," or, even better "how is that different from what a socialist would do?" instead of short-circuiting all the way to "you're a socialist" or "I would never be a socialist like you."

Thank you, Ann Landers.

See above for the appropriate way to call people names.

(01-09-2021, 04:01 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]See above for the appropriate way to call people names.

I agree.. dude sounds like a chick..

(01-09-2021, 04:01 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]See above for the appropriate way to call people names.

Yes, compare the person to someone who was widely admired and successful.

---

(01-09-2021, 04:07 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-09-2021, 04:01 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]See above for the appropriate way to call people names.

I agree.. dude sounds like a chick..

So what?

Saw this in a Twitter thread about Trump being censored.
https://twitter.com/jake_vig/status/1347...33408?s=21

Uh oh. You know it’s bad when the ACLU thinks what you’re doing is a bad idea.

https://www.newsweek.com/aclu-counsel-wa...on-1560248