Is Current Events dead?

[phil]

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone,
and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

[strat-0]

That's helpful...

[shin]

jackory said:

You can only watch the spectacle of Roc Doc & Shin's never-ending clashes before the whole thing gets old. []

Pfft. Yeah right! I do my part to keep it fresh, dunno about the 6'1" scabwound over there

That being said, the fact of the matter is is that the American conservative right is currently unable to deviate from the party line. Logic, reality, truth, evidence, reason, none of it matters as long as the communal expectation is agreement and obedience. It's become part of their self image, in which they tie their devotion into their superegos, allowing themselves to become subservient lapdogs for the powerfucks. Perhaps every two months there's a minor disagreement ("Look! I somewhat disagree with the president on how to deal with inflation! I'm an independent thinker! Really!"), but on the whole, when the King gives his orders, his paupers gladly obey.

As such, there's no hope for honest debate in CE. There's only how much fun you can have at the expense of the mentally handicapped.

Btw, nice avatar, JAC.

[maarts]

Shit.

Chrisfan- you 'wonder' why you rack up so many posts? Probably all that jabbering you do on the Wacko-board. Considering the postcount there and the fact we never see you anywhere else except there, here and one or two other boards...yeah you do spread yourself thin on these boards so if we want to talk to you it's either Wacko or CE- not everyone can find themselves there subject matter wise.

And you find Kat's board boring? Good! I find the same of the Wacko-board. Totally not my cup of tea. Only I'm not saying that en plein publique, like you did just here.

But what pissed me most off is this: you now have heard from several people that you are condescending. You! Are! Condescending! You don't want to know about it. Fine, as long as you know that you are being perceived as such.
You don't have to change, I'm not asking for that. But don't justify yourself here saying that RocDoc and Shin are the same, concentrate on yourself for a change. You could have so easily made friends with Mellie, easily one of the nicest people around here. You chose to be smug and condescending (and yes, I have read your posts on their relative merits). Thanks heaps for making one of the nicest people make the decision to quit. I wish it had been you.

[ScottsyII]

At the risk of making it look like the "Kat's Crew" are ganging up, and frankly I don't really care about that perception anymore... I have to reiterate what Maarts just said almost piecemeal. Perfectly put, really. I wonder how many really wonderful people walking out of this place it's going to take...

Maybe it'll seem like more fun with only oneself to argue against. At least you'll always be right.

[ScottsyII]

Take note of my new signitures too Chrisfan... and why the hell don't you take note of your own at the bottom of your posts??!!

[phil]

admin said:

That's helpful...

OK ! Lets see if I can be more helpful ...


How’bout a little recapitulation…



I'm not changing, and I"m not going anywhere.
If you don't like it, don't read my fucking posts.
(Chrisfan)

You probably shouldn't post on CE
if you can't stand being called a jackass.
(kMc)

Anyway, whatever I don't really expect it
to change much around here.
(Mantis)

In the big picture Chrisfan's not going to change
and neither am I.
(Mantis)

As such, there's no hope for honest debate in CE.
There's only how much fun you can have
at the expense of the mentally handicapped.
(Shin)
---------
And I'd be a lot more likely to participate more actively in CE
if the tone weren't always so offensive. …
(Ken Holtzman)



So, I will continue to post articles I find of interest
and opinions I tend to share on CE
but don't expect me to participate in any "honest" debates about them
because I, for one, don't care being called a jackass
or told to move on if I don't like what I read ...


And that is all I'm gonna say about this subject !!

[ScottsyII]

Nicely put Phil, and with considerable Phil wit, humour and character! A glass of champagne for that man! :-)

[kmc]

You probably shouldn't post on CE
if you can't stand being called a jackass.

A truer statement has rarely been said in this place. No, it was not an endorsement of the situation, and everything I've posted since then has been an earnest attempt to get people to move away from name calling and to realize that they have to sincerely watch the tone of their posts; however, CURRENTLY, CE is for the thick skinned. This is why this board is here. I personally would love it if it were more inclusive.

[JACkory]

I remember distinctly believing that Chrisfan was condescending when she told me that if I didn't want feedback on my opinions posted here that I should "go back to (my) blogs".
Of course, she explained what she meant by that, spinning it as if it were just a neutral comment on the nature of blogs being more "one-sided".
But it was not even so much that she'd point me away from here to my blog that irked me so much as the implication that I don't appreciate feedback, based on my not responding to one of her questions, which Rocky had answered in my absence. Then she copped the tone of "well, you don't have to worry about it because Rocky did your work for you"...
I mean, the ONLY reason I read these boards regularly and post occassionally is precisely because I DO appreciate feedback...gee, there were times on RS.com when I'd say something for no other reason than because I knew it WOULD generate feedback.
So yeah, I got a little pissed when she accused me of that, because the implication was that I was avoiding her question because I didn't have any answers of my own to offer (inferred from the quip about Rocky answering the question "for me").
Is that condescension? I don't know, but it sure got under my skin and discouraged me from wanting to contribute to CE (which, very likely, was the intended effect, for all I know).

But the thing that really dissappointed me about Chrisfan was that I had made a conscious decision to befriend her, as I felt she was one of the most effective communicators on these boards (which she is, no doubt about that) and I thought we had some common ground to discuss in the future (a shared faith in Christ)...
We had actually become civil towards each other after much enmity shared on the RS.com boards, and I was pleased...
Then one day I had the nerve to agree with Shin about her heavy-handedness in deleting posts when she became CE's moderator and all of a sudden I get this shit from her (quoted here verbatum from my PMs):

That you would see absolutely nothing wrong with a zero tolerance approach to Pissin's posts (and I agree with you there, there's nothing wrong with it) and yet you are willing to not only fan the flames with CE right now but light more yourself just paints you as a raging hypocrite. The CE section of this forum is absolutely out of control right now. That is what Strat-o was trying to quell. To continue this act, when Strat-o is not even around to answer to any of your concerns is pure jackass behavior, and does not just lower you to the behavior of Pissin, Shin, DED, and the rest of their gang -- it may just put you below it.

Now let's see...I'm a raging hypocrite who is "lighting more flames" because I stood with shin in his criticism of her spree of deletion...yeah, I guess I would define that as somewhat condescending name-calling. As if my problem with (and "zero-tolerance" solution for) Pissin should be applied to everyone here INCLUDING MYSELF (as several of my posts were deleted immediately as they were about the moderation situation and not precisely "Current Events"...talk about frustrating).

More from our PM exchange:

You're willing to shit all over CE, because yo'ure mad about that right now. But until you start shitting in your own section, I'll see you as a hypocrite. Not that it really matters, since DED alreayd took care of setting up the board.

I was not aware that I was "shitting all over CE", and by the time I'd recieved this PM I'd already set up a thread in "my section", though I didn't want to because I knew it would be one of those threads that would be used for a day or two and then abandoned when the current controversy subsided (which is exactly what happened and is exactly why I wished to discuss the problem on the board that was being uber-moderated at the time).
But I'm a hypocrite for that, right?
Yeah, that's condescension.

More (and I think this is the one that dug deepest, hurt the most and made me decide to just stop communicating with her altogether):

Your opinion of me does not effect me in the slightest. I'm just sorry to see that your old combative nature has come back with such a vengence today. And to think I was starting to like you.

I sincerely do not remember offering an "opinion of her", though I was pretty adamant in my opinion of her deletion marathon...I suppose she confused the two...but then again, I'm still at a loss to figure out just how I was being "combative".
And to think...she was starting to like me.
What a tragedy.
Doesn't take much to get kicked off of her welcome wagon, does it?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is not a thing in the world I could say to you that you would find satisfactory at this point. So if you continue to PM me, and you get no response, you'll know why.

Yeah, that's it. I was looking to be pacified, right? Not engaging in conversation, attempting to understand why I'd been called a "hypocrite" or why I'd somehow ruined everything "just when (she was) starting to like me" or desirous of feedback (oh no, not me)...I was apparently just wanting her to say the magic words that would "satisfy me", right?
Oh if life were so simple, so cut-and-dried, so easy. There'd be no need for the kind of Current Events board which has evolved into nothing more than a boxing ring for two opposing sides to spar with each other on. Not much middle ground to be found on CE, you gotta admit.

At any rate...it's too bad mellie is leaving, not that I've ever really corresponded with her.
But I can't say I blame her.

[Rit]

James Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers that men are so far beyond redemption that the only recourse is to set ambition against ambition, and interest against interest. The American seperation of powers is based on that grim view of human behaviour, and it seems to be replicated here.

[Galactus]

phil said:

admin said:

That's helpful...

OK ! Lets see if I can be more helpful ...


How’bout a little recapitulation…



I'm not changing, and I"m not going anywhere.
If you don't like it, don't read my fucking posts.
(Chrisfan)

You probably shouldn't post on CE
if you can't stand being called a jackass.
(kMc)

Anyway, whatever I don't really expect it
to change much around here.
(Mantis)

In the big picture Chrisfan's not going to change
and neither am I.
(Mantis)

As such, there's no hope for honest debate in CE.
There's only how much fun you can have
at the expense of the mentally handicapped.
(Shin)
---------
And I'd be a lot more likely to participate more actively in CE
if the tone weren't always so offensive. …
(Ken Holtzman)



So, I will continue to post articles I find of interest
and opinions I tend to share on CE
but don't expect me to participate in any "honest" debates about them
because I, for one, don't care being called a jackass
or told to move on if I don't like what I read ...


And that is all I'm gonna say about this subject !!

So...you're not going to change for the sake of the board? Is that what you're saying?

[chrisfan]

jackory said:

You can only watch the spectacle of Roc Doc & Shin's never-ending clashes before the whole thing gets old. [] CE's dead? I didn't notice. I stopped posting there a long time ago and haven't paid too much attention to it at all in weeks. It's just too predictable. And I get sick of the "I'm right, you're wrong, so fuck you" attitude that both sides are guilty of.

My unsolicited two cents, for which I expect no response.

Maybe it's because my name has been thrown around, and therefore I"m sensitive to it, but I have to say that I don't think ANY honest discussion of "what is wrong with current events" with honest suggestions and solutions should be naming any specific names. That indicates that just those people are causing a problem, if there is one. It's also indicating that if those people went away, things would be different. Not only do I think that is the case, but I believe that if anyone truly believes that the "problem" is the devisive and defensive tones, then when a person starts naming names and pointing fingers, is that not just being devisivie and defensive? Is that not an example of "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem". I think that if we're being totally honest here, we've ALL had our moments of making things personal, being defensive, and being devisive. So I think it's silly to put the spotlight on just a few people when everyone can fall into the guilty boat.

That aside, I join those in the "Lulls are natural, there's no real probelm" boat. I think that in many ways, this board is like an elementry school classroom. When there is something to focus on, we all behave and learn a lot. As soon as there's not something to focus on, we start to misbehave and we're not at all productive. The truth is, there really has not been much happening in the news which we have not already beat to death. The war? The only thing we may have driven into the ground more than that is environmental issues and maybe intelligent design vs evolution. When you don't have new viewpoints coming to the table, there does come a time there's not anything new to cover in a discussion.

We were in a lull when Katrina hit. That was a new issue which we did a fantastic job of really having some GOOD discussions on before we beat that one into the ground. Since it's happened so many times in the past, I'm confident than when something new comes along again, we'll get right back into being constructive ... until the topic is beaten into the ground again.

It's not a matter of these specific people who aren't behaving, or confusion over the difference between disagreement and disrespect. It's a lack of new topics to cover.

[chrisfan]

shin said:

jackory said:

You can only watch the spectacle of Roc Doc & Shin's never-ending clashes before the whole thing gets old. []

That being said, the fact of the matter is is that the American conservative right is currently unable to deviate from the party line. Logic, reality, truth, evidence, reason, none of it matters as long as the communal expectation is agreement and obedience. It's become part of their self image, in which they tie their devotion into their superegos, allowing themselves to become subservient lapdogs for the powerfucks. Perhaps every two months there's a minor disagreement ("Look! I somewhat disagree with the president on how to deal with inflation! I'm an independent thinker! Really!"), but on the whole, when the King gives his orders, his paupers gladly obey.

Then how exactly do you explain all of the lively debate among conservative circles over Harriet Meiers?

[chrisfan]

Thank you for that post Jac. It does a fantastic job of illustrating why the breakdown of the civil relationship between the two of us was 100% my fault.