Is the President racist against White People?

[Heracles 417]

Platy is the epitome of these open-minded yank libs that I cannot freagin stand. Aka a Hypocrite with double standards. All of the bullcrap he apparently stands for, such as: diversity, tolerance, loving rather than hateful, being progressive and 'open-minded' goes out the window the second someone with opposing views challenges him or his shitty views. He won't ever bother construction a legitimate argument, rather, he just go off on a tantrum and state how dumb people on VJ are. Seen it for a good four years now.

Are we thinking of the same Platy?

(no offense intended, Platy)

Considering Platy's posts over the past few years, that is a spot on description of his hypocrisy and him in general.

[zqt3344 21]

Actually Booyah is completely correct and not making it up at all. And I do know so now you know.

Platy is the epitome of these open-minded yank libs that I cannot freagin stand. Aka a Hypocrite with double standards. All of the bullcrap he apparently stands for, such as: diversity, tolerance, loving rather than hateful, being progressive and 'open-minded' goes out the window the second someone with opposing views challenges him or his shitty views. He won't ever bother construction a legitimate argument, rather, he just go off on a tantrum and state how dumb people on VJ are. Seen it for a good four years now.

Are we thinking of the same Platy?

(no offense intended, Platy)

I did laugh when I read that. I don't know Platy very well - but I do know that suggesting he stands for those things is a rather creative interpretation of the facts.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Considering Platy's posts over the past few years, that is a spot on description of his hypocrisy and him in general.

That's just it BY, it really isn't.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Private Pike

[TayRivers 4]

Posts containing personal attacks have been removed for review.

Tay

Edited September 9, 2009 by TayRivers

[Heracles 417]

Funny but expected to see the perpetrators come in and discredit the accusations and their actions. The old mob is back.

Let's bring back the past: Okay tell us how we are wrong.

[Jenn! 918]

Platy is the epitome of these open-minded yank libs that I cannot freagin stand. Aka a Hypocrite with double standards. All of the bullcrap he apparently stands for, such as: diversity, tolerance, loving rather than hateful, being progressive and 'open-minded' goes out the window the second someone with opposing views challenges him or his shitty views. He won't ever bother construction a legitimate argument, rather, he just go off on a tantrum and state how dumb people on VJ are. Seen it for a good four years now.

Are we thinking of the same Platy?

(no offense intended, Platy)

Considering Platy's posts over the past few years, that is a spot on description of his hypocrisy and him in general.

Well, we do all know he's a big teddy bear on the inside, but "loving rather than hateful" really isn't accurate. And I think he hates tolerance as much as you do.

[Peikko 1,575]

You are just whining and as for making it up, no, you just have an odd perception of how message boards work. If you can't differentiate between different posters, then it may feel like being 'ganged up on. The reality is, everyone is an individual - some people post at you, some post at what you post but the fact is, there is no conspiracy and certainly no effort to shut you up. That's the only difference between 'you guys' and everyone else you and a few others believe there is a conspiracy and that 'everyone else' wants you to 'shut up'. Post as much as you like, or as little, it's all the same to me

Ganged up as in terms of behavior. I never made it out as if you guys had secret meetings and discussed which posters to attack. Ganged up as in 10 posters bombarding a single poster than claiming they're an idiot because they cannot respond. Regardless of the reality that by the time they respond to 2 posts, another 10 posts have been made. ganged up as in certain posters jumping on to post for the sole sake that their buddies are antagonizing someone they do not like either. Therefore, they have to jump in too.

Maybe this is a limitation of a forum. Chat rooms are much better at this as you get to react and respond on the fly.

Sorry, I am not getting this. Why do you feel you have to respond to everyone? As for the buddy support thing, I don't know, I see it occasionally, but not that often in the political threads. Most people are responding to the ideas presented, not the person presenting them - unless you are one of the drive by posters, they get a bit of flak just for being so pedantic.

[Heracles 417]

That's just it BY, it really isn't.

Six, the posts are all there.

Sorry, I am not getting this. Why do you feel you have to respond to everyone? As for the buddy support thing, I don't know, I see it occasionally, but not that often in the political threads. Most people are responding to the ideas presented, not the person presenting them - unless you are one of the drive by posters, they get a bit of flak just for being so pedantic.

Hence my comment about OT having gone through a noticeable change.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That's just it BY, it really isn't.

Six, the posts are all there.

No, they aren't.

That's just what you want to believe so that you can reduce Platy to a cardboard cutout 'Lib' stereotype. It just isn't the case.

[Peikko 1,575]

That's just it BY, it really isn't.

Six, the posts are all there.

Sorry, I am not getting this. Why do you feel you have to respond to everyone? As for the buddy support thing, I don't know, I see it occasionally, but not that often in the political threads. Most people are responding to the ideas presented, not the person presenting them - unless you are one of the drive by posters, they get a bit of flak just for being so pedantic.

Hence my comment about OT having gone through a noticeable change.

Correct me if I am wrong though, but you perceive me as one of the people who 'jumps in to support my buddies'. The fact is, I don't.

I'll also suggest that whatever it is you don't like about Platy, it isn't that he is a typical 'librul'. Perhaps if you try to articulate the actual problems you have with particular posters rather than using labels you might not get this type of reaction? It's only a suggestion, take it or leave it.

[Heracles 417]

Well, we do all know he's a big teddy bear on the inside, but "loving rather than hateful" really isn't accurate. And I think he hates tolerance as much as you do.

Well I heard he is a nice guy but I guess my experience with him has not been the best. I can certainly say my reputation here does not match what people I know think of me.

[Peikko 1,575]

Well, we do all know he's a big teddy bear on the inside, but "loving rather than hateful" really isn't accurate. And I think he hates tolerance as much as you do.

Well I heard he is a nice guy but I guess my experience with him has not been the best. I can certainly say my reputation here does not match what people I know think of me.

Use that and apply it more generally - the view we have of message board posters is necessarily two dimensional. Use that and respond purely to what people actually post and not what you think these posts might mean if one were to hang on the 'clothing' of ideology.

[Heracles 417]

No, they aren't.

That's just what you want to believe so that you can reduce Platy to a cardboard cutout 'Lib' stereotype. It just isn't the case.

Posts in the past were not deleted. That is only a recent thing. There are a hell of a lot of examples of Platy jumping in and just throwing out insults. As there are of 50 page plus posts were you guys have gang up on posters.

Use that and apply it more generally - the view we have of message board posters is necessarily two dimensional. Use that and respond purely to what people actually post and not what you think these posts might mean if one were to hang on the 'clothing' of ideology.

Likewise, don't assume someone is a racist the second they mention race. Furthermore, how about holding people on the other side as equally accountable? rather than stereotypically claiming their views are just isolated; as that is hypocritical.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Booyah!

[Peikko 1,575]

OK, I think I get it. We are supposed to 'ration' our opinions dependant on how many other people have expressed a similar opinion before us. Great. Good to know

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I really think you need a new tune - preferably concerned with why it is in all these interactions that noone comes to your defence.

Edited September 9, 2009 by Private Pike